Growth Options Study

Report of the Growth Options Study Group, January 2002
This report to the Board of Trustees fulfills the charge given to the Growth Options Study Group in May of 2001. It gives a brief history of the construction of our current church building which occurred the last time we faced major growth issues. It provides statistics on the growth in numbers our church is now experiencing and discusses other kinds of growth - organizational, spiritual and incarnational - that we also need to think about. It suggests four possible options for dealing with our physical growth and offers some arguments pro and con for each option. It describes some of the resources available from the UUA and other sources both for helping the church community to select the course we wish to pursue and for implementing that decision. Finally, it offers some suggestions as to the next steps the Board of Trustees might wish to take.

History and Present Situation
Growth History
Related Growth Issues
Growth Options
Resources
Next Steps

Authors of the Study

The Building of the Present Church
The Unitarian Church in Eugene began by meeting in homes starting in the fall of 1909. Over the years, a relatively small group of dedicated members maintained the presence of a liberal religious group in the community.

In 1959, the small congregation faced space limits in their old building at 11th and Ferry. One of the members, a psychologist, was looking for property near downtown for a research institute and offered a good price for the building and the house next door, formerly used as a manse. The offer was accepted, the congregation vacated the building and began meeting in Frances Willard School. While there, the then minister, the Rev. James Meade, left and the group simultaneously began the search for a new minister, affordable land, and started a capital fund drive. A piece of land in the southeast hills was found and money raised for the purchase. Grant Seder, an architect and member of the congregation, began drawing up plans for the new building even as the congregation also undertook the ministerial search.

The congregation appealed for money to the American Unitarian Association (AUA), to sister churches throughout the Pacific Conference, to members, friends, and local citizens who felt the continued presence of a liberal religious church was important for the community. Members of the church also contributed time and talent as "sweat equity" to keep down the costs.

By 1962, building was well underway at the new location and that fall the Rev. Carl J. Nelson arrived and began his ministry. The present building at 477 East 40th in Eugene, was completed at the end of January, 1963, and the first service in the new building took place on February 14, 1963. The total cost of the new building was $70,000. Current assessment is about $800,000 including land. (A wild guess according to our own treasurer who thinks, because of the location, we could realize more than that.)

Growth in Numbers
During the 1991-92 church year we were averaging 138 persons at the single service we were then holding. By Fall 2001 we were holding two services with a total average attendance of 200. This is an increase of 45%. In the same period our Religious Education enrollment went up from 42 to 140, an increase of 233%. Our membership went from 191 to 270 an increase of 41% and our pledge income more than doubled from $75,343 to $155,144 during this same ten year period. Pledge income is projected to increase to $185,000 in 2001. The following table gives more detailed information about our growth during the last decade.

*Note that the last column was computed by dividing the pledge total by the number of members. This is not the same as an average pledge since some members are not able to give money and some friends do donate. Since the number of pledging units was not easily obtainable for some years this statistic was used instead to give a rough idea of the degree of commitment of our membership. As would be expected when we are adding new members rapidly who have not yet had time to build up a deep commitment this number has fallen slightly over the last four years.

**Estimated figures provided by the Board at December 2001 congregational meeting.

Other kinds of growth-or do we want to fly?
The growth of a church is not simply an increase in the size of a building or in the numbers of attendees. Consider a larval insect that outgrows its skin and sheds it for successively larger ones until it matures into a winged adult that can fly. Similarly, a growing church needs to reorganize itself until it becomes capable of activities not possible in a small church. These novel activities will affect the design of the new church building. The changes may be obligatory or optional. Ann Heller in her book ChurchWorks suggests the following three categories - organizational or structural; spiritual or church related; and incarnational or community related.

1) Organizational changes. As churches increase in size, they require new administrative structures and appropriate spaces for those structures. For example, a board of trustees might no longer be able to handle the increased number of church activities. Therefore, it would have to delegate some activities to another body, perhaps a committee of chairs of committees. Such a change would not double the space required for board meetings, however. With the growth of a church, the financial chain of authority would also become more complex, and a new structure of oversight would be needed. At the very least, new computer programs would be needed. Depending on the two other types of growth, spiritual and incarnational, there might be a need for additional office space to accommodate additional staff members who would assume some tasks previously performed by volunteers.

2) Spiritual or church-related changes. An increase in size triggers new activities and permits existing ones to expand. Some activities will be planned; others will simply emerge and must be accommodated. As a matter of policy, we can decide now whether we want to enhance our music program and hence direct the architect to provide acoustically satisfactory spaces. We can decide now whether we want to enlarge our art gallery, create a music room or provide space for adult education classes or alternative services, etc. Larger size also means that one or two people with an unusual interest suddenly become a more viable seven or eight. We cannot predict all the interests that might emerge, but we know that we will continue to need small spaces for some activities and bigger spaces for our enlarged congregation.

3) Incarnational or community-related changes. A church can be a source of inspiration, guidance and leadership for the community. We need to clarify our priorities because they will influence the design of our new church. Possible options include concert space, rooms for community education, a kitchen for feeding the homeless or space to serve as a community center for other types of social action. If we choose to move we will also need to consider the effect of a new location on our outreach into the community.

Growth Options
Possible ways to respond to our physical growth fall into four general categories - do nothing; expand on our existing property; move to a new location; or start a second church. The following paragraphs attempt to lay out some of the factors that need to be taken into account when considering each of these options.

1) Remaining the same: Doing nothing has the advantage of requiring the least amount of work, money and psychological upheaval. We could stay as we are, maintain the connections that come with smaller size and continue to enjoy the natural beauty of our present location. This will limit our financial base and the variety and quality of the programming we can offer. It may also in the future impact our ability to recruit and retain the kind of ministers we would like to have. Another disadvantage is that this would have the effect of keeping a lid on the number of people we can serve. The population of this area and our potential audience will continue to grow whether our church grows or not and hence there will be more and more people who might benefit from what we have to offer who we will not be able to serve. Moreover, a substantial amount of money and effort are needed just to repair and maintain the existing physical plant so this option should not be viewed as being cost free. Last year it was estimated that $20,000 was needed for the most urgent maintenance alone. A history of deferred maintenance has already led to the deterioration of our building and even the removal of some of the exterior esthetic elements. Moreover, there are already conflicts occurring as different groups within the church compete for the same space. At some point, overcrowding might lead to declining membership and financial support.

2) Growing in place: Expanding on our existing property could be done by remodeling the current building, adding on to it or tearing it down and building a completely new building. This could have the advantage of keeping our current location. It might appear that we would incur lower building costs if we added onto our existing building but this is unlikely to be the case. Our church was built in the early 1960s and any new construction could require bringing the building up to all the present building code and land use code requirements. For example, this could mean the entire parking lot might have to be paved and storm sewers installed. There is also a requirement for one parking space for every 28 square feet of space in our sanctuary. At present this comes out to 50 parking spaces but if we doubled the size of our sanctuary we would have to double the number of parking spaces. An exception to this requirement might be possible if a shared parking agreement could be arranged with the owner of the Safeway parking lot. There is an existing city storm sewer line that runs through our parking lot and down the hill through the woods that may limit where on our property we can build.

If we remodel or add on to the existing building, we would likely have to replace all of the current windows with insulated windows, an expensive process that would also change the building's esthetics. We might also have to upgrade, or possibly replace outright, some or all of the plumbing, electrical, and heating systems. a number of other issues, such as accessibility, insulation, etc., might also arise.

If we choose to build an entirely new building we would probably have to tear down the existing building first and meet elsewhere while construction was underway. This may entail unforeseen costs for such things as asbestos removal as well as the cost of renting or leasing temporary alternative space. New construction and adding parking area could also be significantly limited by the configuration of the property, especially its slope. Finally, our property is zoned R-1, single family residential, and the church building is now defined as an "existing nonconforming" use of the property. New construction, remodeling, or adding on that "intensifies the use" of the property, would force us to apply for a Conditional Use Permit. This is a process that includes public hearings at which our neighbors might object to having a larger, busier church built next to them.

3) Changing locations: Moving to a new site would involve either buying or leasing an existing facility or buying land and building a new structure. This option would have the advantage of allowing us to continue to operate in our present building until the new church was ready. The sale of our current property could then partially offset the cost of the new site. We might also be able to proceed in stages, e.g., raise money to buy the land first and then do the fundraising for the building. It might be possible to find a more central location that would be more conveniently located for a larger segment of our community, but it seems more likely that we would only be able to find suitable property in more peripheral locations. We would also as a congregation have to adjust ourselves to giving up our present site to which many of us are deeply attached. Existing churches are very seldom for sale and might not meet our needs and our budget.

4) A second church: Starting a second church is another possibility. If we could site a second church some distance from the present one, for example in the north end of Eugene or in Springfield we would have better and more convenient geographical coverage of our metropolitan area. A second church might also have a different philosophical orientation than the present church. For example it could be a lay led fellowship, and that might increase the odds of people finding a church that is a good fit for them. It would also mean that we would have smaller more intimate congregations. However, this would divide our people and financial resources. Our present church could be left with a smaller group trying to pay for our staff and for the maintenance of our building. Many of the same problems noted in option #1 could also apply in this scenario. The UUA has expressed doubts whether churches with fewer than 300 will be able to survive financially in the future. In the worst case enough people might join a new church to worsen the finances of the present church but not enough to significantly alleviate our growth problems.

Resources
Several different kinds of resources are available to assist us in choosing our future and implementing our vision.

1) UUA resources: The UUA website [www.uua.org] offers both fundraising and education services relevant to dealing with growth. Congregation Fundraising Services [www.uua.org/cde/fundraising] offers a fundraising consultant as well as the following services:

Searching for the future [www.uua.org/cde/fundraising/vision.html]
This a weekend series of focus groups designed to help a congregation clarify its vision, create a mission statement and create a starter list of goals that can be incorporated into a long range plan.

Assessment visits [www.uua.org/cde/fundraising/assessment.html]
This is the first step in gathering information about our current situation and our desired future. For an $800 fee a fundraising consultant would visit us and conduct meetings to gather information about our current situation and our desired future. Based on this information the consultant would offer specific recommendations on how to get “from here to there.”

Feasibility studies [www.uua.org/cde/fundraising/feasability.html]
This program answers questions that must be determined before launching a capital campaign. It identifies issues that must be resolved. It provides critical information about the attitudes of the congregation. It indicates the general health of the church and its ministry. And finally, it gives an accurate picture of the congregation’s willingness to financially support the proposed project. Costs currently range from $5,880 to $7,840.

Building Loan Program [www.uua.org/cde/fundraising/building.html]
This program is designed to provide affordable financing for congregations engaged in acquiring ownership of a building or in expanding or renovating existing facilities. The program is not intended to replace local financing options. 20 year loans of $50K to $750K are possible depending on availability of funds.

Financing your spiritual home [www.uua.org/cde/fundraising/financing.html]
This is a publication available by mail or on the UUA website. It contains tips on working with local bankers.

UUA loan guarantees [www.uua.org/cde/fundraising /loan.html]
The Loan Guarantee Program is designed to encourage local lenders to make available larger mortgage loans by the participation of the UUA as a guarantor of a portion of the loan usually 50% up to a maximum of $375,000.

Educational services offered by the UUA [www.uua.org/cde/education] include:

Demographic Research and Information [www.uua.org/cde/education/demographic.html]
This service provides census information on our ministry area that may help predict future growth and provides lifestyle information (a combination of several census fields). Examples of demographic information are Lifestyle Diversity, Median Age, Five Year Growth, Percentage of 1990 College Graduates and number of Unitarian Universalists. Cost is $195 dollars.

Planning for Growth and Vitality for Midsize Congregations [www.uua.org/cde/education/weekend-midsize-growth.html]
This is a weekend workshop to identify current strengths and future opportunities for growth, development and vitality in the congregation. Strategies for moving from a “pastoral” to “program” style congregation are discussed.

2) PNWD resources: The PNWD website [www.pnwd.uua.org] lists a committee called the FACT team that is involved in fundraising and financial management. However, at the time of the writing of this report we have been informed that they do not have anyone who is qualified to do capital campaign consulting although this may change in the future.

3) Other resources: If we choose to build a new building or to add on to the existing building we can call on the experience of other churches in the PNWD. In the last few years, the Corvallis Church has added a new sanctuary to their property and the Salem Church has built a completely new building. The primary mover in the Salem Church’s expansion was George Struble who is a former member of this church and who has already offered us his advice and counsel. There may also be other churches in the district whose experience we can draw on.

Next Steps
It is now time for the Board of Trustees to engage the entire congregation in envisioning our future. This is a process that might take several months and might use some of the resources given above such as the weekend “Planning for Growth” workshop. The object of this process would be to select one option that the church could then move ahead on. The Board might wish to establish a new task force to prepare a detailed plan for moving toward this goal. This could include such things as determining which of the resources we have uncovered may be useful and studying them more thoroughly, preparing a budget for the studies needed, conducting demographic studies, and cost studies. The congregation would be asked to approve this plan before the first concrete steps are taken.

Submitted by the Growth Options Study Group
Kathy Dillon
Bonnie Phipps
Martin Sage
John Wagner
Gil Osgood

Notes on sources:
The short church history was compiled from the church archives and from a meeting organized by Kathy Dillon and attended by the following persons who were involved in building the present church - Evelyn and Bayard McConnaughey, Grant Seder (architect) and Sylvia Seder, Lori TenBrinke, Doris and Carl Johannessen, Joy Hainsworth, Carl Nelson (past minister) and Janet Nelson.

The church statistics were obtained from the UUA and cross checked and augmented by church records including Treasurer’s Reports, Annual Reports and attendance records.

The section on other kinds of growth drew on the book Churchworks by PNWD District Executive Ann Heller and on a meeting the Growth Options Study Group had with her.

The discussion of options drew on the report of the Short Term Space Need Team compiled by Howard Coffin, Ruthie Manley and Phil Writer

Resources were mostly obtained directly from the UUA website and by communications with George Struble at the Salem Church.