Would you like to make a gift of cash or securities to Unitarian Universalismwhile retaining needed income for yourself and your loved ones? The UnitarianUniversalist Association offers free gift planning services to all UUs and canhelp you make a "life-income" gift to support our congregation, the UUA, and/oranother UU organization.

The two primary types of life-income gifts are the Charitable Gift Annuityand the Pooled Income Fund. Life-income gifts are rewarding and simple to arrange.You make an irrevocable contribution of cash or securities and may claim a one-timecharitable deduction for part of your gift. In exchange, you'll receive quarterlypayments for life, guaranteed. One or two people - you and your partner, forexample - may be named as income recipients. Payments can be either fixed orvariable, depending on the type of gift you choose. When you die, your giftis distributed to the beneficiaries you've designated - our congregation, theUUA, another UU affiliate, or a combination. It's entirely up to you.

Life-income gifts are a great way to give highly appreciated securities becausepart or all of the capital gains tax may be excused, and the remainder distributedover a period determined by life expectancy. You may be able to generate a largerincome stream from lowyielding assets, and you'll create a wonderful legacyfor our congregation. To learn more about life-income gifts and the benefitsyou might enjoy, contact Ron Crane, the church office at (310)829-5436, or the UUA's Charitable Gift and Estate Planning Team, at (888) 792-5885.

- Ron Crane

 

We Need More Time to Think Before Selling 17th Street

We are scheduled to meet September 19 to decide on building plans. This needwas created by the unexpected acquisition of the property next door on 18thStreet, essentially throwing our building plans for 17th Street out the window.Such a change and delay can be very disturbing: somewhat akin to grieving. Wewant to reachieve our equilibrium and momentum.

In this present state we may make decisions we may later regret. The churchhas not yet had the equanimity to truly contemplate and dream about what thenew acquisition can mean for the long-term future of the church.

The original buyers of the corner lot on 18th Street had no chance to foreseewhat would happen to Santa Monica in 75 or 100 years. Further, when the 17thStreet property was originally purchased, it was right after the building ofForbes Hall and classrooms and many people could not see the future need forthat property. Now, in many regards we are at the same place: we have plansfor the new 18th Street acquisition and, again, cannot see the future need for17th Street. Part of the reason, I believe, for not currently being able tolook beyond our current needs is that we have not yet had the opportunity toexamine what our new property holdings could mean for our long term future.

The church board recently had its annual retreat, during which we discussedin broad strokes ways we could increase the level of commitment and responsibilityour members feel toward the vibrancy of the church. The consensus was that offeringprograms which engage our members creates a cycle of enthusiasm and involvementthat will lead to an increase in commitment. (Commitment, here, can mean eithertime or money.)

Up to this point, our church has mainly been a Sunday institution. The acquisitionof the new property allows us the opportunity to think beyond Sundays. But thechurch community has not had the opportunity to discuss these possibilities.We are scheduled to meet regarding building plans, which currently include thepossibility of selling the 17th Street property, without having had the opportunityto brainstorm and cogitate on our future. The church has been around for over75 years. What about the next 75 years? We have pressing needs now, particularlyregarding the church school, but if we meet those needs without thinking ofour further future, we may be dooming the church to little beyond what we currentlyare.

A vibrant church is a growing church. Many might say we don't want to be muchbigger than what we currently are. That may be a valid point, but the churchhas not had a chance to talk about it. Some want to reach out to the wider community,to help the disadvantaged. Some feel that a weekday nursery school offered bya liberal religion would be good. That may be a valid point, but we have nothad a chance to talk about it from our current property position. We need thatopportunity. The town hall meetings that have taken place to this point havenot offered that option.

We have carried out a capital campaign, which has not netted us as much aswe had hoped, and we have bursting classrooms. We want to DO something and havesomething to show for all of our efforts. This is also a valid point. Doingsomething related to building can help our fund-raising efforts. But we alsoneed to think about our longer-term goals and we cannot do that if selling the17th Street property is on the table beforehand.

The facilitator at our board retreat felt that the ideas generated would needsix months to be fleshed out. That was for the board - what about the wholecongregation? If the 17th Street property has already been sold, it will betoo late. September 19 is too soon and comes too quickly after summer for sucha permanent decision. We need time.

- Rebecca Deal Crawford

 

It's Time to Start Building; We Must Sell 17th Street

We have spent many years on our building plans. Through a series of visioningmeetings in 1997, facilitated by LuAnn Darling, the congregation named a newbuilding as our priority. We wanted more sanctuary space and better church schoolfacilities. In 1999 we engaged a capital campaign consultant and an architect.

I doubt that any of us realized what a long process it would be. It is noteasy to build in Santa Monica. We conducted a capital campaign. And the BuildingCommittee kept plugging away at plans for the city to approve.

Those plans were shelved the very week the city approved them. No one objectedto that delay because the new property is so clearly better for us than theoriginal. We all recognize new plans must be created and we must jump over whateverobstacles the city places in our way. I am working on both the capital campaignand the Building Committee, trying to make the delay as brief as possible.

The purchase of the new property depleted the construction funds. We have onlyabout $300,000 to begin a project that will cost at least $1.5 million, or muchmore if we build underground parking. This is far more than we can expect toraise from a capital campaign and loan; sale of the 17th Street lot could contributeup to $1 million and mean the difference between starting construction in 2005or not until years later.

Further delay to study alternatives to selling the 17th Street property isuncalled for. There have been many opportunities to state our preferences. Inthe survey taken at the July 25 town hall meeting, 30 favored selling 17th Streetand five were opposed. At the de Benneville gathering, 23 favored selling itand two were opposed. We all have had an opportunity to speak pro and con, andto study alternative ideas. We have until September 19 to do further work onthem.

It is hard for me to understand why some people think this is not enough time.Yes, once property is gone, it is gone. But land across the alley was alwayssecond best. We are fortunate we made the purchase, because without it we wouldnever have had the capital campaign that enabled us to buy the property we havelong coveted. Without selling that land we have the coveted property withoutenough money to build on it.

Am I in a hurry to build on that property? Yes. There is the city to consider.With their approval of our plans fresh in the minds of the planning staff andcommission, I hope we can move faster to get approval of this new project. Propertyvalues are high now, and with interest rates rising, the value of land may drop.And we must consider our donors. They gave money for classrooms and improvedfacilities. Do we have the right to spend it in another way?

Keeping 17th Street, for whatever reason, leaves us without much-needed cash,which would mean we have three properties with mediocre facilities. Given thesize of the property, its location, and the significant development limitationsfor the site, the best use is to sell it so we can make something special contiguousto our church. Using 17th Street for parking or putting parking under our newproperty would mean a huge cost per space and not give us enough spaces to makea dent in our needs.

The town hall meetings gave us the opportunity to discuss alternative usesof the property. More talk is not what we need. It's time for action. Thosewho want to present facts and figures on alternatives to moving ahead now withour building plans can present those alternatives at the meeting.

Our existing facilities are inadequate, unsafe, and inaccessible. We reachedthat conclusion in 1997 and nothing has changed. Let's get moving and builda facility that we and the larger community can enjoy.

- Carol Agate