Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ’s)

Additions May 13-25, 2018

Our congregation is getting older. There is documentation that churches are not growing, they are declining. How will building on Pacific help?  There’s more growth in contemporary church services.

Your question has really a multi-part answer to Why Now? 

The economic argument is an important consideration  We are presently failing to maintain the 55,000+ square feet of facilities that we have, and the time to do major repair and upkeep projects has come due.  We cannot continue to put off new roofs, parking lot resurfacing, HVAC system updates, sanctuary window restoration, etc., etc. without risking the structural integrity of these buildings. There will also be more maintenance costs down the road due to the age of these facilities.  Further 55,000+ square feet (including 23 AC units) is far more facilities than is needed for a congregation of our size or even double our size.   

  • Do we want to incur significant expense now (a capital campaign to raise $400,000-$500,000) for repair/maintenance of these dated buildings or would we rather take those dollars and more (capital campaign of $1.3M) to invest and right-size ourselves into 30,000 square feet of new, better buildings, on a unified campus for now and in the future?

Timing is another consideration.  The unique opportunity with the Library trade, whereby we are both in a position to do this, may not come around again.   We have the type of facility (the Ministries Center) that offers them the structure needed for their growth and vision and they have the adjacent land and additional seed money to allow us to right-size our facilities on a vibrant, unified campus. This trade would be a win-win for both of us as well as the city of Mineola. 

The unity/morale consideration.    Each time Church Council has discussed the facilities issue an overarching goal has been the unification of our congregation on a single, vibrant campus.  Unintentionally the two-campus approach has created a sense that we have two congregations (or possibly two churches to the public. )  We are one congregation, FUMC Mineola, with multiple types of worship services, educational opportunities and service ministries.  Unifying on one campus will allow us to come together, create synergy and unity as we fulfill our vision of Loving God, Sharing Faith and Serving Neighbors. 

Finally, the theological consideration.  If a “winter for Christianity” is coming we would be better positioned maintaining 30,000 square feet with new, better buildings, better location, better and less air conditioners, and a much better chance for the Methodists to keep saving souls until the Second Coming. If Christianity itself is going to continue its decline in North America, let’s ensure that Mineola’s Methodist Church survives and Keeps the Faith as some of the faithful remnant.  This decision will give Christianity Itself in Mineola the best possible chance for survival (and revival).

How can we go forward if we can’t even take care of what we have now?

The Church currently has 55,000 sq ft of facilities and multiple parking lots. Nearly half of which was built in the 50’s.  We have 23 HVAC units with a total 160 tons of AC capacity. Our Energy costs are nearly $30,000 per year. This plan reduces but updates our facility footprint yet has capacity for growth. New and updated facilities will result in lower maintenance cost and lower operating costs. Not sizing and updating our facilities correctly has and increasingly will limit our financial ability to conduct ministries and community services through, for example, salaries paid to our various ministries directors.

What are our current maintenance costs and proposed budget costs on future building?

Our church invests most of its budget in our ministries and worship while mainly covering just the operating costs of our facilities.  Very little is allotted in the budget for what would be described as long-term maintenance and upkeep of our facilities, thus the decline and several large looming maintenance projects across our existing facilities (roofs, parking lots, HVAC, etc. which are documented in the VTF report.)  Common sense would say that new facilities, with a smaller footprint, should be more energy efficient and should “reset” the need for some of our looming maintenance because we would have new roofs, HVACs, etc. on much of our campus.

Has the blue house property been planned into future plans?

The blue house property was originally purchased to provide a buffer property out of a concern that a business may occupy that lot. There are no specific plans for the lot at this time but there have been discussions on potential use for additional parking, prayer garden or signage. The building committee will be able to consider all of the Pacific campus property, including the blue house lot,  in developing final plans.

What materials will be used on any new build? Same or similar to the Austin stone on the Sanctuary?

The building committee working with stakeholders, architect and construction contractor will determine the final design. This committee will weigh many trade-offs when determining the final design. The stated goals are to compliment and not compete with the existing structures. We want a unified campus appearance.  It is believed that the budget assigned allows for the accomplishment of this goal

The shape of the Ministry Center – will we have to have the AC work done before making any deal with the Library?

There are no current plans to perform any updates to the Ministries Center for the purpose of the trade. With that said, no negotiation has occurred with the Library Board and the outcome of that negotiation will determine any upgrades or repairs, if any, will occur as part of the negotiated settlement.

Does the Library property have asbestos?

The library board has stated that they believe the chance is low. A definitive answer requires trained professionals to sample and inspect. During negotiations and fact finding FUMC Mineola will likely ask for a survey be conducted.

Do we know the Library will have the $700,000 (approx.) necessary for a trade? They didn’t have the money 18 months ago.

During discussions with the Trustee work group and the VTF there were clear indications that this was doable financially for them. The Library is supported by both the the Meredith foundation and private donors.  They also have other assets available to them. We are not aware of any information that they indicated they were not financially capable 18 months ago and this has never been expressed in any meeting with them.

Is there a number we have placed on the Ministry Center if not the $700,000?

No, This number is strictly based on two appraisals. A negotiation team and strategy will be established to negotiate the final number. The Library board will have a fiduciary responsibility to the their supporters just as the  FUMC negotiation team will have a fiduciary responsibility to the congregation and the United Methodist Church who must approve any sale/trade of its assets. It is expected that the final settlement will be acceptable to both parties and based on fair market values.

If the capital campaign falls short, where will that money go? Will it be held for future purchase or for current repairs to go forward?

The church is very clear on this issue.  If money is donated for a specific purpose (such as a capital campaign for the campus unification), these funds are restricted to that purpose.  If that project does not come to fruition then the money is returned to the donor unless the donor offers otherwise. If donations are “pledged” but not yet given, then the pledge is canceled if the project is not undertaken.

How many campaigns has our church held on a hefty goal and been successful?

 If you look at the historical timeline of our church in the Appendix of the VTF report, you will see several times , when the church has successfully raised money for building efforts and paid off the debt.  These include:  1905-1913 for the initial church, classrooms, etc. on North Johnson, 1950-1963 when both the Sanctuary and Education Buildings were built, and most recently in 2001 with the purchase of the Brookshires building which was remodeling into the current Ministries Center. After each of these major decisions you will see that the church became “debt free” after raising funds in various ways.

Difficult and concerning in using the Fellowship Hall for services – stairs, etc. seen as a real problem.  We bought the Ministry Center because of the parking availability.

We recognize that this feels like a step back to a time when the church was elbow to elbow in the Fellowship Hall, but in order to make the leap forward to new, updated facilities for our current and future generations’ worship, ministries, education and administration a transition plan is required.  The VTF has recommended that handicap access issues be priority in planning the transition.  It is acknowledged that parking could be a problem if two services are going on at the same time.  Off campus (street) parking could be utilized by those who are physically able to allow close-in parking for those with mobility challenges.

Poor management in the church – asbestos in the blue house was an unexpected expense.

We are only addressing the current recommendation, but recognize the importance of due diligence in any property acquisitions, remodeling/refurbishment and future constriction.   Hence the VTF’s consultation with both architects and construction companies when even developing the renderings provided in their report. 

Consider placing a red light at corner of McDonald and Pacific for crossing to MC.

The benefit of not having to transport His Kids attendees in vans  across the busy Pacific street is just one among many benefits of the campus unification proposal.  It is not the major catalyst and if the congregation decides not to pursue a unified campus, this concern may be addressed in other ways such as a red light request.

We already have a church facing Pacific – non-issue.

The issue is not just having a building facing Pacific, it is about what our campus on Pacific, as it is appears now, conveys to others as they travel the busiest street in Mineola  and whether it’s appearance support or hinders our mission to make disciples for Jesus Christ.  The Education Building is rarely utilized and not maintained, most days our parking lots are empty and need maintenance and the Sanctuary is only active for 1 hour on Sundays.  This conveys to passerbys that we are essentially non-active or in decline.

Conversely having a unified campus on Pacific, with new/refurbished facilities, and a centralized place for all of our worship, education and ministries will convey that we are a vibrant church, growing disciples and fulfilling our vision to Love God, Share Faith and Serve Neighbors.

Placing children and youth on 3rd floor creates an issue for their teachers who will have difficulty climbing the stairs.

The exact placement of classrooms, administration, etc. has not been determined.  A transition team will look at needs of  stakeholders and make a best effort to accommodate everyone.  The intention of this recommendation in the VTF report was to say that we do have two floors that are handicap accessible and we should consider using these to place activities most used by those with mobility issues.

The 3rd floor is hot – water in the kitchen is foul, etc.

If we can keep an open-mind there are ways to address many of these types of obstacles but it will require cooperation and preparation before the transition. The Unification Recommendation allows for the replacement of  all of the 5 ton, mid 1990’s HVAC units in the Education Building (as well as addressing handicap access issues).  For other issues such as the quality of the kitchen water the transition team might consider investment in things like water filters.

Doesn’t like use of the word “Dominate” the city of Mineola for future generations.

The intended usage of the word in this context is to convey that with our return to the Pacific street campus, along with our neighboring churches, houses of worship will have a significant presence in downtown Mineola signifying God’s role in our community.

You presented that the VTF was charged with researching only an option to trade the MC for the Library and build a new MC/facilities on the Pacific Campus, what were the other options previously considered by the Council and why was this path chosen? 

The short answer is that after research and discussion only this option provided a path forward that  1) reached our overarching goal of unifying the congregation, our worship and our ministries on one campus 2) allowed us to right-size our facilities to our current and future worship and ministry needs, 3) reduced the upcoming maintenance costs of our aging/declining facilities and 4) offered a financially feasible opportunity as we would have “seed” money from the trade.

Options which were researched by the Trustees Facility Work group and reported to Council:

  • Sell the Ministries Center, demolish the Education Building, and build new facilitates of the comparable size (~20,000 square ft) on the Pacific Avenue Campus. (This would achieve a unified campus, and provide almost all new facilities but the overall project cost was viewed as beyond our reach.)
  • Option 1a/b: Two variants of this option emerged when a trade with the Library for their building and house was explored. The difference in these was the use of existing Library facilities and the size of new construction.  It was this general Library Trade option that the VTF was tasked to explore
  • Demolish the Education Building and renovate the vacant space (dungeon) in the Ministries Center to accommodate the lost Education Building and continue to use the Sanctuary. (This option would not achieve the overarching goal of unifying on one campus.)
  • Sell the Ministries Center and Renovate the Education Building. (This would achieve a unified campus however it would limit our worship facilities significantly.  There was also uncertainty regarding costs to bring the Education Building up to ADA and building code. The other uncertainty was finding a potential non-profit buyer for the MC  as it’s location off the main thoroughfare makes it geographically undesirable for a for-profit entity like a retailer.)

Two other options were briefly considered in very early discussion and discarded.  These were not researched by the Trustees Facility Work Group.

  • Do nothing. Council recognized that this was not a real option as our facilities were in decline and would continue to decline without proper attention.
  • Sell it all and rebuild elsewhere: (Council felt this was not a viable option for many reasons including the low probability of finding buyers for all our facilities and the cost of purchasing land and and rebuilding from scratch.)

Why are we considering selling the existing Ministries Center and building a new
Ministries Center?
Twice in the last two years the Church Council voted to unify all of our
worship services, ministries and congregational activities on a single
campus to aid in our fellowship, ministry growth, evangelism and spiritual
growth (and practically speaking to also reduce our significant maintenance
costs now and going forward.) Council, and later the Visioning Task Force,
looked at several options as to how to accomplish this. Of our two
locations, only the Pacific Street location offers enough space to accomplish
this as well as an opportunity to fund a portion of the project with a trade
and equity from the library. The building of a new Ministries Center on the
Pacific campus is a cornerstone of the unification proposal.

How can we commit to such a large debt when we are just getting by?
Clearly capital campaigns are required no matter which path we go down.
The church will have to pull together to raise needed funds.
-A status quo path (stay in the buildings we have) requires
approximately $400,000to $500,000 be raised due to the significant
maintenance required now and in the near future.
-The unification path requires ~$1.3M in Phase 1 but results in new
facilities on a single campus. After speaking with a financial advisor
that helps churches, the VTF felt this amount is attainable as it falls
within the advisor’s recommendation that the most successful capital
campaigns are usually around 2.5x operating budget.

In addition to pledges the church will seek outside grants, hold fundraisers,
etc. It is our belief that the new, inspiring campus and facilities will also
attract new members as well as reduce costs due to increased efficiencies.

Why is a phased approach necessary and how were the phases selected?
A phased approach is necessary to be financially feasible. The phases/steps
will be laid out based on priority, funding, and architect recommendation.

Why do we think a beautiful building will bring more people to our church?

It’s the members that bring in visitors.
First impressions make a difference – right or wrong! If the facilities look
declining, the assumption perceived is that the church is declining.

How can I participate in this transaction/vision if I’m on a fixed income?
Many opportunities other than financial gifts will present themselves.
Creative minds will offer up unique opportunities such as bake sales, garage
sales, festivals, Lord’s Acre, etc. as fund raisers where you can give your
time and talent. Assistance in the transition by participation in work days to
refurbish the Education Building and Sanctuary (e.g. cleaning and painting)
and assistance in packing/moving.
The support and positive influence of each of us is a major factor in the
success of any endeavor. Continue to support and assist in our
ministries/activities and pray for our church to remain loving and unified.

How will the new Praise Court be better than the existing Praise Court?
Our current Praise Court is wonderfully accommodating and we will have
no less in the new facility. The new Court of Praise is designed to seat ~ 300
and includes a larger stage for better movement and accommodation of our
Praise Bands and allows for larger productions in future ministries. Better
storage areas for band equipment are planned. We will also be able to plan
for a higher quality visual/sound experience.

What can I do to help this vision come true?
Each member of our congregation plays an intricate roll in the vision –
whether it is in giving of money, talent, time or other gifts and graces. Our
prayer is that each will continue to pray for God’s hand and direction as we
go forth. We have been blessed through the years with a membership that
is actively supportive and we seek your continued participation. See where
God is working in our church and be involved. The blessing is in experiencing
God’s activity here.

Will we lose the ability to perform any current ministries in our transition time?
We should not. The VTF looked at current facility usage and determined
that we can make the transition and not lose existing programs. By utilizing
the Education Building and Fellowship Hall (approximately ~15,000 square
feet) we should have ample room to be able to accomplish all of our current
ministries. The church could partner with the community (Mineola Civic
Center, the school district, etc.), if additional space is required for specific
things such as storage of canned goods for Caring and Sharing.

If trade is made with the library, we won’t have a Court of Praise and there is no
way we can do all we do at the Ministries Center at the old library. Right?
The library building is not part of the transition or the unified campus plan.
We will use the Education Building and Fellowship Hall (~15,000 square
feet) during transition to house our administrative offices, classrooms and
ministries. The library and small house will be demolished and, in their
place, in Phase 1 the new Ministries Center will be built which will house the
Court of Praise, kitchen, nursery and classrooms.

Is the Education Building handicap accessible?
Only the first and second floors are handicap accessible. The VTF
recommended putting administration and adult education classes on these
floors, while putting children, youth, etc. on the upper floor. Some work will
need to be done on existing ramps and door entries before the transitional
period to improve access. We are currently examining how to best meet this
need.

Why would we spend money on the Education Building and Fellowship Hall if we
will eventually tear them down?
Only light refurbishment is planned to make the building handicap
accessible and reasonably pleasant during the transition. In addition to
replacement of mid 90’s HVAC units and resolving handicap access, the plan
calls for only cosmetic renovation including painting, wall dent/ding repair
and target flooring repair and cleaning to the Education Building.

What are we going to do to the Sanctuary interior?
Appendix II of the VTF report provides detail regarding the ~160,000 set
aside for Sanctuary Renovation Costs. Approximately $110,000 was
allocated for needed maintenance including window restoration of the side
windows and replacement of tower windows, deep cleaning of the exterior,
a new roof and new carpeting. Additionally approximately $50,000 was
allocated for cosmetic renovation to be determined by the Building
Committee, but could include: painting of the exterior trim, painting of
interior non sanctuary spaces, uniform chancel furniture, landscape work,
and other cosmetic enhancements in key locations.

The ramp and entrance/doors on the Johnson Street side of the Fellowship Hall
don’t offer easy access for seniors or those with disabilities, will this be
improved?
The appointed Building Committee will address access to the Fellowship Hall
and Education Building as preparations are made for the transition.

What about the asbestos and mold in the Education Building?
Asbestos is only a danger when it is disturbed. Material in good condition
and left undisturbed during renovations is not a problem. Mold can be
treated and controlled with bleaching agents or other cleaners; however,
we don’t know of any current issues.

When does the conversation with the Library take place?
No formal negotiations with the Mineola Library will take place before the
church membership votes on whether to accept a consolidation to one
campus on Pacific and a successful capital campaign is completed.
However, in the effort to be a good neighbor, brief contact with the Library
Board has happened by way of expressing and confirming ongoing interest
in a possible trade. The Library has also been made aware that FUMC has
several steps of approval/veto before final negotiations can take place, i.e.
Church Council approval, membership vote, capital campaign success, and
District approval.

What about parking at the Pacific street campus?
It is understood there will be issues with parking spaces for members,
handicap, and elderly. This will be one of the concerns addressed in plans
and designs made by the Building Committee appointed by the Church
Council. The Vision Task Force proposed renderings include additional
interior parking on the lots between the Knight house and the current
Education Building.

Is the Education Building equipped with the necessary wiring to supply all the
power needs of administration in the transition phase?
The office equipment and devices currently used by administration are
considered low current and pose no problem for the Education Building
electrical needs.

How much money will we receive from the Library? Does the Library have the
necessary funds for an anticipated trade?
For vision purposes only and to enable an estimation of costs, the VTF used
the independent appraisals conducted for both the Library and our Ministry
Center. The difference between the two is $700,000 and is only a beginning
point for any future negotiations. Final negotiations and exact trade values
will not be known until those negotiations take place.

The Library has indicated they have the money and resources to carry out
any trade/negotiations.

Have we verified we will have permission from the city to tear down the
Library? What about the Historical marker?
The Landmark Committee of Mineola will review any structure renderings
presented to them for buildings and the city approves or denies. We have
been told if it represents the era structure already there, it shouldn’t be a
problem with approval. The City Council has ultimate authority of any
decisions should the need arise.
The Historical marker located at Mineola Memorial Library is not a marker
for location, but for the establishment of a library consisting of the
business/contents within the building. The Library will take the Historical
marker with them wherever they go.

Are demolition costs of the Library included in the $1,335,000 estimated total
cost presented by the VTF?
The Phase 1 construction costs of approximately $1,800,000 shown on
Appendix I in the VTF Report is inclusive of costs expected in the tear down
of the Library.

How smooth will the transitions be? Will we be in one room at the Ministries
Center on one Sunday and have a prepared room in the Education Building
awaiting us the next Sunday?
Thus far in the vision only broad plans have been discussed on the overall
transition required to make a move to the Pacific campus. Addressing all the
finer details of that transition will be coordinated with the formed Building
Committee. However, as always, every effort will be made and planned in a
way to least disrupt the daily/weekly flow of activities of our church.
Historically, we have a wonderful membership that steps up when a need
arises and we feel confident in efforts by everyone to assist in making any
move/adjustments as smooth and seamlessly as possible.

How are members of the Church Council selected?
Church Council members include Council Chair, Pastor, Lay Leader, Director
of Music, Director of Senior Ministry, Director of Youth Ministry, Children’s
Ministry Coordinator, Staff Administrative Assistant, Staff Financial
Assistant, Chair Finance Committee, Chair Board of Trustees, Chair of SPRC,
Chair Memorial Fund, Treasurer, Evangelism, Missions, Fellowship, UMW
President, UMM President, Council Secretary, Sunday School Class
Representatives, and Youth Representative.
With the exception of staff positions, Sunday School Class Representatives
and Youth Representative, all committee chairs are voted on by democratic
process after being nominated by the Nomination Committee. Class and
youth representatives are selected in each Sunday School Class.

Did the Vision Task Force examine all possible options?
The VTF was charged by the Church Council to pursue one option, uniting
the church at the Pacific Street location and initiating a trade with the
Library. In June 2016 the Church Council held an all-day Facilities Workshop
and explored four options for uniting the church at a single location. In July
2016 they then appointed a Trustee Facilities Work Group to further explore
those four options. In May of 2017 the Church Council met to hear the
report of the Work Group and selected the option with a Library trade and
uniting at the Pacific Street location for further exploration. In August of
2017 the Church Council then selected a Vision Task Force to explore this
single option. However, the VTF looked at all the original options to further
verify the pursuit of what they deemed the most appropriate. In further
review, the architects also reviewed all other options to validate (again) the
Church was pursuing the best possible choice.

If the church approves this vision, will the move end the 8:30 service?
No. Our worship services are an integral part of the ministry FUMC has to
our membership and the surrounding community. The church will make
every effort to accommodate each service. The 8:30 praise and worship
service began in the Fellowship Hall and had a regular attendance of about
200 at the time of our relocation to the Ministry Center. Attendance at this
service is less than 150 today; therefore, we are confident the Fellowship
Hall will accommodate the seating, but the Sanctuary is also available if
preferred.

How will moving to this location reduce operating costs?
The Trustees have provided a future (5-10 years) expected maintenance and
repairs list for the Ministry Center, which include parking lot restoration and
seal ($100,000) AC replacement ($10,000 year), roof replacement
($143,000), and minor renovations ($6,000). The recommended date to
perform these repairs, with the exception of undetermined AC replacement,
is in 2018. By relocating temporarily to the Education Building the church
will experience a decrease in monthly energy bills, as well as future
maintenance on the Ministry Center. The savings experienced will redirect
our future expenditures to a more energy efficient building, sized to our
specific needs.

Why do we believe being on a major traffic artery is vital to our church future?
One of the major principles of selecting a church site is “location, location,
location.” Placement of a major church on a highly traveled, major artery of
traffic in town aids in the immediate visibility to possible visitors. It allows
the entire community, as well as those just driving thru, to see an alive and
energetic campus actively involved in ministry.

Are the renderings we have seen exactly what will be built?
The Vision Task Force has offered up a possible vision of what can be done if
the church chooses to go forward. However, these are not the final
renderings. A final plan would be decided by the appointed Building
Committee.

Since office staff will be located in a separate facility, how will requests for use
of our facilities be observed and handled? How will security be maintained and
handled in the new location?
These concerns are valid and will be addressed by the appropriate
committees and individuals involved as needed, i.e. Building Committee,
Trustees, etc.

How much money is required to upgrade the Sanctuary and Ministry Center?
Trustees have determined that an estimated $400,000 to $500,000 is
anticipated in maintenance for the current facilities (both campuses, all
buildings) in the next five to ten years. A repair list for the Ministry Center
includes parking lot restoration and seal ($100,000) AC replacement
($10,000 year), roof replacement ($143,00), and minor renovations
($6,000). The recommended date to perform these repairs, with the
exception of undetermined AC replacement, is in 2018.
These costs differ from the renovation costs projected for the Sanctuary and
Education Building if the church chooses to go forward with the Library
trade. Sanctuary renovation costs are anticipated at approximately
$161,000, to include restoring Sanctuary widow frames and replacement of
windows in the tower, exterior cleaning, new roof, new carpet, paint, etc.
Education Building renovations are all cosmetic and AC replacement at a
cost of approximately $45,000.

Why aren’t town hall meetings being held prior to the Church Council vote?
The Church Council is elected as an administrative board and is responsible
for the overall function of our church and is accountable to the membership.
In its capacity it is responsible to make decisions for the betterment of the
church. The called Church Council meeting held on Saturday, April 28th, was
an information meeting where the Vision Task Force presented the vision it
had been working on for eight months. This meeting allowed the Church
Council to ask questions and have an open dialog prior to their vote on
whether it is in the interest of the entire church to proceed with the vision.
At that time the Church Council agreed to move forward in presenting the
vision to the church body for their vote on whether to move forward with
this vision.  The town hall meetings are a necessary opportunity to inform all church
members of the vision and allow them to ask any and all questions they
may have in order to be informed prior to conducting a church-wide
membership vote.

How many town hall meetings will there be before a congregation vote is taken?
As many as we need. The Church Council initially scheduled three, primarily
informational, sessions to present the Unification Recommendation and to
answer initial questions. These are scheduled for May 6, 13, and 20 at 9:45
a.m. – 10:45 a.m.
Follow-up town hall meetings with more of a Q&A Discussion format will be
scheduled at varying times (not during Sunday School) until we feel that all
members have had the opportunity to see and understand the unification
proposal and to present all concerns and questions. Not until we reach that
point will we schedule a church-wide membership vote.

Is there an alternative plan if the proposed option is not accepted by the
membership?
There is not an alternative plan at this time. If the decision is made to not
go forward with the vision presented, a capital campaign will still be
required to fund the necessary maintenance and repairs that has been
presented by the Trustees. Our church cannot continue to productively
function without addressing the needs of our facilities.

What is the sequence of voting that will take place?
There are several steps where approval/termination of the vision can take
place:
 Church Council vote
 Membership vote
 Capital Campaign
 Library Negotiations
 District Superintendent Approval

Who can vote?
According to our Book of Discipline, all full members present (regardless of
age) at the church conference may vote. Associated or affiliated members
do not have a vote. You must be present to cast your vote; no proxy voting
is allowed. Voting is conducted by a secret ballot and controlled by the
District Superintendent.

Where will the Sunday morning services take place?
The 8:30 service has the option of using the Sanctuary or the Fellowship Hall
and every effort will be made to accommodate their choice. The 10:50
service remains in the Sanctuary and the 11:00 service will take place in the
Fellowship Hall because of the current use of the Sanctuary at that time