tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2987633698271670286.post7574451192247792849..comments2023-09-04T09:00:06.938-07:00Comments on UUA View from Berkeley: Leaving Beacon HillLinda Laskowskihttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00430830718856244947noreply@blogger.comBlogger6125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2987633698271670286.post-92227884750883870752013-03-04T11:11:46.613-08:002013-03-04T11:11:46.613-08:00Sorry that I didn't see this earlier.
I thin...Sorry that I didn't see this earlier. <br /><br />I think that we should sell the building and not leave Boston. Although history is nice, it's only since 1927. The inefficiency and inaccessibility are overwhelming.<br /><br />I was in 25 many times when I represented PCD as UUA Trustee. It is beautiful for the public, but dismal for the staff. <br /><br />John will need a really long chain from Monterey to Boston.<br /><br />Art UngarArthur Ungarnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2987633698271670286.post-79587102298836173562012-06-10T17:25:11.331-07:002012-06-10T17:25:11.331-07:00San Francisco, Sacramento, Long Beach etc. etc. th...San Francisco, Sacramento, Long Beach etc. etc. the UUA should move it's center of gravity to where many UUs live. And California is the perfect candidate because of it's great weather, high percentage of UUs compared to other states, and it's progressive attitude that reflect that of Unitarians. Moving the HQ to California would be a Strategic move, which would also generate much needed publicity/attention to the movement. Infuse new energy by moving to The Golden State. After all, it's the 2nd state with the highest number of congregations and adherents right behind MAFunInTheSunNewHQhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01152533833733748970noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2987633698271670286.post-16120377357949640872012-06-01T12:52:05.468-07:002012-06-01T12:52:05.468-07:00Thanks for the feedback, Sally. I understand the ...Thanks for the feedback, Sally. I understand the attachment as I was there as well. You will find most of your concerns spelled out in Board policy in my January 31 blog post, http://www.blogger.com/blogger.g?blogID=2987633698271670286#editor/target=post;postID=86568589683391528<br /><br />Leases for large office spaces are a very different beast than residential, so the analogy for #2 doesn't exactly apply. It is more of a financing than a risk decision.Linda Laskowskihttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00430830718856244947noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2987633698271670286.post-8877146248795416692012-05-31T14:40:21.248-07:002012-05-31T14:40:21.248-07:00I am somewhere between “chain myself to the door” ...I am somewhere between “chain myself to the door” and “sell it now while the residential market is high and office market is low”.<br />I am only gradually, reluctantly, persuaded that an alternative to staying is logical. My sense of history and tradition argues for remaining, as does my desire for preservation of historic buildings and disdain for new corporate-headquarters-style buildings.<br />The discussion of the labor market leaves me cold, makes me angry.<br />However, IFF (if and only if) the deficiencies—lack of Internet service (presumably something that Verizon, ATT, etc. cannot fix? hard to imagine), accessibility issues, mold, etc., are accurately reported (having never been there, I can only accept reports, having no objective knowledge), then there is a reasonable case for a move.<br />I take the 3–4 years with a grain of salt, and as for the potential of losing senior staff: tough. No organization guarantees no moves when a job is taken. We are not QUITE as connected to Boston as the Catholic Church is to the Vatican (though it might be close ).<br />There are a few points on which I am unbendable, however, as follows:<br />(1) no new building, custom built for us; that is a luxury that we simply cannot afford, and sends a much-too-exclusive message<br />(2) no leased space; we cannot look back at a box of receipts instead of retaining equity in our headquarters. Too many of our congregations have gotten into financial trouble by giving up their parsonage; we must not do the same at the denominations level.<br />(3) any money gained that is not used for a new-to-us building must be retained for future capital projects, not spent on programming that is fleeting. It is a “spend the interest, not the principal” approach that suits long-range planning.<br />(4) We must be accessible to public transportation and incorporate as many environmentally beneficial choices as possible: skylight, operating windows, dual-level flush toilets, etc. To do otherwise would be hypocritical, given our emphasis on Green Sanctuaries.<br />To me, this is a very tall order. I do not know whether it is possible to meet all, or even most, of these conditions. If not, then we stay where we are, for my money—but if we can find the right place, I can accept it.Sally Gellertnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2987633698271670286.post-51210574256495036132012-05-15T16:51:01.232-07:002012-05-15T16:51:01.232-07:00Ah, John, I knew it was you. I just didn't kn...Ah, John, I knew it was you. I just didn't know you were coming as Interim to Monterrey -- welcome to the district! I look forward to having another opportunity to talk.Linda Laskowskihttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00430830718856244947noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2987633698271670286.post-6513483380706575182012-05-14T14:51:23.223-07:002012-05-14T14:51:23.223-07:00You and I should talk. You will be my UUA trustee ...You and I should talk. You will be my UUA trustee when I become Interim Minister in Monterey this summer. I will literally chain myself to the door of that building before I will allow today's amnesiacs to sell it.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com