It’s always easy to second guess what went on.
But considering that our vice president is an architect (and proposer of several of the options) himself, you and many and me wondered about the way this board went ahead.

Like with most here, I was impressed and loved the “Starbucks” options 3&4, I was going to vote for them right away.

Then I learned that:
1) the Starbucks designs were initially proposed for over $230,000.
2) that price was cut down by 3/4 to $57,000 (amazing achievement, right?)
3) the proposed lined up donor(s) of $100,000(s) were laughing at that idea and some are actually doing fundraisers for their own projects.
4) there will be no windows nor doors (yet to this day same nice rendering is shown to us).
5) the Starbucks options 4 and probably 3 would be started with cement walls and columns with “only” $19k.
6) *Before* the *whole* sum is secured by donations in cash.
7) the “remaining” phases would be finished upon funding.
8) the board did not put a time limit for said funding.

So if the Starbucks designs are selected, we could end up sitting between some cement ruins, walls and (dangerous?) cement columns, and be held hostage until the “funds” come in.

All those insights made Mitch & us come up with a viable, no wishful-thinking rendering, honest and all laid out design, with the help of actual architects and structural engineers.

I’m just trying to salvage what can be done.
Jimmy