Read NWH Grace Hall article

When you read this morning's Northwest Herald article about Grace Hall, read it carefully, and see if you come up with the same thoughts I did.

The reporter is certainly correct that Grace Hall's fate remains uncertain.

The article reads that the City Council continued the ordinance "at the behest of Woodstock Christian Life Services." It wasn't quite that way. As I wrote in a separate article, the mayor handed a postponement to WCLS on a silver platter. The mayor was the one who brought up putting off the vote, not WCLS. After at least five council members indicated they were going to vote against demolition of Grace Hall, the mayor figured he'd better not let it come to a vote. And so he asked WCLS's attorney, Mark Gummerson, if he wanted the Council not to vote on the Motion in the Agenda. That's not "behest".

Is WCLS a "non-profit charity"? No, it's a not-for-profit business. When I think of "charity", I think of United Way, Salvation Army, Red Cross. I don't think of a business selling little duplexes for $200,000, plus a hefty monthly fee. And not even "selling" them for $200K.

It wasn't "eight months" ago that the City Council passed Ordinance 08-O-62. It was October 7, 2008. That's 6 1/2 months. Why stretch it to "eight"?

The article said that WCLS "offered to sell Grace Hall for $1 and have it moved to another location." Well, no, not quite. The offer was "Buy it for $1 and move it." That is, the Buyer would move it after, of course, purchasing land on which to place it AND coughing up $300,-500,000 to move it, and then another $500,000 to renovate it. The offer was initially laughable and it still is.

One of the Councilmen wisely challenged WCLS' estimated rehabilitation costs for the building. Those costs jumped 40% in ten minutes last October, after the architect said it would cost $500,000 to rehab the building and Terry Egan then said it would cost $700,000. Last night those added costs were explained as including "soft costs", like marketing.

WCLS is apparently already moving employees out of Grace Hall. Will they let it deteriorate and then come back and say that rehab costs are even higher?

How about this for an approach? You've owned Grace Hall for 53 years. Show some pride in that ownership. Get serious about an adaptive re-use. If you had spent half your efforts and money to find a good, solid, economically-feasible re-use of Grace Hall, you'd be miles ahead.