From: Keith Seat 
Sent: Saturday, July 10, 1999 12:01 AM
Subject: To Seekers: Important Update on 1101 Pennsylvania Ave SE

Summary:  The property at 1101 appears to be slipping away from us.  We
are proposing to take more dramatic steps to convince the owners to favor
our contingency contract, even though there would be costs if we later
chose not to purchase the building.  We will be available in the PC & CC
room at 11:15 a.m. this Sunday to discuss.  The specifics follow:

     As most of you are aware, Seekers has been attempting to enter into a
contingency contract on the property at 1101 Pennsylvania Avenue, S.E.  We
initially made an offer on the property on June 25, with terms that would
have allowed us a period of time to determine whether we wanted to proceed
with the purchase of that building and to suffer no loss if we decided not
to go forward.  In fact on that day we got as far as an oral agreement
with the seller on a price of $750,000 and all other key terms; but before
seller signed the contract (his attorney was out of the country on
vacation) another offer was made.  This was the status at the time of the
congregational meeting on June 30.  At that time we did not know the terms
of the other offer, and were analyzing whether we should offer more money
or stick with our initial offer.  After much consideration, we concluded
that our best move was to include an escalation clause which stated that
we would pay $1000 more than any other bona fide offer up to a cap that
was known by our agent, but not disclosed to the seller.  Those terms were
included in a second offer that we made on July 5.  Unfortunately, it was
not sufficient, even though the competing offer was less than our cap.
     Two days ago, Seekers' contract negotiators were informed by Kitty, 
our agent in our dealings on 1101, that seller is planning to
accept the other offer on the building, and to consider the Seekers' offer
as a back-up, although nothing is yet final. We have learned that the
alternate offer was made by the hardware store adjoining 1101, and that
their offering price is $775,000. We have also heard that the hardware
store and 1101's owner have been in conversation about a possible sale for
a number of years.
     We've been told by Kitty that the owner's concerns with Seekers'
offer weren't about price, but were about the owner's perception that our
offer wasn't as "clean." Our offer had more contingencies and our study
period was longer. And, because we provided for an additional board
approval, he wasn't as sure that our contract would actually go forward to
settlement. He may also have had questions about our actual financial
ability to pay for the building.
     Our response has been to be as creative as possible in trying to
obtain for Seekers a real opportunity to consider this building.  We have
put together an amended offer that responds to the owner's concerns, and
that hopefully will persuade him to accept Seekers' bid over the hardware
store offer. We have verbally sent him a new offer that changes our
earlier offer in the following ways:
	-Increases our offering price to $780,000
        -Decreases the period of time for us to complete all studies and
assure ourselves about the feasibility of the building from 90 days to 45
days
       -Adds a forfeiture clause to the effect that if for any reason
[short of finding some gross defect] we decide not to go to closure,
Seekers agrees to forfeit $10,000 of the deposit made with our offer.

     Of these changes, the forfeiture clause is the biggest: we are
committing ourselves either to purchasing the building or giving up the
$10,000. However, this is exactly the kind of decision that we earlier
anticipated we might have to make in this "hot" real estate market. We
knew it was likely there might come a time when we'd have to use our
financial resources to hold a building while we took the time we needed to
think through our decision thoroughly. We feel that we need to offer this
kind of possible financial forfeiture now to have a chance at securing the
property.
     There is one additional way of making Seekers' offer cleaner and more
attractive that we feel is important to pursue. That is, we propose that
our amended offer take out the provision for Seekers' giving its
preliminary approval by July 19. We included this in our first offer as a
way to get Seekers into the game on 1101 without ultimately committing
ourselves to going forward.  The time has come when that is no longer a
viable strategy: dropping this first phase seems to us a necessary step
for Seekers to have a good chance with this building.  For Seekers, the
effect of this change would be that the forfeiture clause just discussed
would come into effect right away, instead of giving us a small risk-free
cushion of time for preliminary discussions and decision-making.
     Dropping the first phase and shortening our study period would
require Seekers to work more rapidly to answer our questions and address
our concerns. We won't have the time that even a week ago we thought we
would have. For some, these new constraints are going to feel like Seekers
is rushing too fast. We nonetheless propose them because we feel the
changes are necessary to have a realistic chance of keeping Seekers in the
game at all.
     It is important that all Seekers understand what the situation is
with 1101 at this point, and what the issues are before us.  Core members
will be considering these new circumstances at their meeting this Sunday
evening. We want to make time for all Seekers to get answers to questions
and discuss any concerns and provide feedback this Sunday morning after
services, at 11:15 in the PC &CC room. We would urge all of you who can
attend to come help us discuss these rapidly changing circumstances and
what they mean for us.
     We also welcome any e-mail questions or comments you may have if you
are unable to talk with us after church on Sunday.  Please direct your
responses to Keith.
Faithfully, Keith, Jeanne and Peter in absentia.

----

This message was sent to all Seekers.