St. Chad’s Building Committee 3

Meeting # 25

04/06/2008

Revised

Attendees:  Paul Apodaca, Larry Babineaux, Susan Carson, Bob Gough, Merri Jean Jones, Jan Kingsbury, Rich Lehoucq, Eileen Simpson, and Richard Simpson

 

Members Absent: Bo Keith, Debra Kincaid, and Father Brian Winter

 

Handouts provided prior to meeting:  Agenda

 

Handouts provided at meeting:  Financial Report as of March 31, 2008

 

 

 

1.   Bob Gough opened the meeting and led the prayer.

 

2.   Bob Gough proposed a discussion of the two Parish Meetings be added to the agenda.  The addition was met with approval.

 

3.   Richard Simpson moved the minutes of the March 16 meeting be approved.  Jan Kingsbury seconded the motion, which was passed unanimously.

 

4.   Paul Apodaca presented the financial report.  Paul noted that the 2007 contributions were adjusted by $14,000 after it was learned these contributions were part of the 2008 pledged amount.  Paul indicated that changes to the graph will be incorporated next week.  Four zero amount pledges are shown on the Congregational Pledge Chart.  $52,792.36 has been received to date toward the $406,846 pledged.  Larry Babineaux moved the financial report be accepted.  Richard Simpson seconded the motion which was passed unanimously.

 

5.   Jan Kingsbury offered comments regarding pledge results.  Pledges have been received from 88 of the 112 families who pledged during the Stewardship Campaign.  That leaves 24 families not making any pledge to the Building Fund.  It is known that four to six of the 24 are opposed to the building project.  Since twelve of the 24 are elderly and on a limited income, it leaves about 12 families to be approached on a one-on-one basis.  However, Jan indicated she did not wish to do that prior to discussing the list of twelve with Father Brian and Bob Gough.  Jan also stated that one new family had not received a building fund packet and requested one, and another former parishioner had requested to make a donation to the fund.

 

Bob Gough requested that when any BC3 obtains information affecting pledges, to pass that information on to Jan who will be the central keeper of that type of information.

 

Larry Babineaux indicated being in favor of suggesting a one-time gift.  Richard Simpson requested we ask Hal DeHoff to list those who have not pledged, but have given a one-time gift to the building fund.

 

Bob Gough relayed information provided by Hal DeHoff.  13 of the 84 building fund pledging units did not pledge to the operating fund.  Of the pledging families, 16 pledges are at least 3 times their 2008 operating fund pledge; 11 pledges are between 2 and 3 times their 2008 operating fund pledge; 24 pledges are at between 1 – 2 times their 2008 operating fund pledge; and 20 pledges are between 0 and 1 times their 2008 operating fund pledge.

 

6.   The group discussed the two Parish Meetings held on March 30 and April 3.  The following points were noted:

·         There was no expressed interest in additional fund raising

·         There is a desire to have the architect begin

·         There was some resistance to building

·         There were also those who want to get on with it

·         Put the “do nothing” option last on the list of approaches

·         Sunday’s session had the most vocal opposition, but when favorable things were said, many persons would nod or indicate favorable agreement with the statement

·         Many parishioners who oppose the project did not attend either session

·         Two persons who are opposed to the project indicated they would not be attending the sessions because we would not be receptive to their comments. They suggested considering prefab buildings for administrative space and classrooms.  These persons also believe crowding was not too bad, but that we should maximize what is available (such as adding a third service).

·         We respect various views, but some views do not take us forward.  The issue is crowding.  The 80 (?)% rule states that if a number of measurable seats are not available, newcomers will not come back because there is a perception that there is not enough room for them.  The same feeling applies to programs and parking.

·         Temporary buildings become permanent, especially when the building occupies the site of the future building.

·         The problem is not the concept or the design, but of funding.  To focus on alternative design is the wrong focus.

·         If we switch to using Butler Buildings now, this changes the concept on which people pledged their money.

·         The BC3 needs to accept that some would say the BC3 made a decision to build and doesn’t care what they say.

·         A much larger fraction of the congregation says go ahead.

·         BC3 has to make decisions as a whole for the congregation, while the ultimate authority is the Vestry

·         We want the parishioners to know that the BC3 talked of and considered their viewpoints.

·         Parishioners that oppose the building may “prefer” that we not build.

·         When the New Hampshire Bishop event occurred, several people voted with the feet, but St. Chad’s survived and even has grown since then.

·         There is potential for reaction to any action that the BC3 takes.

 

7.   Bob Gough, Merri Jean Jones, Father Brian Winter, and Richard Simpson met with Glen Holliman on Friday, April 4.  Glen is Vice President of the Giving Services of the Episcopal Church Foundation and was in New Mexico to advise members of the Navajoland churches.  Merri Jean and Father Brian had met with Teri Mathes previously.  Teri is also from Glen’s organization, whose purpose is to assist parishes with capital campaigns.  Merri Jean observed that both of these individuals have the ability to articulate giving in a comfortable way that presents pledging and giving as a spiritual action.  Even though fund raising discussions are not part of St. Chad’s history, we should learn to be comfortable with the dialog.  Richard Simpson stated he was impressed with Glen and his approach.  We have gotten far with our fund raising but not far enough.  Glen’s challenge is how he can help us to move forward at this point in our process.  There is a fee associated to the service provided by the Giving Services organization.  There was some discomfort expressed with sales pitches and use of an outside consultant. 

 

Bob Gough stated that their process when engaged from the beginning is to meet with the top 20%, the leadership of the congregation and conduct a survey.  For example, the questionnaire asks “Would you estimate your total amount of giving if the project were to proceed?”, and “What problems do you foresee?”  The responses are tabulated and an assessment is made on whether the parish should or should not continue with the building project.  There is no pressure to collect pledges at the time of the survey.  The consultants are there to gather basic information.  The feasibility study conducted by St. Chad’s did not poll individuals on how much they might be willing to pledge.  The consultants then train parishioners to make calls during the campaign.  The most effective results come from person-to-person contact.  The next effective approach is to meet in small groups.  The third most effective approach is to meet with the entire congregation.  The least effective approach is to send a letter.

 

Based on the consultant’s experience, Glen estimated we should have raised $500 – 600,000 during a capital campaign.  He stated that 80% who pledge to the operating fund will also pledge to a capital campaign.  20% of the congregation pledges about 80% of the money.  It is also typical to have a second campaign four to five years after the first capital campaign focused on reducing the debt.  Their expected shrinkage, from pledged dollars to actual collected, is 5 – 10%.

 

The opinion was expressed that we should be able to raise another $200,000 and construct the Phase 3 portion, but not the entire project.

 

Debra Kincaid and Susan Carson have been working on a financial spreadsheet analysis.  The assumptions include:

·         10% growth for attendance, which is considered to be realistic

·         10% growth in contributions, although St. Chad’s has seen the percent increase more than the increase in numbers of members

·         5% increase each year for plate income

·         5% increase each year for staff expenses.  A spike was added for the part-time Christian Education Director and Assistant Rector.

·         3% increase each year for maintenance and administrative costs.  A 10% spike was inserted during the move-in year.

·         4% increase per year for programs and outreach

·         Ladder of maturity for bonds at 3 – 5% interest and 3 – 12 year maturity

·         Assumption of a 20 year commercial loan

The spreadsheet resulted in a positive net cash flow except for three of the 30 projected years, but the accumulated profit from the previous years would be more than enough to carry us through those three years.

 

Bob Gough stated that borrowing $1.25 million is doable and that the $1.25 number is approximate.  With this size loan, the debt service averages $110,000/year.

 

Glen Holliman will be sending us their proposal this week.  Bob Gough believes the proposal will include conducting a survey, incorporating a pause in the process, and then conducting a second campaign.

 

It was noted that the Vestry has already set aside $33,000 for utility upgrades that has not been included in contributions toward the cost.  With the Vestry and Foundation anticipated contributions for 2009 and 2010, the total reaches nearly $700,000.  That plus $1.25 million in debt gives us $1.9 million for the project.  By raising an additional $150 – 200,000, we could do Phase 3.

 

Jan Kingsbury expressed the opinion that we could raise these funds ourselves with another internal campaign.  Susan Carson agreed.  Larry Babineaux stated the spreadsheet and having an actual number of what we need to achieve, or a goal, is helpful.

 

Bob Gough proposed that the BC3 has reached the conclusion that the gap can be closed.  Richard Simpson reminded everyone that we have to give the architect a budget number before he can proceed. 

 

Bob Gough indicated that the consultant would probably tailor their survey instruments to our particular situation during the month of May, conduct the one-on-one meetings in June, and finalize the feasibility study in July so we could resume the campaign in August.  Susan Carson believed this was too long a period for our project.  Bob suggested that if the pledge collection extended for another year, from three to four years, we may need to take on a larger debt at the beginning to allow for the extended pledge payment period.

 

Glen Holliman is expected to provide their proposed by Wednesday.  A special session of the BC3 is temporarily set for Thursday, April 10 at 7:30 pm to review and discuss the proposal.  The Vestry must approve any hiring of consultants; and the next Vestry meeting is this next Sunday, April 13.  Merri Jean Jones noted an advantage of using consultants over an internal campaign is their anonymously position when gathering information. 

 

Bob Gough stated we should keep the parishioners informed about our plans.  Richard Simpson indicated we should send a thank you letter with the pledge card, separate from any other communication.  This action was agreed by a majority of those present.

 

8.   Jan Kingsbury discussed the May Fun-Raiser.  We will be selling flowers on May 11.  Eileen Simpson will be using the Bulletin Board to publicize the event.  Jan will include information in the Sunday Bulletin.  Sales will begin on April 20 after the Spring Fever Fest is over.  Jan stated she is working on keeping the expenses down so we can charge $2 - $2.50 per flower.  She suggested the women prepare the flowers and the men perform the selling tasks.  Pre-selling will occur on April 27 and May 4.

 

 

 

New Action Items

Jan Kingsbury – Send thank you letters and return pledge cards to pledging families.

 

 

Respectfully submitted,

Eileen Simpson

4/07/2008