St. Chad’s Building Committee 3

Meeting # 26

04/10/2008

Revised

Attendees:  Susan Carson, Bob Gough, Merri Jean Jones, Bo Keith, Jan Kingsbury, Eileen Simpson, Richard Simpson, and Father Brian Winter

 

Members Absent: Paul Apodaca, Larry Babineaux, Debra Kincaid, and Rich Lehoucq

 

Handouts provided prior to meeting: 

Capital Campaign Contract from the Episcopal Church Foundation,

Conceptual Cost Estimate dated April 8, 2008 from Bill Fanning

 

Handouts provided at meeting:  Phase 3 Cost Estimates and BC3 Program Finances

 

 

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

 

2.   Bob Gough explained the purpose of this special session of the BC3 was to come to a decision on the next steps and ask for Vestry concurrence next Sunday at their regular monthly meeting.

 

3.   Bob Gough handed out the Phase 3 Cost Estimates that he had drafted.  The document listed estimates from Bill Fanning as well as a more spartan estimate using numbers believed to be a reasonable square foot cost but $15/square foot less than the amount used by Bill.  The Spartan figures total $2.3 million.  Bob suggested the BC3 review the document at their leisure regarding the square foot estimates.  He noted that $150,000 was allowed for furnishings, which is larger than the previous number used for furnishings.

 

4.   Bob Gough then handed out the Program Finances document that estimates available funds.  The numbers include an additional year of pledges, a second pledge drive, Vestry and Foundation contributions for 2009 and 2010, and the fee for the Episcopal Church Foundation contract.  Bond and mortgage numbers were identical to the spreadsheets previously prepared by Debra Kincaid.  A shortfall of $65,000 is projected.  It was felt that because we are close enough to the Phase 3 costs, we can figure out a second stage pledge drive.  Refinement of our project budget was deferred to another time.  This document was to be used tonight to help us see if we were close to the ballpark numbers needed.

 

Susan Carson commented that a 25 year mortgage, rather than the 20 year mortgage shown on the document, was possible and thereby reducing the monthly payments.  The mortgage could be paid off early by having fund raisers at a later time.

 

Father Brian Winter noted that the money the Vestry automatically transfers to the Building Fund will go away when the mortgage payments begin; therefore we cannot include those transfers into the fund when that occurs.

 

Bo Keith stated that timing is an issue, and parishioners are more likely to purchase bonds when they see something happening.

 

Bob Gough indicated Bill Fanning’s estimate for the combined Phase 4 is now at just over one million dollars.  Bob expressed the opinion that Phase 3 should encompass all of the new construction because the penalty for breaking construction into multiple phases is enormous; therefore it would be unwise to delay some of the new construction.  Bob also indicated the mortgage interest might be less than the 6.75% shown since interest rates are currently declining.

 

5.   The group shared their opinions regarding the proposal from The Episcopal Church Foundation and the option of having an internal follow-up campaign.

 

Jan Kingsbury indicated she was pleasantly surprised at the fee indicated in the proposal.  However, she believes we can raise $200,000 – 250,000 internally without a consultant, by being up front with the parishioners, making use of a “thermometer”, and giving the parish a challenge.  Jan suggested providing options: extending the pledges for an additional year up to four years and offering one time gifts as an option.  She indicated some parishioners might question our wisdom in spending $14,000 for a consultant.  Jan also thought that if we select ECF to assist us, we should ask the consultant how willing they would be to include questions beyond the building fund.  Jan suggested we provide a public semi-apology because we did not have goal numbers initially, but that we have firm figures now when we ask for their help in reaching the goal of $200K or $250K.

 

Richard Simpson concurred with Jan’s statements, and added that we could present this information to the congregation at small group gatherings in homes.

 

Susan Carson indicated she favored an in-house second fund raiser.  The ECF proposal would have been excellent if we had done it at the beginning.  Susan questioned the effect it would have on current pledges.  Susan indicated she personally does not want a one-on-one with a consultant and that others may be annoyed by having consultants conduct a personal survey.  It was questioned why the information could not be gotten strictly from the written survey.  Susan added to Jan’s suggestions the options of increasing pledge dollars, making contributions when personal finances permit, and notation for those who will not make a pledge.  Susan indicated we need to show how we got to the dollar goal and that the building will not be affecting any St. Chad’s programs.  Susan expressed the option that people will come forward.

 

Bo Keith stated that even though the BC3 did not have definite dollars to share with parishioners, many made pledges without regard to the total amount needed for the project.  Bo expressed the opinion that having another appeal with definite money goals would be successful.  Having an additional year for pledging is an easy way to extend it.  Bob Gough noted that extending the pledge drive to four years may create a cash flow crunch.

 

Merri Jean Jones stated she was pleasantly astonished at the ECF proposal’s fee.  She felt it was unfortunate that all BC3 members had not heard either Teri Mathes or Glenn Holliman speak.  She felt uncertainty with what was being said, and believed we need to be careful in what is presented to the parishioners.  She stated the survey, which is really a feasibility study, would tell us how people are thinking and where they are in their commitment to the building project.  An important part is to find out what they think about the bond portion of the project and their participation in the bond sales.  Merri Jean expressed the opinion that having a consultant gives parishioners an opportunity to share personal information they might not share with one of us.  The consultant has the ability to assess the feasibility of a second fund drive.  Having a consultant would give us an idea if it is worth it or not before we ask for additional funds.  The consultant can help us word communications to the parish and to help the congregation feel secure that we have thought through this clearly.  Merri Jean expressed the opinion that we do not need to apologize.  It is not just dollars that we are asking for, it is commitment.  Merri Jean also was not sure we can do this on our own.

 

Jan Kingsbury expressed concern over the small number of people who would actually be interviewed by the consultants.

 

Bob Gough noted he had first looked at the survey and thought we would get good information.  After reviewing the congregational list and knowing the results were determined by who we put on the list to meet with the consultant, he indicated he was suspicious that information from the ECF survey would be highly dependent on the specific individuals chosen to be interviewed due to the small sample size.

 

Merri Jean Jones stated she did not have a good sense after the Parish Meetings of how people really felt.

 

Richard Simpson stated he was surprised about the fee charged for the ECF services.  Richard expressed the opinion that using the consultant’s proposal would alienate people.  Richard stated we have come so far and a consultant might say to others that we don’t know what we are doing.  Having the consultant might have a negative impact on the congregation.  Richard suggested that instead of accepting their proposal, we ask ECF to train us how to speak to people, ask him what things we can do on our own, and perhaps ask for a one-day seminar.

 

Merri Jean Jones stated we were moderately successful the first time, but that it will be more difficult from now on.

 

Father Brian Winter indicated the proposal’s fee is good and the information we would receive from the consultant’s would also be good.  Father Brian reminded everyone of the impressions given by the congregation and we should do some soul searching because some input said we need a scaled down version.  Some may perceive that our Phase 3 is way beyond what they expressed; often perception is reality.  Father Brian hoped we could tell Bill Fanning our budget was $2 million.  Father Brian expressed the opinion that he liked the idea of having Teri Mathes here for a couple of days to process through everything.  We need to be very clear how to proceed.  The bond question needs to be addressed.  Assuming we would obtain $500,000 in bond purchases is scary.

 

Eileen Simpson noted that she concurred with comments already expressed and had nothing new to state.  She expressed the opinion that using the consultant’s survey might alienate some of the congregation and give the wrong message as to how we are handling the project.

 

Bob Gough stated the low fee on the proposal was a surprise to him.  He expressed the opinion that the proposal’s language was generic and did not speak to the fact that St. Chad’s had already held a campaign.  The proposal’s timeline was lengthy and we should not suspend our project that long.  Bob is uncertain about getting much additional information from the sixteen individuals selected to meet with the consultants.  Bob believes we have received the information already: less than 100% of the pledging units to the stewardship drive pledged to the building fund and the amount pledged was not as much as we could have gotten, although the congregation has responded favorably to our drive and to the project.  The goal has not changed.  The building concept is ministry driven and not lavish.  Bob urged the BC3 not to attribute to the whole congregation comments by a few.  In regard to scaling back, Bob believes that we took on that responsibility by breaking the project into two pieces.  The Vestry and BC3 have been cognizant of congregational comments and have weighed those comments when making decisions.

 

Bob Gough stated that from the group discussion, he was inclined that we propose to the Vestry a second stage pledge campaign, the bulk of it done internally with help from the ECF, or Jan Hosea and Celeste Wether.  We could contact Glenn Holliman for assistance.  Merri Jean Jones suggested that we need to do our homework, to get training, learn to speak the language of fund raising, and scheduling.

 

Jan Kingsbury stated that during small group sessions for the Stewardship campaign held five or six years ago, people opened up in that setting.  Father Brian suggested combining those who have been opposed to the project into one group.  Jan further suggested we have a list to demonstrate how we have trimmed the first estimate and why we are striving to do the Phase 3.

 

It was recommended that Bob Gough report to the Vestry 1) Phase 3 be scaled back to new construction and part of the parking only, and that the emphasis be on function and less on esthetics. 2) The preliminary estimated project cost is $2.3 million, which will be refined later as the project budget.  3) Hold a second stage pledge campaign with details to be determined.  Small group settings are suggested and we would obtain assistance from the ECF or others.  We need to obtain a sense of support for the bond campaign.  We will have hard numbers so we can be explicit on how much money is to be raised during the second drive.  At this time, unofficially, the goal is $250,000.

 

It was agreed that it would be helpful to know what the mortgage would look like if we had zero dollars in bonds, $250K in bonds, and $500K in bonds.  We should also look at changing the interest rate to a more likely number at this time, possibly 6% interest.  Susan Carson agreed to talk with Debra Kincaid to revise the financial spreadsheet with the above considerations.

 

Jan Kingsbury moved the BC3 not accept the ECF written proposal, but ask the Episcopal Church Foundation to assist us with a second stage  campaign to “close the gap” for Phase 3, the bulk of the activity being done internally.  Bo Keith seconded the motion.  The motion passed unanimously.

 

Bo Keith questioned the New Mexico Gross Receipts Tax using 6.875% since we are in the county and not city limits.

 

6.   Bob Gough presented an invoice from Fanning Bard Tatum in the amount of $8,821.40 for the period ending March 31, 2008.  Bob noted the invoice indicated the program phase and schematic design phase are 100% completed.  The design development phase is 0% complete.  The architect fee is based on the estimated $2.75 million construction cost.  Richard Simpson moved the invoice be paid in full.  The motion was seconded by Merri Jean Jones and passed unanimously.

 

7.   The meeting was adjourned.

 

 

New Action Items

Susan Carson – Talk with Debra Kincaid to work on the spreadsheet using different variables.

 

 

Respectfully submitted,

Eileen Simpson

4/11/2008