Update from the Steering Committee of the Capital Campaign
Our November kick off for the capital campaign left us with visions of space for our youth, classes for Bible study, a place to gather for fellowship, ample parking for all, and a reluctant willingness to have “a visit”. And then, we turned on the television, read the newspaper, and saw the results of a declining American economy. Never has the theme, “Step out in Faith” taken on more meaning. But “step out” you have. Many people are asking why we would continue a capital campaign during times that are tough for so many people. This capital campaign is about our future. It is about having a facility that will meet our needs for ministry for many years to come. The commitment from the steering committee is to make sure that every person has the opportunity, through a personal visit, to review the plans and ask questions. That commitment has not changed. The process is not quick. As I write this we still have several hundred visits to make. We expect the majority of visits to be completed in March and to wrap things up in April. At that point, the Building Committee and the Finance Committee will develop several options for us to consider. We are a long way from breaking any ground.
In the meantime, all of us need to continue supporting our operating budget. Your annual pledge card is completed with your estimate of giving card for the capital campaign, but your giving to the operational budget needs to be ongoing. A list of frequently asked questions follows:
Frequently Asked Questions
Do you really believe we can raise 20 million dollars?
The 20 million dollar figure was the estimate for the total project when the building committee first developed the conceptual plans. We did not want to set a limit on what we thought the congregation would give. We wanted each person to have the opportunity to see the whole vision in deciding what he or she could give and then go back and develop the specific building plan. One of the benefits of moving forward at this time is the decrease in cost for materials and labor. Once we have finished the capital campaign, the building committee will look at those costs. We anticipate them to be much lower.
Are we tied in to the plan that has been presented?
The plan that has been presented is a conceptual plan based on the needs of our church ministries. As a church we will have an opportunity to re-visit these plans once the capital campaign is completed.
Why are we paying a consultant for the capital campaign when we are not meeting our operating budget?
No money from the operating budget has been used for the capital campaign. The church received a bequest and the trustees recommended that this be set aside to support a capital campaign. The finance committee and the administrative board at the November charge conference have approved the amount that has been spent. One-time funds are typically used for one-time projects.
I think this process puts a lot of pressure on people who may not be able to contribute.
We believe that everyone can participate in this campaign. There is no gift that is too small. Several people have commented that in the past they have not participated in the campaign because they felt they could not give enough to make a difference. As a result they felt left out of the excitement of the new building. All gifts will help us to reach our goal.
The entire building is mission outreach. It serves the community and brings more people into our church. Earmarking two million dollars for Potter’s House and other mission outreach is too costly and redundant. Perhaps have a lower amount and then designate a certain amount of the proceeds from the parking garage/business rents for Potters House and other missions.
The decision to designate 10% of funds raised in a capital campaign for missions follows the tradition established in the last capital campaign. Designating funds to be used beyond our own building is just the right thing to do. There will be opportunity to discuss the amount of funds to be designated at the close of the capital campaign.
What is the ratio of positive to negative reactions or comments about the building?
During our 23 focus group meetings this past summer, only 8 out of 236 attendees who completed questionnaires said they would not financially support a new building. Many volunteers are making the visits; it is hard to give a ratio. The two areas that seem to be the most controversial are the columbarium and using part of the proposed parking garage as retail space.
How was the campaign method selected?
J. D. Klote was chosen to conduct the capital campaign based solely on their performance record in raising funds for other churches in our conference. Their method came highly recommended by the churches they had served. They were selected after providing an overview of their methodology to the building committee.
Based on the revenue generated by the existing parking lot and our parking needs, we feel the parking garage should be the priority. The city will eventually develop the lots across the street. It’s in our best interest to improve our existing infrastructure before we expand the church.
Once this phase of the capital campaign is complete, the building committee will go back to the drawing board and develop options based what we have raised, what the city has determined to do with the dome site, and the amount of debt our church can afford. At that time there will be a church conference where those decisions will be made.
The weekly list seems in conflict with reasons people give - not to brag or be patted on the back. You may call it a list of people to question but in reality it just makes those on fixed income feel a chasm between financial tiers in this church. This “list” has been a source of many problems.
The goal of the capital campaign is that everyone will participate in whatever way they can with a sacrificial gift. Part of the purpose of this list is to create a sense of togetherness that encourages everyone to participate no matter how big or how small of a gift. That might be one dollar for someone and it might be one million dollars for someone else. No gift is too small.
How can you possibly ask for this money after eliminating the Director of Outreach Ministries position?
I believe there is a perception management issue, with the announcement of eliminating the Director of Outreach Ministries position, while at the same time asking for pledges for a building campaign. They may be separate issues addressing different challenges, but perception is reality in the perceiving mind. This needs to be explained. The issue I’ve heard from several people is that the church is people not buildings. Are our priorities misaligned?
Decisions regarding appropriate staffing of the church are made by the Staff Parish Relations Committee. Staff salaries are funded by the operating budget which relates back to your annual pledge. The capital campaign is a separate budget. The capital campaign has not received any money from the operating budget and we have continued to remind everyone that giving to the capital campaign is above and beyond their annual giving.
The church is “people” and the future of our church requires a facility and parking that will enable us to be in ministry for many years to come.
Did everyone agree that publishing names of committed givers each week was appropriate?
There was much discussion regarding this on our steering committee. The committee decided to follow the advice of the consultant as it shows the commitment from a cross section of our members.
Has it been considered that three million could change many lives if used to help people rather than build at this time?
The generous gifts that have been given in this campaign have been given to support the vision of a facility that provides adequate space to be in ministry. Bible study, fellowship, youth group, and missions that will take place in this building will change many lives.
Where is our annual pledge card?
The finance committee, the administrative board, and the stewardship committee agreed to combine the capital campaign with the annual campaign. This allows a family to consider all of their resources and how they want to give at one time. Any person who had previously made an annual pledge received their giving envelopes as usual so that they might continue to give towards the annual budget while waiting for their visit.
Maybe we should just mail out the annual cards.
“The visit” not only allows us to speak to families about the future of the church but also to talk about the importance of the annual commitment. This process has the opportunity to increase the number of people who complete an annual pledge card and to assist them in understanding the operating budget.
I refused my visit when I was called but am rethinking that decision.
Great!!! Just contact Tracy Miller or one of the other volunteers and we will be happy to share the information with you.
