Parish Partnership in Ministry Project
Feasibility Study (Stage 2)
PARISHES OF
GRAND BAY, GREENWICH, KETEPEC and WESTFIELD
January 2002
Project History | Conclusions | The Next Step? | Estimated Asset Value | Parish Statistics | Funds Available for Project
January 2001
EVENT: An archdeaconry commission appointed by our Bishop to explore the relationships, demographics and fiscal realities of the Parishes of Greenwich, Westfield, Grand Bay and Ketepec. The potential for working together in ministry in the lower St. John River Valley securing a future Anglican presence was intended.
RESULT: In light of information gathered by way of research and consultation with parish vestries, several options were proposed in the Commission's report dated March 2001. The Bishop met with parish clergy and wardens (09 May 2001) to discuss the Report.
April 2001
EVENT: The Bishop of Fredericton writes parish vestries with a proposal of ministry partnership for consideration requesting they respond to him by answering the following questions as a guide:
1. Will your present situation and facilities endure for the long term and guarantee viable resources for ministry in your area?
2. Are there signs of real growth in your present situation that would encourage you to maintain the status quo?
3. Financially, are you able to continue with the status quo for the next ten to fifteen years?
4. List the long term advantages of a new partnership with the neighbouring parish(es), over against the possible losses incurred.
5. If such a new partnership was supported by your parish, what first steps would you be willing to take?
RESULT: Parishes returned the response to the Bishop before the end of June. Parish vestries outlined concerns while overall were in favour of proceeding with the exploration.
September 2001
EVENT: The Bishop of Fredericton writes the parishes with a proposal outlining 6 stages of continued exploration including:
RESULT: Parish vestries make decisions to continue to Stage 2.
October 2001
EVENT: Wardens and clergy of the four parishes meet with Archdeacon Miller at Westfield (11 October) and agree to appoint two teams to explore: 1) Property issues 2) Financial issues.
RESULT: Property Team: W. Porter (Leader), J. Kierstead, P. Wong (or A. Morton), D. Murchison, Archdeacons Hall and Miller.
a) LAND - To study the ministry area with a view to availability, cost and location of land and possible sites for a new worship and fellowship center.
b) BUILDING - To acquire architectural proposals for new worship space: design, probable cost, construction time, and accommodation of memorials from existing churches, estimated seating capacity of 400 (single or multi-use facility).
c) ADDITIONAL RESEARCH - To visit recent new church construction in the Diocese. Two locations named at the meeting - St. James the Less, Renforth and the new church in Prince William.
d) REPORTING - To the Bishop and Diocesan Property Committee - to be determined ASAP.
Finance Team: A. Logan (Leader), L. Chisholm, R. Peacock, Keith Lane, Archdeacons Hall and Miller.
a) ASSET INVENTORY
i) Fixed - Land & buildings (redeemable)
ii) Cash on hand
iii) Investments
iv) Otherb) FINANCING (internal / external)
i) Interim (construction phase)
ii) Long-term, etcc) Financial FORECASTS - operational projections
d) REPORTING - to the Bishop and Diocesan Property Committee to be determined ASAP.
December 2001
EVENT: The Finance and Property Teams and parish clergy met at St. John's Church on 18 December. A preliminary report to the Bishop will be drafted for mid-January 2002.
RESULT:
The Finance Team:
The Team presented the results of research by way of appraisals commissioned on St. John's
and St. James' churches as well as estimated values for the other buildings concerned
(page 5). A detailed financial projection of operating costs of a new combined corporation
with one new facility was presented (Appendix to Report to the Bishop).
Initial indications are that one parish with one facility is well within reasonable
feasibility.
The Property Team:
The Team reported on investigations of possible land for a new facility. There being no
existing sites (present church locations) that could be developed - limited in size (2 - 3
acres required); five or six options were investigated, but probably only one or two are
possible options. Serviced land suitable for building is at a premium. The majority of the
sites looked at were of large acreage requiring subdivision, extension of municipal
services, and municipal approval (zoning etc.). This process is normal and requires
financial resources that have not yet been granted. Investigation of these costs require
that a choice be made on a suitable site and an agreement with the present property owner
(option). The detail of exploration will continue in January 2002 after approval and
direction of the parishes.
Some random visits have been made to newer church facilities in the area but no organized approach has been taken as of yet. The team met with an architectural consultant as to design process (Appendix to Report to the Bishop). It was clear that the design of a new facility is no easy task. It will require intentional cooperation of all stakeholders working in conjunction with a design consultant, not only to address real and perceived need, but the incorporation of memorials that exist in facilities that will be closed as they enter into this partnership. Some preliminary work has been done as to perceived needs and expectations of a new facility. An analysis of parish statistics by the parishes would assist those explorations (page 5). A map displaying the combined demographics of parish household location has been created by the parish clergy.
The analysis indicates that the proposed partnership between the four parishes has merit from a financial perspective. With funding identified for the next step and the required visioning by the parishes, we could proceed with securing a new site. There is certainly no over-whelming evidence to suggest that we not continue to proceed with the project.
The site selection and preliminary design of a new facility is obviously the next step in this process. This will require obtaining an option on a suitable property (apx 5% of the final purchase price) and preliminary architectural presentation drawings and model (apx 2% of the building cost). These initial planning costs at this preliminary stage could be in the range of $20,000.
Phase ll Complete
Given that substantial financial resources are required for preliminary site selection and
schematic plans, a decision to proceed is required by all parishes. This report will be
presented to the Bishop prior to Parish Annual Meetings in January 2002 for his approval
and direction.
A New Parish
Final decision as to the location and design of a new facility must be predicated on a
mission statement for a new parish; a new parish configuration that best meets the needs
of the existing participants and the community it serves. This will be the responsibility
of all four parishes and will evolve from continuous consultation and as community is
created.
Community Building
A service to celebrate progress thus far and the spirit of co-operation between the
Parishes of Greenwich, Grand Bay, Ketepec and Westfield is scheduled for Sunday, 17
February (Lent 1) 3:30 p.m. followed by a meal of mixed blessings (pot luck) at St.
Matthew Roman Catholic Church. The Bishop will be the preacher. The organizing group
(worship, hospitality, communications) to be assembled to work with parish clergy in
preparation.
| SUMMARY |
| Ketepec | Grand Bay | Westfield | Greenwich | TOTAL | ||||
| Operating Cash | 1,500 | 1,000 | 10,000 | 12,500 | 25,000 | |||
| Special Funds & Trusts | 11,260 | 50,510 | 73,639 | 94,935 | 230,343 | |||
| Church Properties | 40,000 | 100,000 | 90,000 | 20,000 | 250,000 | |||
| Rectories & other | - | 140,000 | 150,000 | 40,000 | 330,000 | |||
| $52,760 | $ 291,510 | $ 323,639 | $ 167,435 | $ 835,343 | ||||
| PARISH | Sunday Attendance | Easter
Communicants |
Identifiable Givers | Envelope
Offerings |
Average
Giving (wk) |
Children
on Rolls |
Anglicans
on Rolls |
| Greenwich | 66 |
136 |
80 |
63,127 |
15.17 |
84 |
373 |
| Westfield | 71 |
107 |
78 |
70,597 |
17.41 |
99 |
210 |
| Grand Bay | 70 |
86 |
66 |
44,400 |
12.94 |
55 |
192 |
| Ketepec | 42 |
106 |
66 |
49,500 |
14.42 |
53 |
182 |
249 |
435 | 290 | 227,914 | 14.99 | 291 | 957 |
| TOTAL CAPITAL COSTS |
| Low | Mid | High | |||||
| Land | 50,000 | 75,000 | 100,000 | ||||
| Building | 550,000 | 675,000 | 900,000 | ||||
| $ 600,000 | $ 750,000 | $ 1,000,000 | |||||
| PROPOSED FINANCING | |||||||
| Realization of assets | |||||||
| Total assets | 835,000 | 835,000 | 835,000 | ||||
| Less: | |||||||
| Rectory (Grand Bay) 1 | - 140,000 | - 140,000 | - 140,000 | ||||
| Rectory (Westfield) 1 | - 105,000 | - 105,000 | - 105,000 |
| Working capital 2 | - 10,000 | - 10,000 | - 10,000 | ||||
| Margin for error in valuation/timing 3 | - 100,000 | - 100,000 | - 100,000 | ||||
| Available for project | 480,000 | 480,000 | 480,000 | ||||
| Mortgage Required | 120,000 | 270,000 | 520,000 | ||||
| Monthly payments on 20 year mortgage | |||||||
| bearing interest of 6.5% | 895 | 2,013 | 3,877 | ||||
| Annual Debt Servicing Costs | $ 10,736 | $ 24,156 | $ 46,524 |
NOTES:
1. We have assumed that the new Ministry would include two clergy both requiring a rectory. Consequently, we have not included the disposition of the Grand Bay or Westfield rectories towards our available funds.
2. We have assumed the new Parish will need a cash float of $10,000 for working capital purposes.
3. We have built in a $100,000 cushion for variances in the actual funds realized.