Menu

Fr. Bob's Last Capital Campaign Update

Dear Friends,

As I prepare to leave St. Thomas More it is important that I provide you with my final update on the Building Project.

In my last letter to you on the project, dated September 29, 2007, I informed you that a new Building Committee had been formed and that we would be working with interim architect, Tom Kundig, of Olson, Sundberg, Kundig, Allen Architects. I also informed you that the task of the Building Committee and architect at that time was to create rough designs and estimates for two stand-alone projects:

Build a church.
Or
Build a new gym/social hall.

The reason for wanting to complete just one project was that we could not afford to build the original combined church and gym/social hall because of the tremendous rise in construction costs over the last few years.

We accomplished our goal in looking at designs and cost estimates for two separate projects. However, we discovered that the costs of building materials and construction has risen so much that we could not afford to build either project separately! We then called for a community meeting to which everyone in the parish was invited to discuss our dilemma. At that meeting there was a unanimous vote that we should not seek to build only a church or only a gym/social hall. The consensus was that we should return to the original plan and find a way to complete both projects.

The Building Committee then met to discuss how we might start with the church and build it in phases. To determine if this was financially feasible we called RMC Architects, the architects that did the original proposal for the building project while Fr. Jim Dalton was pastor, and asked if it is possible to build the church in phases and also to give us a rough estimate as to what the first phase cost. Using their original plans for a new church for our campus, RMC presented a proposal to build the church in two phases. The first phase would seat the same number of persons that our current space seats (about 700). The building would then be expanded in Phase II to seat about 900 persons according to the original plan. If the church is built in two phases, and construction costs rise only minimally, it should be affordable for what we can raise in funds and borrow.

Once Phase I of the church is completed and paid for, Phase II of the church would be completed. After the entire church is finished, the existing church would be renovated into a gym/social hall as Phase III of the building project.

The next step is for the Building Committee to present plans and estimates to build a church in two phases. Once these plans are prepared, our intention has been that you will be asked to vote on one of the following:

1. Proceed with Phase I of a two-phase church construction with the plan to complete. The gym/social hall as Phases III and IV
2. Use the funds collected for other needs:

A. Retrofit church building for seismic (earthquake) mitigation.
B. Construct a new roof for church.
C. Renovate the Adult Ed. Room in Dalton Hall for a new pre-school for 3 and 4 year old children
D. Use funds for purpose designated by each contributor to parish or school operations or ministries (a list would be provided for this purpose).
E. Keep building campaign funds in savings earning 5% interest for a future building project?
F. Cancel project-do not build a new church or a new gym/social hall and return funds to those who wish their contributions refunded.

Although I am disappointed that we did not start or complete a major building campaign and project during my three years of service here, I am satisfied that the lengthy process we have gone through with the Building Committee has been necessary to arrive at where we are today. The question that remains is this: “Does the community have the patience and is it willing to make a long-term commitment and investment to construct a new church and gym/social hall?” I hope you will have a chance to determine the answer to that question with your vote.

Sincerely in Christ,
Fr. Bob Camuso