Comments are off for this post

Informational Meeting Presentation

Below are the presentation slides from the Informational Meeting held between services on January 7, 2018.

The Voter’s Meeting to decide whether or not to move forward with the project will be on Sunday, January 14, 2018, after the second service (approximately 12 p.m.).

A list of questions and answers from the meeting is at the end of the presentation slides, or jump to the Q&A here.

Please feel free to contact anyone on the Building Committee with any questions or concerns.

You may also download the entire presentation as a PDF here.

Questions and Answers from the meeting

  • Q: Didn’t Peace, North Mankato, obtain a loan from the ELS for their expansion?
  • A: As reported by ELS Secretary Rev. Craig Ferkenstad the synod does not have funding for expansion of existing facilities of churches of the Synod.

 

  • Q: Did Peace Lutheran Church, North Mankato, get funding from the WELS (Wisconsin Ev. Lutheran Synod)?
  • A: No.
  • POINT OF CLARIFICATION: The financial members of the building committee did research possible funding options but the only possible sources of grant funding cannot be applied for at this stage (the project must have been approved by and undertaken by a congregation). These possible sources are the Antioch Foundation and Lutheran School Subsidy for a maximum of a combined $100,000.

 

  • Q: Peace Lutheran Church used help from the WELS Kingdom Workers. Couldn’t we?
  • A: This option was explored but our type of building wouldn’t qualify for their type of building projects.
  • POINT OF CLARIFICATION: The Kingdom Workers are not entirely “free” help as they also require space to park campers, etc. for housing and must have meals furnished. According to the Builders for Christ website, “BFC provides general volunteer labor and acts as a subcontractor for the congregation’s general contractor or construction manager. BFC is not able to design, act as a general contractor, or supply material.”

 

  • Q: How is security being addressed, specifically exterior entrances, cameras, automatic lock-down possibilities?
  • A: Exterior doors are currently locked during school hours and this would remain the same. The expense of cameras and automatic lock-down technology is not included in the plan. The current plan makes provision for controlled access points, that is locked or lockable doors at critical points of entrance depending on the activity taking place on our property. We acknowledge that complete security is not ensured as forced entrance through a window, the roof of the gym, etc., is still a possibility but the cost to address all potential threats is prohibitive.

 

  • Q: Are new furnishings included in the current cost estimate?
  • A: It is expected that current furnishings will be used and relocated as necessary and that new furnishings may be provided by special gifts, etc.

 

  • Q: How much money is estimated to be saved by the volunteer labor necessary to do the remodeling of existing spaces vacated and made available by the new construction (like the current offices, workrooms, etc.)?
  • A: Approximately $100,000 of the original estimate from ISG was designated for renovation of existing spaces so this amount would be saved.
  • POINT OF CLARIFICATION: This $100,000 should be considered as a significant part of the “pledge” toward the building project because without this volunteer labor these dollars would have to be raised additionally.

 

  • Q: If Mt. Olive has historically undertaken a major project every 15 years, what are the implications of potentially extending our current mortgage to 20 or 25 years?
  • A: This was not part of the consideration of the building committee.
  • POINTS OF CLARIFICATION: The congregation has already extended the current mortgage several times with each property purchased in recent years. The charge to the committee was to ascertain the perceived needs of the congregation at this time and explore the options available to address those needs.