Parish Consultations on St Augustine Presbytery

Meeting Chaired by Fr Martin. Consultation began at 7:32pm.

1) Opening Prayer (Fr Martin)

Fr Martin opened the meeting with a Prayer, seeking the Lord's guidance for the discussions.

2) Updates on the Action Points from Previous meeting (Fr Martin)

ACTION POINT (1) Finance committee to provide a summary of the accounts for 23/24 available for all: Chris Thompson has provided a summary of the accounts for 2022/23, 2023/24, and a projected outturn for 2024/25, which will be discussed further during the presentation. A copy will be made available online for all after the meeting.

ACTION POINT (2) To publish the names of those currently volunteering on the Finance committee: This is available for all on the website at https://www.chelmsfordcatholic...

ACTION POINT (3) To consider how to promote further financial support from Parishioners for the Church: Discussions are ongoing, and ideas for promoting financial support always welcomed.

ACTION POINT (4) Further clarity regarding potential costs and income of rental and selling would be
beneficial to decision making: This is a significant part of the current consultation and will be discussed as the next agenda item.

ACTION POINT (5) An appeal to be made for volunteers for a working group to take forward the
option of retaining the Presbytery and renting it out: A working group (Parish Presbytery Working Group, PPWG) was initially formed with eight voluntary members, including one member of the Finance Committee. The group met twice, and notes from the first meeting are available on request, although not formally agreed by the members. After the second meeting, both the chair and another member resigned, and no further volunteers stepped forward to lead the group, effectively disbanding it. The initial information gathered by the group was collated by a Finance Committee member to support further work on costings and quotes.

3) Presentation on the Presbytery (Adam Fahey - Member of the Parish Finance Committee)

The PowerPoint presentation is available alongside these meeting notes. The following points were discussed in addition to the information provided in the presentation:
Slide 3: The Diocese has successfully renegotiated the overdraft interest rate for Parishes, which is now set at 19%, down from 26%.
Slide 6: The estimated sale price for the property, according to different agents, ranges from £525,000 to £550,000.
Slide 7: It was emphasised that any new rental working group would need to focus on the upkeep and maintenance of the Presbytery.
Slide 9: The first year’s profit and loss estimates include replacing only the failed window panes (not frames) in the Presbytery rather than all of them. The kitchen has been priced at a basic "at cost" rate due to a generous quotation from a vendor acknowledging the Church’s charitable status, thus reflects a conservative estimate. Other works have also been quoted at below usual rates, and all appreciated Adam's work on this.
Slide 10: It was agreed that utilising the Presbytery for pastoral or mission purposes at this time could not be pursued. It was noted however that if the site is to be sold, this would no longer be a viable option in the future.
Slide 12 (Typographical error noted in last column – should read "projected outturn 2024/25"): Chris confirmed that the Diocese has not provided a repayment schedule for the loan. In 2022/23, the Diocese converted the overdraft used to build the extension into a loan, without a fixed repayment schedule. At the end of each financial year, any surplus income has been used to reduce the loan. This has been possible over the last two years due to income from the New Hall rental agreement.
Slide 15: The figures presented were sourced from the Quinquennial report commissioned by the Diocese. A parishioner expressed disagreement with the contents of the report and the figures provided. Adam clarified that these are estimates for the required work, not formal quotations, and emphasised that the Diocese needs to understand the risks associated with the Presbytery and Church. Quotations will be gathered when work is ready to commence, which may lead to revisions of these estimates. A question was raised regarding why the most urgent work at the Church had not been completed. Adam explained that the focus of this meeting and his presentation was specifically on the Presbytery.
Slide 16: The current concern is the lack of available cash for Presbytery works, combined with insufficient support currently for fundraising initiatives and the rental of the property following the lack of action by the PPWG. One former PPWG member offered to lead efforts to rent the property. Other suggestions included the possibility of building on the site, though some parishioners felt this was not viable due to its location next to a school and the associated costs of planning and permissions.
A considerable discussion took place regarding the repayment of the loan to the Diocese. Some parishioners advocated for selling the Presbytery, repaying the loan, and reinvesting the remaining funds into the Church. Others felt the loan should be repaid minimally, extending its term as it is not fixed, and using the funds to renovate the Presbytery and maintain the Church over a longer period. The matter of the loan will be considered as the Diocesan finance department will be in discussion with all parishes in debt to revise the programme for loan repayments


4) Additional agenda items requested. (Fr Martin)

a) An update on the ownership of the Church.
Fr Martin confirmed that discussions between the Chelmsford and Brentwood Dioceses regarding full ownership of the Church are ongoing and are currently in the hands of the legal teams from both sides. It was noted that with full ownership comes full responsibility for maintenance issues, as the Joint Management Committee would no longer share costs. While this remains the preferred option for the Church, it introduces financial risks if significant repairs, such as the heating system, become necessary. The possibility of revisiting the Ecumenical Council was also noted.

b) Review of the parish finances (including an update on the JMC)
Covered in agenda point 3, slide 12 on the presentation.

c) Review of the maintenance items for the Church (including cleaning).
Covered in agenda point 3, slide 15 of presentation. Again a parishioner expressed that he did not agree with the findings of the Quinquennial commissioned by the Diocese. Fr Martin said at a minimum, there would need to be renovation work on the kitchen, ceiling including lights, toilets, windows, general refurbishment and maintenance around the building. The main boiler is also forty years old and could need to be replaced with some consideration given to a new and sustainable source. Another parishioner suggested that further prioritisation and costing of urgent work needed on the church, especially as the Quinquennial was now two years old may be helpful.

d) Review of the outstanding loan, past and future payments.
Covered in Agenda point 3, slide 13 on the presentation.

e) Review of the finance committee's findings on letting the presbytery.
Covered in Agenda point 3. Adam presented the findings to the Parishioners present and the powerpoint will be available after the meeting.

e) Decision making processes in the parish on the sale or letting of a significant asset (the best part of £1M) should the whole parish be given a vote in the absence of an elected parish council.
Fr Martin confirmed that the next steps are for the finance committee to meet and confirm their best way forward, and then to discuss this with the Diocese. It was reiterated that the Diocese is keen to reduce its overall loan position as well as considering the deficit that exists on the maintenance of buildings.

5) Further Questions (Fr Martin)

a) A Parishioner was concerned that the meeting had not been publicised widely. The meeting had been in the Parish Newsletter for three weeks, was agreed in the notes published from the meeting in January and spoken about at Masses by the priest. Another parishioner raised that the agenda beforehand would be appreciated, and this was acknowledged. Parishioners had been invited to suggest agenda items with a deadline of the day before the meeting, giving all concerned three weeks to contribute. All suggested agenda items had been included from the two parishioners who submitted them.

b) One parishioner suggested that, since the likelihood of another priest residing at the Presbytery is low, the funds could be better utilised elsewhere.

c) Another parishioner asked if the surplus capital from the sale of the property at St. Augustine could be reinvested into the Presbytery or Parish office in the town centre. While this is not currently an actively being explored by the Finance Committee, it could become an option as the links between the parishes in the Linked Parish Partnership formalise, including the possibility of including a right to repayment in the agreement.

d) Another Parishioner expressed that she was shocked at the overall condition of the presbytery and that Priests had been living in such poor quality accommodation until recently. She said that better stewardship of the property was needed and more volunteers to come forward to care for the property. She also suggested that Parishioners could loan money to the church instead of the diocese, but this was thought to not be a viable way forward due to current charity law constraints.

e) It was agreed that fundraising initiatives to raise money for the Church, that could be used for the church or the Presbytery were welcomed, this could include information for all on how to leave legacies to the church.

e) It was also discussed that further submissions were received from parishioners unable to attend the meeting that had expressed their support of selling the presbytery. One notably had changed his mind and now preferred selling. Fr Martin said his preferred option would be to keep the presbytery as an asset. However due to the current financial constraints without significant fundraising and financial support from parishioners on the maintenance, upkeep and legalities, that it is difficult to see how that would be possible.

e) A general discussion took place at length, with fewer attendees than the previous meeting on the same issues. It was noted that there are two differing opinions emerging: one group wishes to retain the Presbytery, attempt to rent it, and find funds to to this and maintain the presbytery while continuing to service the loan to the Diocese; the other group prefers to sell the Presbytery and use the proceeds to fund Church maintenance and renewal. All participants acknowledged the need of considerable funds for practical works to be completed on the Church as well as an injection of funds to bring the presbytery up to an acceptable standard in order to consider the rental option.

Fr Martin closed the meeting at 21:37pm. He apologised to all again for leaving to go to the hospital for an end of life call, and led those present in prayer for the man and his family.

Meeting Chaired by Peter Whitington. Consultation began at 7:31pm.

1) Opening Prayer (Fr Martin)

Fr Martin opened the meeting with a Prayer asking for wisdom and guidance for us all.

2) Context of Meeting (Peter Whitington and Fr Martin)

a) Peter Whitington, Chair of the Finance Committee, explained that the purpose of committee which each parish is required to have under Canon Law, is to advise and assist the Parish Priest on financial matters. This pertains specifically to the Catholic part of St. Augustine of Canterbury Church. He also clarified that there is a separate Joint Management Committee responsible for overseeing the joint partnership between St. Augustine’s Catholic and Anglican communities.

b) Peter provided background on the meeting, noting that a letter outlining concerns regarding the vacant Presbytery was shared with parishioners after Mass on Sunday, December 15th. Parishioners were invited to submit written feedback, and four submissions were received in advance of the meeting. He said that the purpose of the consultation is to gather input from a broader group to help guide future decisions. He thanked attendees for their participation and that it would be an open question and answers format.

c) Fr Martin, Parish Priest, then provided further context about the current status of the Presbytery. He explained that the Presbytery has been vacant since September 2024. It had been used for priest accommodation between September 2023 and September 2024, and prior to that, it was rented to New Hall School at periods during the 2022–2023 academic year. Concerns have been raised at the Finance Committee about the ongoing vacancy of the Presbytery. Fr Martin reiterated that this consultation is part of a broader process to explore potential options, one of which includes selling the Presbytery. However, no decisions have been made at this stage.

d) Fr Martin highlighted two main challenges facing the linked parishes. The first is the pressing need to resolve priest and office accommodation, as St. Philip’s Priory has been deemed unfit for habitation due to safety risks. The second is the need to strengthen collaboration between the linked parishes. Some areas, notably the joint sacramental programs and Parish talks, have been successful, other areas, such as developing a stronger cross city Catholic community including Blessed Sacrament Parish, require further development and this will become easier as time moves on.

3) Finance context at St Augustine of Canterbury Church (Chris Thompson and Fr Martin)

a) Fr Martin, explained that currently the three parishes operate as separate bank accounts and financial returns. Currently Fr Damien is living at Holy Name, the parish office is in St Philip's near Our Lady Immaculate, and Fr Martin's accommodation provided by New Hall School. There is £160k owed to the diocese from a loan drawn in 2006. The diocesan levy is 26% on income. This provides a variety of services such as property, finance, safeguarding and HR support and at every level finance is extremely tight. The Diocese has made it clear that Parishes are unlikely to be allowed to increase their borrowing above current levels i.e. no new loans and overdrafts will attract a very high interest rate.

b) Chris Thompson, treasurer, said at St Augustine since recovering from COVID the parish has a surplus of approximately £10k a year. Half of this is used to service the debt, and half into a repairs and renewal fund. In response to a question about the total income of the Church, he explained that approximately £39k is taken in via collections, an additional £9k recovered in Gift Aid, and £7-8k on restricted collections such as second collections and Christmas and Easter donations to the Priests. In response to a question about the recent roof repairs Chris explained the Catholic community contributed significantly to the roof repairs.

- ACTION POINT (1) Finance committee to provide a summary of the accounts for 23/24 available for all

c) This lead to a discussion about the general state of repair of the Church and Presbytery. A representative of the Joint Management Committee present explained that following the Quinquennial and ongoing reports there is work to be done on the Church and "that it is optimistic to say it is in good state of repair." The Anglicans do not have the money to pay for joint works, the ceiling, kitchen and floor in the Church needs work and maintenance. The JMC generally deals with urgent issues, not general upkeep currently, and insurance for the building which has increased considerably. When the catholic community become the sole owners of St Augustine's Church ongoing works which have in the past been borne by two communities will become solely the catholic community's responsibility, once the pending transfer of ownership is completed, increasing expenditure.

d) A question was raised about participation on the finance committee. It was explained that the lay members, of whom there are six at present, are parishioners who have, over the last number of years, been invited by the Parish Priest (at the time of their appointment) to serve on the committee

- ACTION POINT (2) To publish the names of those currently volunteering on the Finance committee.

e) A question was raised about the arrangement with the Church of Our Saviour. Fr. Martin and members of the Finance Committee explained that this remains an ongoing issue, which they hope will soon be resolved between the legal departments of the Catholic Diocese of Brentwood and the Anglican Diocese of Chelmsford. Currently, the Diocese of Brentwood and Chelmsford Diocese is liable for St. Augustine’s Church, while the Diocese of Chelmsford is liable for the Church of Our Saviour. Since 2021, the Catholic community has not been contributing financially to the upkeep of the Church of Our Saviour but still owes £8,000 following the fire since 2021. As the arrangement ends and the two entities become entirely separate, it is anticipated that the Anglican worshiping community will rent space at St. Augustine’s as their financial contribution. The Catholic community will assume full responsibility for St Augustine's maintenance and all costs. It was explained that ending the shared ownership/management arrangements of both the sites are expected to be broadly neutral in terms of transfer values.

f) It was acknowledged that ownership resolution of St. Augustine’s Church is a prerequisite for addressing maintenance issues. The Anglican community has limited fundraising possibilities at this stage.

g) A parishioner suggested that further money could be raised by the community for the church through legacies and stewardship Sunday. Additionally a suggestion was raised about changing bank accounts to avoid charges, however Fr Martin explained that was a diocesan decision, beyond the remit of himself or the finance committee.

-ACTION POINT (3) To consider how to promote further financial support from Parishioners for the Church.

5) Renting out the Presbytery (Parishioner discussion and Fr Martin)

a) A parishioner suggested that renting the Presbytery should be explored as an option to retain it as an asset. They noted that New Hall School had previously rented the Presbytery. Fr. Martin confirmed this, explaining that New Hall was a good temporary option at the time, allowing the Presbytery to remain occupied. The school paid £1,500 per month, covered additional costs, and handled some maintenance. They also did not require a letting agent and were amenable to leaving on short notice.

b) Currently, a local estate agency has estimated that the Presbytery could be rented for approximately £1,700 per month. However, due to the age of the building, certain works would need to be completed, requiring additional investment to bring the property up to rentable standards. This includes immediate work on the kitchen, addressing the poor state of repair of the windows and commissioning an Energy Performance Certificate (EPC) to identify further requirements or exemptions and electrical works. The costs associated with renting, including management, insurance and compliance with landlord regulations were highlighted. Many reputable firms would consider 15-20% of rental income plus VAT their fee for a fully managed rental service. The estimated £1,700 is a gross figure, and deductions for these expenses would need to be considered.

c) Some parishioners expressed that renting the property would be a preferable interim solution. This would allow time to address broader issues concerning priest accommodation and the potential sale of St. Philip’s and Parish Partnership plans. Renting was viewed by some as a convenient stopgap while continuing to consider whether selling the asset of the presbytery was viable, and potential rental income could offset the debt. It was highlighted that necessary renovations would most probably cancel out any net income to the parish for two years. In context recent renovation costs at Holy Name's property were £60k to raise it to a rentable standard.

6) Selling the Presbytery (Parishioner discussion and Fr Martin)

a) In response to a question, Fr. Martin confirmed that in any sale of diocesan property, 95% of the proceeds would be allocated to the Parish, with a 5% levy retained by the Diocese.

b) A parishioner noted that selling the Presbytery could allow the Parish to immediately pay off its debt to the Diocese, rather than over the next 15 years. This would also provide cash flow to maintain the church building and address immediate maintenance issues. As well as providing potential capacity for increased mission expenditure.

c) Another parishioner raised the possibility of using the Presbytery as both priest and office accommodation. In response, Fr. Martin clarified that the premises would need extensive remodelling work and Canons of the College of Consulters had stipulated that priests must reside near Chelmsford city centre and the Parish office to fulfil their pastoral responsibilities effectively.

7) Wider Mission of the Church across Chelmsford (Parishioner led)

a) A suggestion was made to explore other uses for the Presbytery, such as providing a base for youth coordinators or supporting the pastoral mission of the Church. It was noted that broader pastoral considerations could help enrich the parish communities and strengthen their mission.

b) A parishioner expressed concern that financial considerations appeared to be the primary driver in the decision about the Presbytery's future emphasising the need for a wider discussion about the Church’s mission in Chelmsford before making wide ranging decisions including the presbytery. It was suggested that no action should be taken until a city-wide parish partnership review is completed, highlighting the importance of addressing the broader, holistic context through Parish partnerships.

8) Concluding Open Questions and remarks (all)

a) In response to raising funds for maintenance and renovation Fr Martin confirmed that four written submissions had been received in advance of the meeting. He checked with two attendees their points had been covered and they confirmed they had. He then reviewed the other two submissions, noting that the only other point raised was that Priests should not have to live with each other.

b) A parishioner expressed concern that it was disrespectful to sell the property after it had been bought for the Parish years ago.

c) Fr Martin confirmed that a new loan from the diocese was no longer an option as the diocese is in a considerable building maintenance deficit.

d) Peter asked those still present whether they would support moving forward with exploring selling the Presbytery, or retaining for now. The majority wanted further information about costs involved in potentially renting the property.

-ACTION POINT (4) Further clarity regarding potential costs and income of rental and selling would be beneficial to decision making.

e) Fr Martin raised that due to the considerable amount of work involved in rental both initially and ongoing, volunteers to help manage the process and property would be necessary. Fr Martin asked who may be willing to help with the running of the presbytery.

-ACTION POINT (5) An appeal to be made for volunteers for a working group to take forward the option of retaining the Presbytery and renting it out.
-----
Peter closed the meeting at 9:10pm with Fr Martin concluding in leading all in a Glory Be prayer.