Flexible Housing Task Force Completes Work
1/25/2010
Final Report of the Flexible Housing Task Force
January 24, 2010
(Changes to the 12/16/09 Preliminary Report, not editorial in nature, are in green.)
Executive Summary
The Flexible Housing Task Force (hereafter referred to as “the Task Force”) was created by action of the 2009 West Michigan Annual Conference. The fourteen members of Task Force met on multiple occasions since its first meeting in July, 2009. Each meeting lasted approximately five hours. The nearly 1,000 collective hours from these persons has been a remarkable gift of time and talent contributed to the health and future of the West Michigan Conference. The result of the Task Force’s process and study is as follows:
Annual Conference legislation in 1994 affirmed the option of providing a Housing Allowance. Included in that legislation was the following statement written by the Cabinet (1/27/94):
“…clergy owned housing, when the house is in the parish served, poses numerous problems for the mission of the Church with the Conference, such as:
1. Clergy would normally need to sell their present house before they could move to a new community and purchase another house. This could seriously slow down the process of changing pastors and/or create financial difficulties.
2. It is much more difficult to purchase suitable housing in town and country settings. This could cause pastors to prefer city and suburban churches where more housing options could be available. This could be detrimental to our many fine town and country churches.
3. It could be very difficult for some pastors to secure the necessary funds to purchase housing.
4. It is possible that clergy who own homes in the communities they serve might be less willing to move unless they could sell their present home without financial loss.
5. It could be more difficult to move pastors into parishes where property values are declining.
6. Adequate rental property is difficult to find in some communities.”
The Flexible Housing Task Force finds that fifteen years later all of the above concerns were accurate, even as they were not a comprehensive list of implications. The numerical decline of many congregations, the elimination of many associate pastor positions, the reductions of many full time elder positions, the steady increase of dual professional households, the increased number of clergy couples now when compared to two decades ago, the decline of the housing market and the economy and the near necessity of dual income households have all been additional factors complicating the itinerancy and the related implications for the provisions of housing.
The Parsonage Guidelines Policy was an attempt to help minimize one of these variables by creating a common set of standards expected to be followed across the Conference. The initial 1994 Flexible Housing Policy, and subsequent editions, was developed in hopes of improving options to help effective ministry happen as these changing circumstances began to emerge.
During the course of its work, the Task Force reviewed the disciplinary responsibilities of three distinct groups – one relating primarily to housing, and two relating primarily to itinerancy and appointments.
LOCAL CHURCH
The Local Church accepts certain responsibilities for adequate pastoral support in this mutual covenant. ¶620 of The Book of Discipline of the United Methodist Church - 2008 states, “Assumptions for the obligation of the itinerancy, required to be made at the time of admission into the traveling connection, puts upon the Church the counter obligation of providing support for the itinerant ministry of the Church.”
One specific item of support listed in the duties of the committee on pastor-parish relations is outlined in ¶258.2 of The Book of Discipline of the United Methodist Church – 2008. The following specific matters are noted in ¶258.2.g.16, “To consult on matters pertaining to….housing (which may be a church owned-parsonage or housing allowance in lieu of parsonage if in compliance with the policy of the annual conference)…”
CLERGY
Clergy take vows at their ordination agreeing that they will “offer themselves without reserve to be appointed and to serve, after consultation, as the appointive authority may determine (¶335.c.2 The Book of Discipline of the United Methodist Church - 2008).” The requirements and implications of the itinerancyare repeatedly emphasized in The Book of Discipline of the United Methodist Church – 2008.
Some of those implications include certain guarantees related to an appointment, minimum compensation, benefits and provisions for housing.
Some of those implications are also the forfeiture of certain restrictions by clergy in terms of where they will serve. Each pastor serves at the discretion and direction of the Bishop and Cabinet. This is a reality inherent in our polity.
BISHOP
The third party in this covenant of obligations is the Bishop. The particular responsibilities of the Bishop are delineated in Chapter Three, “The Superintendency”, The Book of Discipline of the United Methodist Church – 2008.
Section VIII contains the paragraphs that address the material related to Appointment Making:
¶430 Responsibility
¶431 Consultation
¶432 Criteria
¶433 Process
¶434 Frequency
These paragraphs outline a comprehensive process, the outcome of which is intended to provide continuity of leadership in local congregations and a comparable intersection of gifts required and gifts possessed between a congregation and the pastor appointed to serve there.
The Task Force intentionally chose to not enter into a review of any past history as a fault finding expedition related to the Bishop, appointed pastor or local congregations. It did identify that the Bishop has a clear role and responsibility for the deployment of clergy. Clergy as a condition of their ordination have a clear responsibility to live within the “obligations of the itinerancy.” Likewise it observed the responsibility of local churches in the area of housing for its appointed pastor. The challenge is to find the creative flexibility that meets those two clear realities and meets the needs of the local congregation. There are multiple matters that are left up to the interpretation of various entities and a vast number of complicating factors beyond simply housing that contribute to the intricacies of the appointive process.
The Task Force believes one possible. critical path through this complex maze of variables is to adopt Flexible Housing and Parsonage Guidelines Policies which contain language reflecting our foundational understanding that the local congregation, or the designated Annual Conference body, is to provide housing for its pastor(s). These policies should also contain the following additional premise, “There shall be flexibility in housing options as determined by the local congregation or designated Annual Conference body.”, rather than the premise of the current policy language, “The historic parsonage system is the basic housing policy.” Thus, our legislative proposals reflect this foundational understanding and new beginning premise.
Full Report
Process Followed
The Flexible Housing Task Force was created by action of the 2009 West Michigan Annual Conference. This completed report is the Task Force’s response to “Petitions #7 and #7R” referred to the Task Force The entire motion approved by the Annual Conference is found at the end of this report as Item A. The membership of the Task Force as constituted and limited by the motion approved by the Annual Conference was as follows:
“This Task Force shall be chosen by respective committee chairs and shall be representative of all involved in the appointive process and in housing issues, including one representative from each of the following groups as well as the individuals listed”:
· Board of Ordained Ministry - Lynn Grimes
· Cabinet - Neil Davis
· COSROW - Judy Coffey
· Conference Committee on Religion and Race -Patti Harpole
· The Conference Trustees - Chuck VanLente
· Committee on Equitable Compensation - David Hills
“Up to 4 lay representatives of local churches who serve on its Staff Parish Relations Committee or other groups who have dealt with clergy housing matters”:
· David Lundquist
· Ned Weller
· Jean Bina
· Jamie Zimmer
“And the following individuals or their representatives”:
· Director of Connectional Ministries - Benton Heisler
· Clergy Assistant to the Bishop - Terry Euper
· Conference Treasurer - Pros Tumonong
· Facilitator - Naomi García.
The Task Force reviewed its make up and was intentional in its efforts to receive insights from those not directly represented in the fourteen members assigned and/or selected for this responsibility.
The Task Force spent time raising various types of questions and issues it felt may be appropriate for it to consider in its work. They also considered various ways they might frame the multiple discussion points related to this matter. There were a number of factual matters they sought to explore, such as but not limited to; existing housing policies, The Book of Discipline of the United Methodist Church-2008, relevant Judicial Council Rulings, salary and housing statistics, numbers and categories of clergy and congregational sizes, to name a few.
The Task Force was intentional in its attempts to address both the confidential nature of some of the issues it encountered and the mandate in the Annual Conference motion “to provide for dialogue, transparency and openness of process by holding open meetings in which feedback is sought.”
Individuals and congregations were invited to submit in writing their particular insights and experiences related to the issue of the Conference Flexible Housing Policy. These comments were submitted to the Director of Connectional Ministries, Rev. Benton R. Heisler. Persons who had a particular desire to meet with the Task Force were provided an opportunity to do so.
The written responses the Task Force received were related to a variety of situations and perspectives. The Task Force noted there may be other additional experiences persons have had. The Task Force chose to address the reports they received.
The request for information was posted on the Conference web site, in the Conference Weekly News e-mail distribution, shared through the Boards and Agencies represented on the Task Force and the request for information was distributed via the District Offices to the following local church positions: Lay Member to Annual Conference, SPRC chairperson, Church Council chairperson, Trustee chairperson, Pastor. (If a church had not updated their data base in the Conference system, the distribution would have gone to the last person on record who held that position.)
A summary of each meeting was posted on the West Michigan Conference website www.westmichiganconference.org.
The Task Force report was distributed via e-mail to the Cabinet on December 3, 2009. Rev. Benton R. Heisler, Director of Connectional Ministries reviewed the report with them in person on December 8, 2009 and the report was then distributed publicly onDecember 16, 2009 via the Conference website in accordance with the January 1, 2010 requirement of the Annual Conference Motion.
The Task Force arranged a time to meet with individuals who requested to speak directly with it. The primary purpose of the September meeting was to listen in person to individuals who had expressed a desire to address the Task Force. The individuals had already provided a written summary to the Task Force of their experience and/or perspective as it related to the issue of the implementation of the Flexible Housing Policy and the itinerancy of United Methodist pastors in the West Michigan Conference. The face to face gathering allowed an opportunity to obtain an even greater clarity and insight to possible solutions.
Each of the presenters was invited to have a support person with her or him, if desired, and was asked to focus verbal comments around the following two questions:
A. What would you like us to learn from your particular experience?
B. What do you hope to see accomplished as a result of this process and by whom?
Each conversation was opened and closed in a time of prayer.
In addition to conversations with pastors and lay persons, the Task Force had an opportunity to dialogue for an hour with Bishop Keaton. Bishop Keaton responded to the invitation from the Task Force to provide it with a written response and he met with the Task Force for this time of interaction. Our conversation allowed the Task Force to hear from him and his perspective in the unique and historic role as a Bishop in the United Methodist Church.
Lynn Grimes provided the Task Force with ongoing updates related to the progress of the joint Board of Ordained Ministry/Order of Elders/Order of Deacons/John Wesley Association as they carried out the expectations of the motion approved at the 2009 Annual Conference Clergy Session.
The Task Force considered a number of perspectives such as, but not limited to, young pastors, second career pastors, clergy couples, and young dual career pastoral households with young children, single parent pastors, local church trustees and congregations, congregations which have sold parsonages, repurchased property for a parsonage, provided a Housing Allowance, etc.
Findings
The Task Force identified a number of critical issues which were at the heart of the matter such as but not limited to:
- There is a need to balance the options flexible housing affords, compassion and the Bishop’s authority.
- The following issues which were outlined in the Annual Conference ‘Motion to Refer’:
a. Address the needs of clergy and their families, taking into account ways to support the physical, emotional, spiritual, and financial well-being of clergy and their families.”
b. “Address the needs of the local church.”
c. “Hold together the needs of the UMC connection, local churches, local communities, and the clergy and their families.”
d. “Address the questions of equity in pension support and compensation as this relates to housing.”
3. The Task Force identified that in regard to item 2.c above from the ‘Motion to Refer’, it would specifically identify that the Bishop represents the connection and the Pastor Parish Relations Committee represents the local church in balancing the needs of the connection and the local church. Clergy representation is clearly stated.
- The Task Force identified that in regard to item 2.d above from the ‘Motion to Refer’, the Commission on Equitable Compensation had intended to communicate with the General Board of Pensions and Health Benefits (GBOPHB) inquiring as to whether an annual conference may use the 25% Housing Factor in computing all clergy pension contributions, regardless of whether or not clergy are living in a parsonage or receiving a housing allowance that might exceed the 25% factor. In conversation with the West Michigan Conference Treasurer, Pros Tumonong, it was learned that an Annual Conference cannot vary from the Pension Plan in this fashion, but is able to require that a minimum of 25% of cash salary be used in computing pension contributions in cases where the Housing Allowance is less than 25% of cash salary.
- Early on the Task Force concluded that the primary reasons the Annual Conference created this task force was because of differing interpretations and applications based on the wording of some parts of the current Flexible Housing Policy, an understanding of the itinerancy and the Bishop’s authority in relation to a validly approved and exercised Conference policy.
The Task Force encourages persons to be familiar with the specific paragraphs on ‘itinerancy’, ‘the appointment making process’, and ‘the duties and powers of the bishop’ for the purpose of determining and understanding these boundaries of authority.
- The Task Force also devoted some of its time to the question: “Does ‘itinerancy’ also include ‘residency’?” The Task Force was unable to locate any language in The Book of Discipline of the United Methodist Church – 2008 or in Judicial Council Decisions that provided any clarity which would answer this question.
- Having identified the interpretation of the current Flexible Housing Policy as the principle issue, the Task Force has chosen to address this issue by recommending the substantive changes to the Flexible Housing Policy noted at the end of this report as Item E.
- The Task Force did research related to the multiple dimensions of the motion the Annual Conference approved. In particular it reviewed fourteen different Judicial Council Decisions which may have had implications and/or insight applicable to this topic. Those rulings were: 101, 432, 501, 510, 547, 562, 588, 634, 701, 970, 1035, 1060, 1068, & 1085. None of those Decisions bear directly on the issues considered by the Task Force but were helpful as background information.
- Since its inception, the current Flexible Housing Policy has been the subject of differing interpretations. That possibility may still exist if the Task Force’s recommended changes are adopted. It may be appropriate to request the Judicial Council to clarify the meaning, application and effect of The Book of Discipline of the United Methodist Church-2008 regarding our Conference Flexible Housing Policy and the responsibility and authority of the Bishop in relation to such policy. A decision to make such request is one that would occur by action of the Annual Conference.
Members of the Task Force were present at the November 30, 2009 Clergy Meeting with the Bishop and Cabinet.The Task Force noted the following from that meeting:
- There is a strong affirmation of the need for flexibility in housing options.
- The world today is not as it was when the “Parsonage System” was developed.
- Definitions of “community” are much different in today’s culture.
- There is a need for a healthy balance between pastors and congregations exercising “informed consent” as they arrive at decisions for housing and the oversight of the Cabinet in monitoring and allowing or disallowing those decisions within the scope of their supervisory responsibility.
- A check and balance oversight is critical because some congregations have not maintained “parsonage sale monies” in escrow as required by the policy; and, some pastors have chosen to accept a mortgage when they have not had adequate resources to sustain the mortgage in the event of a change of appointment and the subsequent loss of the Housing Allowance portion of their compensation.
- There is obviously deep pain among some pastors and congregations around the issues of housing.
- Some parsonages seem to still be “sub-standard” despite the expectations set forth in the Parsonage Guidelines Policy.
- Some feelings were expressed that this discussion ignored the fact that some of the parsonages provided are often of a standard higher than many of the homes of parishioners.
The Task Force also encountered other issues related to parsonages, both with positive and negative experiences noted from the perspective of churches and pastors. Though this arena was not its primary task as set forth in the Annual Conference motion, the Task Force includes a list of these items discovered as it carried out its work.
The following items were encountered but were beyond the scope and time of the Task Force to address:
1. There are examples of a poor stewardship of parsonage property and a failure to adhere to the Conference Parsonage Guidelines Policy by both local church trustees/congregations and pastors.
2. There are examples of the Trustees and committee on pastor-parish relations or staff-parish relations not doing the required “annual inspection” of the parsonage.
3. There are examples of pastors not allowing the Trustees and committee on pastor-parish relations or staff-parish relations access to the parsonage to do the required “annual inspection” of the parsonage
4. When there is a newly formed two-point charge and/or a shared appointment, previously both with a parsonage or allowance, it creates a unique set of circumstances which will need to be resolved by multiple parties.
5. There is a significant importance of thorough and accurate details being provided to the Cabinet in the Congregation and Pastoral Profiles. The Appointive Process is severely hampered when information is withheld, insufficient or inaccurate from either party.
6. There is a need for pastoral care and support from pastoral colleagues and the Cabinet in situations of financial distress and foreclosure precipitated by changes in appointments.
7. An idea was noted that perhaps the Districts could intentionally identify “the worst 10%” parsonages. These homes could then become the project of volunteer work camps and skilled trade volunteers to help congregations make the improvements that would bring them into compliance with the Parsonage Guidelines Policy.
8. There is a need for the development of financial advisory resources and leaders which can be available to congregations and pastors to help them make informed financial and real estate decisions.
9. Despite the restrictions of a Conference Policy and The Book of Discipline of the United Methodist Church – 2008, some congregations, without the necessary church/charge conference approval, have expended proceeds from the sale of a parsonage which is otherwise required to be held in escrow.
10. The following questions have been forwarded to the Cabinet with the encouragement that they be added to the Congregational Profile in order to assist the Cabinet in having improved clarity about a congregation and the region it serves.
- “How does the housing arrangement you provide enable the ministry of the local congregation and the itinerancy of the Annual Conference?”
- “What is the definition of the community your congregation serves?”
The Task Force would want individuals to know that there have been three “official actions” by the Annual Conference related to Parsonage Guidelines Policy and The Flexible Housing Policy:
1. In 1994, the Parsonage Guidelines Policy was adopted, which included a section “For Churches that Provide for a Parsonage Allowance”
2. The 2007 West Michigan Conference Journal, Page 143, Item #11, clarified the language and the process concerning the proceeds from the sale of a parsonage which are to be held in escrow.
3. The 2008 West Michigan Conference Journal, page 146, Item #5 Flexible Housing Policy, was adopted, and on page 148 Item #6 Parsonage Guideline Policy, was adopted.
The Conference Board of Trustees published a booklet dated 1999. It contained some material which had NOT been acted upon by the Annual Conference. This material was updated in 2003, but again was NOT acted upon by the Annual conference. The 1999 and 2003 documents were circulated by District Offices and the Conference Center.
The Task Force reminds pastors and congregations that the most current editions of the Flexible Housing Policy and Parsonage Guidelines Policy were adopted in 2008. If you are using as a reference an edition/copy of guidelines or policy dated earlier than this, please discard it. The 2008 policies are your most current reference source. Those documents are available on the West Michigan Conference website.
The Task Force developed a summary of the implications for pension contributions when comparing the receipt of a Housing Allowance instead of living in a parsonage. (See Item B below.) It also compiled a statistical summary that provided one way of looking at a number of factors the Annual Conference motion requested the Task Force consider. (See Item C below.) These factors were identified in the following points of the Annual Conference Motion:
· “Address questions of equity in pension support and compensation as this relates to housing.
· Take into account issues of class and socio-economic status, gender and race as these issues relate to housing.
· Keep the Conference true to the United Methodist commitment to inclusiveness as stated in Article IV of our Constitution (The Book of Discipline of the United Methodist Church – 2008. Paragraph 4) by directly addressing how housing and residency requirements impact under-represented groups such as women and people of color.”
The Task Force gathered information related to the housing/parsonage practices in other Conferences in the North Central Jurisdiction and across the UMC. (See Item D below.)
Final Summary and Conclusions Reached
The Task Force’s efforts yielded a number of critical issues it believes are “at the heart of the matter.” These were noted earlier in the report on page 8 and 9. The Task Force has worked to address these critical issues through the proposed legislation included in the “Flexible Housing Policy” (Item E below) and “Parsonage Guidelines” (Item F below).
The Task Force concludes this report with some unresolved questions:
· Are we creating a multi-tier system of appointments, those with Housing Allowances and those without, in a clergy covenantal body that is intended to be marked by a more mutual sharing in the expectations of the itinerancy?
· Have the clergy “offered themselves without reserve”, as named in their vows of ordination, or are there issues which limit their willingness to itinerate such as the education of their children, a spouse’s employment, health concerns, special needs, aged parents, hobbies, or preferences for urban or rural regions?
· Why have some pastors, “close to retirement”, been allowed to “lock in” their “last appointment” with a Housing Allowance when the congregation already owned a parsonage, while no acknowledgement is made of the intended year of that retirement and/or with any guarantee of their ministry effectiveness in that appointment?
· What will be the long term effect on the historic model of the itinerancy as a means to provide clergy leadership to congregations, if congregations become unable or unwilling to bear “…the counter obligation of providing support for the itinerant ministry of the Church (¶620 of The Book of Discipline of the United Methodist Church-2008)”; and/or clergy are financially unable to acquire and maintain homes they might be expected to purchase due to, “Assumptions for the obligation of the itinerancy, required to be made at the time of admission into the traveling connection(¶620 of The Book of Discipline of the United Methodist Church-2008)?”
· What efforts of evangelism and stewardship are congregations willing to undertake in order to experience new results?
These are not questions which are easily answered, yet they are at the heart of some of our struggles as servants of Christ and the Body of Christ we call the Church.
This report is provided to the Annual Conference for is review and action as set forth in the ‘Motion to Refer’ approved by the 2009 Annual Conference.
Members of the Task Force:
Jean Bina
Judy Coffey
Neil Davis
Terry Euper
Naomi García
Lynn Grimes
Patti Harpole
Benton Heisler
David Hills
David Lundquist
Pros Tumonong
Chuck VanLente
Ned Weller
Jamie Zimmer
ITEM A
Annual Conference Motions
Conference passed on Saturday, June 6, 2009
Amendment to Referral of Item #7 and Item #7-R
subject: Motion to Refer Item #7 and Item #7-R – Amend by Addition. Conference voted concurrence.
motion: We move to refer item 7R and item 7 to a task force charged with producing a report and/or recommendations regarding issues related to the West Michigan Conference Housing Policy. This report or the task force’s recommendations shall be submitted by January 1, 2010 to the Cabinet and to the Conference Director for dialogue and then action by the Annual Conference in 2010. In its recommendations or report, this task force will be charged with the following (not necessarily in order of importance):
1. Clarify the relationship between itinerancy and residency and its impact on the appointive process
2. Sustain the United Methodist tradition of itinerancy taking into account the Biblical and the distinctly Wesleyan theological and historical underpinnings of itinerancy
3. Support the United Methodist connectional structure of our conference
4. Take into account historical changes (in particular the increase of women pastors, dual career couples, and clergy couples) that impact our tradition of itinerancy, listening especially for our collective experiential wisdom
5. Address the needs of clergy and their families, taking into account ways to support the physical, emotional, spiritual, and financial well-being of clergy and their families
6. Address the needs of the local church
7. Hold together the needs of the UMC connection, local churches, local communities, and the clergy and their families
8. Address questions of equity in pension support and compensation as this relates to housing
9. Take into account issues of class and socio-economic status, gender and race as these issues relate to housing
10. Keep the conference true to the United Methodist commitment to inclusiveness as stated in Article IV of our Constitution (Book of Discipline para. 4) by directly addressing how housing and residency requirements impact under-represented groups such as women and people of color
11. Provide for dialogue, transparency and openness of process by holding open meetings in which feedback is sought.\
This task force shall be chosen by respective committee chairs and shall be representative of all involved in the appointive process and in housing issues, including one representative from each of the following groups as well as the individuals listed:
-Board of Ordained Ministry
-Cabinet
-COSROW
-Conference Committee on Religion and Race
-The Conference Trustees
-Committee on Equitable Compensation
-Up to 4 lay representatives of local churches who serve on its Staff Parish
Relations Committee or other groups who have dealt with clergy housing
matters.
-And the following individuals or their representatives:
-Director of Connectional Ministries
-Clergy Assistant to the Bishop
-Conference Treasurer
-Facilitator - Naomi García .
As well, the task force shall have representation of both clergy and laity and shall include in its clergy ranks persons in both systems of housing. The task force shall also include someone with a monitoring function to insure that all voices are heard.
Item #7-R
subject: Response to Item #7, p. 206, Book B, Addition to 2008 Flexible Housing Policy: SUBSTITUTION. Referred to task force.
motion: I move to amend Item # 7 by substitution so that it reads as follows:
“The use of the parsonage by the pastor may be waived, provided they have consulted with, and received approval of alternate housing arrangements from the SPRC, Superintendent, and Bishop. In those cases where the pastor may request and receive permission to live in alternate housing, the church will not automatically augment his/her compensation package, but may do so at the discretion of the SPRC and Administrative Council, with consultation and approval of the District Superintendent.”
Item # 7
subject: Addition to 2008 Flexible Housing Policy. Referred to task force.
motion: The following shall be added to the Flexible Housing Policy adopted by the 2008 West Michigan Annual Conference: “The use of the parsonage by the pastor is not required. The pastor may live in other housing, but the church will not automatically augment his/her compensation package.”
ITEM B
Parsonage vs. Housing Allowance Retirement Inequities
It was noted that one historic inequi, , ty between the use of the Parsonage and the use of a Housing Allowance, par, ticu, larly under the, , , , , 1982-2006 United Methodist Church Pension Plan, has been that clergy with a Housing Allowance not only had the advantage of growing equity in a home, but also, in most cases, received additional pension contributions based on the amount of the Housing Allowance that exceeded 25% of the Cash Salary. Since Housing Allowances have tended to exceed 25% of cash salary, this gave a significant financial advantage to clergy with a Housing Allowance by means of higher contributions to and faster growth of their pension accounts, as well as the equity growth accruing through home ownership.
To a large degree, though not completely removed, this inequity was eliminated with the implementation of the Clergy Retirement Security Program (CRSP) on January 1st, 2007. This program moved a significant portion of Clergy Pensions from a Defined Contribution to Defined Benefit Plan based on years of service and the Denominational Average Compensation. Nevertheless, because there remains some portion of the pension plan which is a Defined Contribution based on Cash Salary plus the higher of the actual Housing Allowance or 25% of the Cash Salary, and because in most cases the allowance exceeds 25% of the Cash Salary, additional pension fund assets will accrue toward the pensions of most clergy with a Housing Allowance. This creates the potential for a dual benefit of growing both home equity and a larger pension fund available upon retirement.
An area of concern that arose in the Task Force’s research with regard to this matter is that there are some clergy who receive reported housing allowances that are less than 25% of their cash salary. This appears to reveal a potential inequity with regard to pension contributions in those cases, and raises a question to be addressed to the Conference Board of Pensions regarding the possibility of proposed Annual Conference legislation requiring that a minimum housing factor of 25% or, if higher, the actual housing allowance be used in determining pension contributions so that no clergy receive less than the 25% credit.
(Note: One question being raised at the National Association of Commissions on Equitable Compensation is whether or not the 25% housing factor is still a valid figure to use as a basis for computing pension contributions. It is also being questioned whether it is reasonable to add a Housing Factor to pension contributions of those with Housing Allowances since, as noted above, they are growing equity in a home through support of the church. In some ways, it seems to be a double benefit.)
Item C
Statistical Summary of the Flexible Housing Task Force
(These numbers are based on information that was updated as of 8-1-09)
FACTS
The following statistics were compiled in response to the questions raised by the Flexible Housing Task Force and the Annual Conference motion. They are primarily focused upon appointments to local congregations, and for the most part do not include appointments to Extension Ministries.
421 Congregations 320 Full-Time (FT) (76%) 101 Part-Time (PT) (24%)
331 Charges 251 Full-Time (76%) 80 Part-Time (24%)
Charges with Housing Allowances: 49 (19.5%) of FT 36 (45%) of PT
Women 11 (22.4%) 15 (41.6%)
Men 38 (77.6%) 21 (58.4%)
Of the 49 FT with a Housing Allowances 43 were >25% of Salary
Of the 36 PT with a Housing Allowances 30 were >25% of Salary
(In addition to the above positions, there are 5 full-time associates, 4 have Housing Allowances, all are >25% of the pastor’s salary. There are 3 part- time associates. One has a Housing Allowance. Two full time Deacons serving local congregations have Housing Allowances.)
Of the Top 50 Local Church Salaries, 20 have a Housing Allowance (45%)
Of these 50 there are 6 women (12%), 3 have Housing Allowances (50%)
Of the top 100 Local Church Salaries, 28 have Housing Allowances (28%)
Of these 100 15 are women (15%), 5 have Housing Allowances (33%)
Of the Top 50 Housing Allowances, 9 are women (18%)
They rank: 2, 3, 12, 25, 30, 31, 32, 46, & 48
Of the 331 Appointments to Local Church Charges:
42 are women (12.7%)
26 of these women receive a Housing Allowance (61.9%)
Of the 85 FT & PT charges with Housing Allowances, women are appointed to 36% of them.
There are 16 Racial Ethnic Pastors appointed to local congregations.
10 are appointed full time, 4 with Housing Allowances (40%)
4 are appointed part time, 1 with a Housing Allowance (25%)
Not included in the above statistics are the following: Three of the District Superintendents and the Director of Connectional Ministries live in parsonages. Three of the District Superintendents, the Conference Treasurer and the full-time Ministry Consultant receive Housing Allowances. Housing Allowances for these positions for 2009 & 2010 are $20,000 which is 27% of the salary. Two of the district superintendents are part of clergy couples. One receives a Housing Allowance and one lives in a parsonage provided by the congregation served by the spouse.
Interpretive Reflections Based Upon These Statistics
Housing Allowances are less that 20% of all full-time appointments. In the top 50 salary positions, 45% of them have Housing Allowances.
Female pastors are receiving a Housing Allowance as a greater percentage of their number than male pastors.
Racial ethnic pastors appear to receive a Housing Allowance in about the same overall percentage rate as all pastors.
Of the five lowest Housing Allowance amounts received, $10,500 to $13,000, one was a woman. No racial ethnic pastors were in the lowest 20%.
There are eighteen clergy couples. Eight of them receive Housing Allowances (44%). The Housing Allowances ranged from a combined total of $36,000, to one situation in which only one of the pastors in the couple was compensated, in the amount of $14,000.
There are ten other clergy couples that have retired, gone on Incapacity Leave or are currently serving in the Detroit Conference during the last ten years.
ITEM D
Parsonage and Housing Allowance Data from the Five Jurisdictions of the United Methodist Church
The following statistics are approximations based on conclusions reached by interpreting information reported on Statistical Table III. This chart reveals that of the twelve Conferences in the North Central Jurisdiction, eight of them have a higher percentage rate of congregations with Housing Allowances that West Michigan. The West Michigan Conference reports approximately 30.3% of its congregations have a Housing Allowance in comparison to 35.3% as an average across the denomination. (This chart does not isolate as readily the part-time and full-time appointments across the denomination as the statistics for the West Michigan Conference noted in Item C above.)
|
Conf #
|
Conference
|
# Charges Reporting
|
Est. # Parsonage (value $50,000+)
|
Est. # Housing Allowance
|
% Charges with Parsonage
|
% Charges with Housing Allowance
|
|
110
|
NORTHERN ILLINOIS
|
355
|
244
|
111
|
68.7%
|
31.3%
|
|
123
|
DAKOTAS
|
181
|
111
|
70
|
61.3%
|
38.7%
|
|
133
|
ILLINOIS GRT RIVERS
|
588
|
426
|
162
|
72.4%
|
27.6%
|
|
140
|
NORTH INDIANA
|
503
|
331
|
172
|
65.8%
|
34.2%
|
|
146
|
SOUTH INDIANA
|
570
|
324
|
246
|
56.8%
|
43.2%
|
|
150
|
IOWA
|
572
|
405
|
167
|
70.8%
|
29.2%
|
|
161
|
DETROIT
|
374
|
285
|
89
|
76.2%
|
23.8%
|
|
162
|
WEST MICHIGAN
|
323
|
225
|
98
|
69.7%
|
30.3%
|
|
171
|
MINNESOTA
|
304
|
149
|
155
|
49.0%
|
51.0%
|
|
180
|
EAST OHIO
|
658
|
440
|
218
|
66.9%
|
33.1%
|
|
194
|
WEST OHIO
|
958
|
604
|
354
|
63.0%
|
37.0%
|
|
200
|
WISCONSIN
|
361
|
249
|
112
|
69.0%
|
31.0%
|
|
|
NORTH CENTRAL JURISDICTION
|
5,747
|
3,793
|
1,954
|
66.0%
|
34.0%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
315
|
NEW ENGLAND
|
463
|
319
|
144
|
68.9%
|
31.1%
|
|
321
|
CENTRAL PENNSYLVANIA
|
503
|
357
|
146
|
71.0%
|
29.0%
|
|
336
|
GREATER NEW JERSEY
|
540
|
422
|
118
|
78.1%
|
21.9%
|
|
341
|
NEW YORK
|
428
|
320
|
108
|
74.8%
|
25.2%
|
|
342
|
TROY
|
253
|
112
|
141
|
44.3%
|
55.7%
|
|
350
|
EASTERN PENNSYLVANIA
|
438
|
259
|
179
|
59.1%
|
40.9%
|
|
353
|
WYOMING
|
206
|
125
|
81
|
60.7%
|
39.3%
|
|
360
|
WESTERN PENNSYLVANIA
|
545
|
418
|
127
|
76.7%
|
23.3%
|
|
370
|
NORTH CNTRL NEW YORK
|
304
|
173
|
131
|
56.9%
|
43.1%
|
|
373
|
WESTERN NEW YORK
|
231
|
146
|
85
|
63.2%
|
36.8%
|
|
381
|
BALTIMORE-WASHINGTON
|
577
|
313
|
264
|
54.2%
|
45.8%
|
|
382
|
PENINSULA-DELAWARE
|
299
|
188
|
111
|
62.9%
|
37.1%
|
|
391
|
WEST VIRGINIA
|
556
|
370
|
186
|
66.5%
|
33.5%
|
|
|
NORTH EASTERN JURISDICTION
|
5,343
|
3,522
|
1,821
|
65.9%
|
34.1%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
510
|
ARKANSAS
|
481
|
256
|
225
|
53.2%
|
46.8%
|
|
521
|
CENTRAL TEXAS
|
249
|
165
|
84
|
66.3%
|
33.7%
|
|
522
|
NORTH TEXAS
|
274
|
134
|
140
|
48.9%
|
51.1%
|
|
531
|
RIO GRANDE
|
81
|
58
|
23
|
71.6%
|
28.4%
|
|
532
|
TEXAS
|
535
|
352
|
183
|
65.8%
|
34.2%
|
|
541
|
KANSAS WEST
|
269
|
177
|
92
|
65.8%
|
34.2%
|
|
542
|
KANSAS EAST
|
227
|
130
|
97
|
57.3%
|
42.7%
|
|
550
|
LOUISIANA
|
362
|
197
|
165
|
54.4%
|
45.6%
|
|
560
|
MISSOURI
|
651
|
391
|
260
|
60.1%
|
39.9%
|
|
571
|
NEBRASKA
|
246
|
159
|
87
|
64.6%
|
35.4%
|
|
581
|
NEW MEXICO
|
128
|
95
|
33
|
74.2%
|
25.8%
|
|
582
|
OKLAHOMA
|
437
|
321
|
116
|
73.5%
|
26.5%
|
|
583
|
OKLAHOMA INDIAN MSSN
|
69
|
31
|
38
|
44.9%
|
55.1%
|
|
591
|
NORTHWEST TEXAS
|
186
|
137
|
49
|
73.7%
|
26.3%
|
|
592
|
SOUTHWEST TEXAS
|
304
|
197
|
107
|
64.8%
|
35.2%
|
|
|
SOUTH CENTRAL JURISDICTION
|
4,499
|
2,800
|
1,699
|
62.2%
|
37.8%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
711
|
NORTH GEORGIA
|
794
|
388
|
406
|
48.9%
|
51.1%
|
|
712
|
SOUTH GEORGIA
|
439
|
329
|
110
|
74.9%
|
25.1%
|
|
721
|
ALABAMA-W. FLORIDA
|
467
|
272
|
195
|
58.2%
|
41.8%
|
|
722
|
NORTH ALABAMA
|
659
|
381
|
278
|
57.8%
|
42.2%
|
|
731
|
WESTERN N CAROLINA
|
886
|
636
|
250
|
71.8%
|
28.2%
|
|
741
|
SOUTH CAROLINA
|
672
|
489
|
183
|
72.8%
|
27.2%
|
|
751
|
FLORIDA
|
690
|
497
|
193
|
72.0%
|
28.0%
|
|
760
|
MISSISSIPPI
|
718
|
417
|
301
|
58.1%
|
41.9%
|
|
770
|
KENTUCKY
|
653
|
386
|
267
|
59.1%
|
40.9%
|
|
773
|
RED BIRD MISSIONARY
|
14
|
10
|
4
|
71.4%
|
28.6%
|
|
781
|
HOLSTON
|
588
|
406
|
182
|
69.0%
|
31.0%
|
|
782
|
MEMPHIS
|
281
|
171
|
110
|
60.9%
|
39.1%
|
|
783
|
TENNESSEE
|
394
|
201
|
193
|
51.0%
|
49.0%
|
|
791
|
NORTH CAROLINA
|
648
|
461
|
187
|
71.1%
|
28.9%
|
|
803
|
VIRGINIA
|
905
|
620
|
285
|
68.5%
|
31.5%
|
|
|
SOUTH CENTRAL JURISDICTION
|
8,808
|
5,664
|
3,144
|
64.3%
|
35.7%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
910
|
YELLOWSTONE
|
86
|
52
|
34
|
60.5%
|
39.5%
|
|
912
|
ROCKY MOUNTAIN
|
252
|
113
|
139
|
44.8%
|
55.2%
|
|
922
|
CALIFORNIA-PACIFIC
|
367
|
230
|
137
|
62.7%
|
37.3%
|
|
927
|
DESERT SOUTHWEST
|
127
|
42
|
85
|
33.1%
|
66.9%
|
|
931
|
ALASKA MISSIONARY
|
27
|
16
|
11
|
59.3%
|
40.7%
|
|
933
|
OREGON-IDAHO
|
178
|
107
|
71
|
60.1%
|
39.9%
|
|
940
|
CALIFORNIA-NEVADA
|
347
|
256
|
91
|
73.8%
|
26.2%
|
|
951
|
PACIFIC NORTHWEST
|
249
|
165
|
84
|
66.3%
|
33.7%
|
|
|
WESTERN JURISDICTION
|
1,633
|
981
|
652
|
60.1%
|
39.9%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
UMC Total
|
24,397
|
15,779
|
8,618
|
64.7%
|
35.3%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
ITEM E
FLEXIBLE HOUSING POLICY
of the West Michigan Conference
of the United Methodist Church
Our Flexible Housing and Parsonage Guideline Policies have been based on the foundational understanding that housing shall be provided for our pastors. All pastors serving full-time in local churches, District Superintendents and full-time Annual Conference staff performing the function of Director of Connectional Ministry, Director of Communications, Conference Treasurer and Ministry Consultant shall be provided with either a parsonage or housing allowance (See ¶258.2g)16 & ¶620 of The Book of Discipline of the United Methodist Church – 2008). There shall be flexibility in housing options as determined by the local congregation or the designated Annual Conference body. Providing either a parsonage or a housing allowance shall be determined by the local congregation or the designated Annual Conference body for the purpose of enabling ministry and the itinerant ministry of the Annual Conference.
The Book of Discipline of the United Methodist Church – 2008 identifies the areas of responsibilities of three distinct groups – one relating primarily to housing and two relating primarily to itinerancy and appointments.
LOCAL CHURCH
The Local Church accepts certain responsibilities for adequate pastoral support in this mutual covenant. ¶620 of The Book of Discipline of the United Methodist Church - 2008 states, “Assumptions for the obligation of the itinerancy, required to be made at the time of admission into the traveling connection, puts upon the Church the counter obligation of providing support for the itinerant ministry of the Church.”
Duties of the committee on pastor-parish relations are outlined in ¶258.2 of The Book of Discipline of the United Methodist Church – 2008. The following specific matters are noted in¶258.2.g)16 “To consult on matters pertaining to….housing (which may be church owned-parsonage or housing allowance in lieu of parsonage if in compliance with the policy of the annual conference), and other practical matters affecting the work and families of the pastor and staff, and to make annual recommendations regarding such matters to the church council, reporting budget items to the committee on finance.”
CLERGY
Clergy take vows at their ordination agreeing that they will “offer themselves without reserve to be appointed and to serve, after consultation, as the appointive authority may determine (¶335.c.2 The Book of Discipline of the United Methodist Church - 2008).” The requirements and implications of the itinerancyare repeatedly emphasized in The Book of Discipline of the United Methodist Church – 2008. Some of those implications include certain guarantees related to an appointment, minimum compensation, benefits and provisions for housing.
Some of those implications are also the forfeiture of certain restrictions by clergy in terms of where they will serve. Each pastor serves at the discretion and direction of the Bishop and Cabinet. This is a reality inherent in our polity.
BISHOP
The third party in this covenant of obligations is the Bishop. The particular responsibilities of the Bishop are delineated in Chapter Three, “The Superintendency”, The Book of Discipline of the United Methodist Church – 2008.
Section VIII contains the paragraphs that address the material related to Appointment Making:
¶430 Responsibility
¶431 Consultation
¶432 Criteria
¶433 Process
¶434 Frequency
These paragraphs outline a comprehensive process, the outcome of which is intended to provide continuity of leadership in local congregations and a comparable intersection of gifts required and gifts possessed between a congregation and pastor(s) appointed to serve there.
The guidelines for providing a housing allowance are as follows:
1. (A) Negotiations to establish a housing allowance in a local church will include the pastor, the committee on pastor-parish relations, the finance committee, and the chair of the board of trustees. The district superintendent shall be informed before and as negotiations progress. The purpose of these negotiations is to develop a clear understanding by all parties as to the arrangements mutually acceptable. Final arrangements must have approval of the church/charge conference.
(B) Negotiations to establish a housing allowance for a cabinet appointment will include the district superintendent, the district superintendency committee, the district board of trustees or parsonage committee, the district board of church location and building, conference council on finance and administration, trustees of the annual conference, and the bishop. Final arrangements must be mutually agreed upon by these parties.
(C) Negotiations to establish a housing allowance for a conference staff appointment will include the staff person, the personnel committee, conference council on finance and administration, the trustees of the annual conference, and the bishop. Final arrangements must be mutually agreed upon by these parties.
(D) Negotiations to establish a housing allowance for a new church start pastor will include the pastor, the New Church Committee, the Director of New Church Development and the District Superintendent. Final arrangements must be mutually agreed upon by these parties.
2. A written record of the housing agreements (signed by the parties mentioned in #1 above) shall be maintained in the files of the district superintendent, the pastor, and the charge conference, and also by the bishop’s office and conference trustees where applicable. The written agreement will stipulate clearly:
(A) The amount to be allowed every month;
(B) That the pastor’s participation in the arrangement for a housing allowance in lieu of a parsonage shall not hinder his/her participation in the itinerancy for future appointments.
(C) That a housing allowance in lieu of a parsonage shall not hinder the acceptance of a subsequent pastoral appointment where a parsonage is desired by the pastor. If, in subsequent appointments, a housing allowance is not desired by the incoming pastor, the local church/charge, or the designated Annual Conference body, shall seriously consider this request and may provide housing, either through purchase or rental.
(D)The church/charge conference, or the designated Annual Conference body, shall also have the option to change to a parsonage at subsequent transition times.
3. A housing allowance shall be based on the rental value of the current parsonage or, if the church/charge, or the designated Annual Conference body, does not own a parsonage, on the rental value of an average home in the parish setting that meets the Conference Parsonage Guidelines Policy. In addition to the housing allowance, an agreed upon allowance or the actual cost for utilities shall be paid.
4. If the pastor chooses to purchase or rent a home, the down-payment and closing costs on a house, (or security deposit for a rental) and all other costs of purchase and maintenance are the responsibility of the pastor, district superintendent, or conference staff and are not included in housing arrangements.
4. No assets from the sale of a church-owned parsonage shall be used for current operating expenses of the charge (2004 Book of Discipline of The United Methodist Church, ¶2542). Proceeds from the sale of such a church-owned parsonage shall be placed in escrow by the trustees of the local church, at least equaling an amount necessary to cover the future purchase of a parsonage or an amount to cover a down payment (of not less than 20 percent of cost of home meeting parsonage standards in the area) plus closing costs. It is recommended that the principal account on the escrow be adjusted annually to provide equity with inflation and the real estate market. Interest received from an escrow account may be used toward the provision of a housing allowance. If a period of five (5) years has passed and there is no evident need to purchase another parsonage, then the escrow funds may be released for the purpose of church capital improvements. The evident need shall be determined by a two-thirds (2/3) vote of a called church conference. Any such sale of a church-owned parsonage must include consent of the pastor, district superintendent, board of church location and building, and the charge conference.
If the parsonage is not sold, but held for rental purposes, income there from may be applied toward a housing allowance for the pastor or for current expenses. Said rental parsonage shall be maintained at the conference and local community rental housing code standards and inspected annually by the local board of trustees, in readiness for possible future use as the parsonage.
Assets from the sale of a new church start parsonage, prior to the constituting church conference, will conform to agreements made at the time of the original purchase of the parsonage.
5. Once initiated, a housing allowance is expected to continue for the duration of a pastoral appointment. The amount of the housing allowance shall be subject to annual approval of the charge conference. The charge conference shall not have the authority to reduce the housing allowance without having consultation with the pastor, the committee on pastor-parish relations, and the district superintendent. Any reduction shall not be effective prior to June 30th following the church/charge conference (See ¶624, The Book of Discipline of the United Methodist Church – 2008).
Once an appointment is in place, if a change to a housing allowance is initiated at the pastor’s request and the parties noted in point #1 above have all agreed, the responsibility of the cost for moving is the pastor’s. If a change to a housing allowance is initiated by the church, the parties noted in point #1 above have all agreed, the responsibility of the cost for moving is the church’s.
6. The local church/charge shall allow the pastor who receives a housing allowance to live where he/she chooses in the communities served. If the pastor desires to live outside the communities served, he/she must receive the consent of the committee on pastor-parish relations or the staff parish relations committee.
7. The housing allowance may be used for purchase, rent, or lease as desired by the pastor.
8. The incoming pastor shall have no obligation to purchase the home of his/her predecessor.
9. If a church which previously provided a housing allowance will be providing a parsonage for an incoming pastor, housing accommodations shall be provided for the pastor until the newly acquired parsonage is ready, and any additional costs for storage or an additional move shall be the responsibility of the local church.
GUIDELINES FOR SETTING THE LEVEL OF HOUSING ALLOWANCES
It is recommended that a guideline be established for determining housing allowance amounts, which includes at least the following two components:
1) Monthly rental amount equal to the average monthly rental of a property meeting the parsonage standards in the agreed locale, as determined by an independent realtor appraisal. (Validation of this number would be by comparison to 1 percent of the property valuation; the housing allowance should not exceed this figure.)
2) Utilities amount based on historical data of the past three years for the parsonage being replaced by the housing allowance, with consideration for inflation.
(Encourage individuals to seek out the most competitive rates; for example, for telephone usage).
The reasonable housing allowance numbers would be determined through consultation of the trustee liaison and the appropriate parsonage committee. Facts from independent realtors or appraisers should be obtained, at least for the base year.
ITEM F
PARSONAGE GUIDELINES
A policy of the West Michigan Conference
of the United Methodist Church
Philosophy of Parsonage Guidelines
Our Flexible Housing and Parsonage Guideline Policies have been based on the foundational understanding that housing shall be provided for our pastors. All pastors serving full time in local churches, District Superintendents and full-time Annual Conference staff performing the function of Director of Connectional Ministry, Director of Communications, Conference Treasurer and Ministry Consultant shall be provided with either a parsonage or housing allowance (See ¶258.2g)16 & ¶620 of The Book of Discipline of the United Methodist Church – 2008). There shall be flexibility in housing options as determined by the local congregation or the designated Annual Conference body. Providing either a parsonage or a housing allowance shall be determined by the local congregation, or the designated Annual Conference body, for the purpose of enabling ministry and the itinerant ministry of the Annual Conference. (See the Flexible Housing Policy for housing options.)
The Book of Discipline of the United Methodist Church – 2008 identifies the areas of responsibilities of three distinct groups – one relating primarily to housing and two relating to primarily to itinerancy and appointments.
LOCAL CHURCH
The Local Church accepts certain responsibilities for adequate pastoral support in this mutual covenant. ¶620 of The Book of Discipline of the United Methodist Church - 2008 states, “Assumptions for the obligation of the itinerancy, required to be made at the time of admission into the traveling connection, puts upon the Church the counter obligation of providing support for the itinerant ministry of the Church.”
Duties of the committee on pastor-parish relations are outlined in ¶258.2 of The Book of Discipline of the United Methodist Church – 2008. The following specific matters are noted in¶258.2.g)16 “To consult on matters pertaining to….housing (which may be church owned-parsonage or housing allowance in lieu of parsonage if in compliance with the policy of the annual conference), and other practical matters affecting the work and families of the pastor and staff, and to make annual recommendations regarding such matters to the church council, reporting budget items to the committee on finance.”
CLERGY
Clergy take vows at their ordination agreeing that they will “offer themselves without reserve to be appointed and to serve, after consultation, as the appointive authority may determine (¶335.c.2 The Book of Discipline of the United Methodist Church - 2008).” The requirements and implications of the itinerancyare repeatedly emphasized in The Book of Discipline of the United Methodist Church – 2008. Some of those implications include certain guarantees related to an appointment, minimum compensation, benefits and provisions for housing. Some of those implications are also the forfeiture of certain restrictions by clergy in terms of where they will serve. Each pastor serves at the discretion and direction of the Bishop and Cabinet. This is a reality inherent in our polity.
BISHOP
The third party in this covenant of obligations is the Bishop. The particular responsibilities of the Bishop are delineated in Chapter Three, “The Superintendency”, The Book of Discipline of the United Methodist Church – 2008. Section VIII contains the paragraphs that address the material related to Appointment Making:
¶430 Responsibility
¶431 Consultation
¶432 Criteria
¶433 Process
¶434 Frequency
These paragraphs outline a comprehensive process, the outcome of which is intended to provide continuity of leadership in local congregations and a comparable intersection of gifts required and gifts possessed between a congregation and pastor(s) appointed to serve there.
It is important that local church or Annual Conference-owned parsonages across the Conference meet certain standards so that differences in quality, size and equipment are kept to a minimum. These guidelines apply for local church pastors, district superintendents and Annual Conference professional staff, when a parsonage is provided.
The Parsonage Guidelines Policy shall be posted on the Conference web site, presented to all new pastors by each respective district superintendent, distributed annually by the district superintendent to the local church Board of Trustees, pastor parish relations committee or staff parish relations committee. The Parsonage Guidelines Policy shall be reviewed annually by the Conference Board of Trustees and the Cabinet. Any changes shall be brought to the Annual Conference for its action.
The Annual Conference affirms that the parsonage is the private home of the pastor. Therefore, the parsonage should not by design or intention be considered as an extension of the church space for program use. The church and the pastor should maintain the home so that it can be opened to friends and parishioners alike with dignity and pride.
The Annual Conference recognizes that families in our culture are of varying sizes and needs. In the interest of Christian stewardship, we must seek homes that make efficient use of space, are energy efficient and are adaptable to the needs of clergy family members. [End of any proposed editing by the Task Force to the Parsonage Guidelines Policy.]
[The remainder of the Parsonage Guidelines Policy contains no changes. The policy in its entirety can be found on the Conference website.]
Comments