THE METHODIST CHURCH, LEEDS DISTRICT

THE METHODIST CHURCH, LEEDS DISTRICT 1 Introduction SYNOD 12 MAY 2012 Report on the Review of the Leeds Methodist Mission, September 2011 1.1 It is now a requirement, under Standing Order 440 (5), that the relevant Synod undertakes a review, every five years, of the mission and ministry of each church, Circuit or project which has been designated for inclusion on the Methodist Church s official city centre list. Accordingly, a Review was undertaken during 2011 under the auspices of the Leeds District Synod, in collaboration with the Oxford Place Church Council and the Leeds Mission Circuit Management Committee (acting as the Circuit Meeting). 1.2 The aim of the Review was to reflect on the current strength and weaknesses of the Methodist City Centre presence in Leeds, as embodied by the Leeds Methodist Mission, and then to consider whether there is a continuing need for a Methodist presence in the city centre of Leeds, and, if so, what form this might take. 1.3 The Review took place over a period of eight months from February 2011 to September 2011. The Report of the Review was completed towards the end of September 2011, and thus could not be brought to the September 2011 meeting of the Synod. 2 The Report: Issues and Recommendations 2.1 The full Report of the Review Group runs to some twelve pages, supplemented by a separate fourteen-page Financial Report undertaken at the Review Group s request by Alan Parker, Assistant District Treasurer. During the course of the Review, it became clear that there are considerable issues to be addressed if there is to be a continuing and viable Methodist presence in the centre of Leeds. However, if these can be addressed, then there are also some real opportunities for the future. The Report focused on the issues and the opportunities and made proposals for how these could be resolved. 2.2 The key issues and recommendations arising from the Review are summarised in Appendix 1. On practical grounds, the Reports themselves are not being circulated to Synod members; they are, however, available on request from Michael Noble, District Development Enabler, should any member of the Synod wish to consult them. 2.3 The Review Group believes that a radical approach to the future of the Mission needs to be taken, that its proposals provide the most favourable conditions for Methodism to maintain a separate city-centre building in Leeds, and that the recommendations need prompt action if the Leeds Mission is to have a future. Were they not to be implemented, then the Group cannot at present see another solution to the issues facing the Leeds Mission which would prevent its closure in any more than the medium term. 3 Progress since September 2011 3.1 Responsibility for addressing the issues and taking forward the recommendations has been taken jointly by the District Policy Committee (DPC), on behalf of the Synod, and the Leeds Mission Management Committee, as the current Managing Trustees. A joint Review Action Group has been established, to work through the matters in detail. 3.2 Many meetings have been held since September in order to make progress, as follows: 3 October 2011 Management Committee 31 October 2011 Action Group 1

14 November 2011 Action Group 14 November 2011 District Policy Committee 30 November 2011 Action Group 11 December 2011 General Church Meeting 14 December 2011 Management Committee (Special Meeting) 18 January 2012 Action Group 19 January 2012 Leeds Mission and Leeds South Circuit Leadership Teams 1 February 2012 District Policy Committee (Special Meeting) 6 February 2012 Management Committee (Special Meeting) 20 February 2012 Action Group 5 March 2012 Church Council 6 March 2012 District Policy Committee 12 March 2012 Management Committee 21 March 2012 Leeds Mission and Leeds South Circuit Leadership Teams 28 March 2012 Action Group 16 April 2012 Management Committee (Special Meeting) 26 April 2012 Action Group 3.3 The remainder of this Report to the Synod provides information both on the progress achieved to date and the future plans, under four headings: Mission, Ministry, Finance and Governance. 4 Mission 4.1 The Management Committee and the Church Council have been reflecting on the particular nature and purpose of city-centre work (and on how this might be developed to meet the challenges of Leeds in the early 21 st century), as the first step towards the creation of a renewed vision for Methodist mission and ministry within the city centre of Leeds. 4.2 A key statement has been formulated, which will now allow specific vision priorities to be established: The mission of the church, outward facing, into the city centre is a mission of prophetic living and grace-filled pilgrimage, expressed through the offering of faithful and constant prayer and worship, generous pastoral care and open-hearted hospitality. It is a mission which holds the city in prayer, which welcomes all who would come and which reaches out over many a boundary to offer the love of God made known in Jesus Christ. It is mission which announces the Kingdom and expects it to come close. It is a mission of accepting people and engaging with systems and social expressions as they are, yet challenging them to be better still. It is the speaking out of the Gospel and the living out of the Kingdom. 5 Ministry 5.1 In considering the future of city-centre ordained ministry, currently exercised through the ministers of the Leeds Mission Circuit, the DPC has established a key principle that the current invitations to all three ministers will be honoured for their full anticipated duration. 5.1 However, one of the key issues affecting the on-going financial viability of the Leeds Mission is that it has borne a substantial contribution to the costs of the Universities Chaplain. This has been a continuation of an historical model when much of the Methodist chaplaincy work with students did revolve around Oxford Place and the other, now closed, churches in the city centre. However, the ecumenical Universities Chaplaincy now operates on a very different model. 5.2 Ensuring that there is Higher Education Chaplaincy is a responsibility of the District Policy Committee under SO 444(4). Acknowledging the above changes in chaplaincy work and that the District already provides a significant financial contribution towards the cost of the chaplain, it is being proposed that the Universities Chaplaincy should no longer be the responsibility of the Leeds Mission, but of the District as a whole, from September 2012. 2

5.3 An application has been made for a Connexional grant to support the Universities Chaplaincy for the next five years (two-thirds of the overall cost). If we are successful in this application, the District will need to fund the remaining one-third of the appointment, either through the assessment or from the District Advance Fund (DAF). If Connexional support is not forthcoming, then consideration will have to be given to whether a full-time Higher Education Chaplain can be afforded from 2014. The DPC has provisionally agreed that an annual sum of 25,000 be set aside towards this appointment for the next three years. In the meantime, the DPC has agreed a DAF grant of an additional 16,000 to the Leeds Mission towards the costs of the Chaplain in the current financial year. 5.4 Other ordained ministry provided through the Leeds Mission will be reviewed as the renewed vision for the work moves forward alongside the discussions around finance and governance issues (see further below). In the meantime, the District may need to provide further financial support to the Leeds Mission from the DAF in order to honour the principle in 5.1 above. 6 Finance 6.1 There has been significant and sustained work by the Assistant District Treasurer and the Church & Circuit Treasurer, together with others at Leeds Mission, to address the urgent financial issues uncovered during the Review. This has included: Meetings with all tenants, and new service charge rates have been applied. New rents where due have been agreed and arrears paid. A new standard tenancy agreement has been agreed with TMCP and is now being introduced: this will enable more flexible arrangements and should help Leeds Mission to retain tenants who would otherwise have been unable to accept the previous terms due to uncertainties about their own funding. Potential new tenants are being explored for areas of the premises which are currently unoccupied. More rigorous financial procedures have been introduced, and arrears of bills have been actively progressed. A revised support staff structure is being introduced which is planned to lead to annual savings of circa 12,300. Sessional lettings have been developed, particularly making use of the worship area for conferences, leading to some increase in this area of income. As indicated above, decisions have been taken by the DPC for the District to provide further financial support for the Universities Chaplaincy. 6.2 The forecast deficit figures from the Review Financial Report have been recalculated by the Assistant District Treasurer to take into account the work to date, and these are attached as Appendix 2. 7 Governance 7.1 Detailed consideration is being given to the governance model proposed in the Review Report, and how this might work out in practice. 7.2 Meetings have been held in the context of A Way Forward for Mission to consider a possible new Circuit involving Oxford Place Methodist Church. At present, this is most likely to arise from a new Circuit combining the Leeds Mission and Leeds South Circuits. Conversations towards this end are proceeding, and were this to happen, then the new Circuit could potentially come into being in September 2013. 7.3 Many issues of detail still need to be worked out in relation to the suggested new District responsibility, including such matters as the balance of ordained ministry between the Local Church and the wider work of the Mission, and how this ministry is to be financed. However, a potential model is currently being worked on with a view to possible phased implementation from September 2012 onwards and concluding by September 2013. 3

Rev Dr Liz Smith, Chair of District & Michael Noble, District Development Enabler On behalf of the Leeds Mission Review Action Group, April 2012 4

APPENDIX 1 REPORT ON THE REVIEW OF THE LEEDS METHODIST MISSION, SEPTEMBER 2011 1 Issues Summary of Key Issues and Recommendations 1.1 Finance The Review identified a potentially very serious financial position. There are several issues which the Management Committee, as the Managing Trustees, needs to address immediately, as recommended in the Financial Report. The Mission has three accounts: Church, Circuit and Property. All three have underlying (year-on-year) financial deficits, which totalled around 68,000, although, if the detailed recommendations set out in the Financial Report are implemented, then the underlying deficit could be nearer 43,000. If urgent action is not taken to address the financial position, the Mission will begin to have cash flow problems by Spring 2013 and will run out of funds by Spring 2014. 1.2 Governance The present governance structure for the Leeds Mission reflects the role of the Mission as a single-church Circuit but which is also designated as a project of the Leeds District under Standing Order 512A, with a Synod-appointed Management Committee to fulfil the role of a Circuit Meeting. The Management Committee are the Managing Trustees of the Circuit. There is a separate Church Council. The Church Council has passed its responsibility for the Managing Trusteeship and the financial affairs of the premises to the Management Committee. The current arrangements have unfortunately not fulfilled the original intentions. The details of the governance arrangements were not widely understood (or possibly even known). The way in which governance arrangements are currently structured has neither supported the ability of the Mission to be run effectively nor enabled the District to feel and have a sufficient engagement with or ownership of the Leeds Mission. The financial arrangements are similarly complex. There are three separate accounts in operation, no doubt reflecting an intention to be clear about the different parts of the work of the Mission. However, there are considerable paper transactions between the various accounts, and this has not aided office-holders or responsible bodies in their being able to establish clearly the overall financial position. The over-riding picture is therefore one of confusion, which has impeded good governance and on occasion has led to key responsibilities being overlooked by certain office holders and bodies. As a result, the work of the Mission has not been as effective as it could have been in fulfilling its work and witness. 1.3 The Local Church Although the numbers attending worship are now considerably fewer than in times past, there is still a strong worshipping community at the heart of the building. Nonetheless, there were significant signs of weariness, particularly amongst the leadership of the Church and Circuit. The present size of the congregation at the Mission (an average Sunday morning attendance of 40) means that there are no longer the numbers of people available, as there once were, to take an active part of the work of the Mission throughout the week. The nature of the congregation is perhaps also more transient than hitherto, which does not assist the connection between Sunday worship and weekday activity and means a lower proportion of the congregation has a long-term commitment to the life and witness of the Mission as a whole. The Review Group is therefore very doubtful whether there is sufficient resource within the local Church and Circuit to enable it to continue to operate the Mission in its present form. 1.4 Vision The Review found that there was no overall, agreed and owned vision within and between the 5

local Church and the Management Committee, which could govern the work of the Mission. If formulated, such a vision would enable the range of possible activities to be focused and developed in a systematic and coherent way; the available resources (personnel, finance and buildings) could then be applied more effectively and efficiently to meet the contemporary needs of the city centre. 1.5 Administration The Mission, with its combination of church, circuit and premises, sessional lettings and rented spaces, etc is a very complex operation. There are several key administrative roles, each requiring very specific skills, which need to be performed for Oxford Place to be able to run effectively and efficiently in pursuing its life, witness and mission. The Review Group is not convinced that the present combination of administrative duties is best placed to serve the future needs of the Mission. 1.6 Relationship with Leeds District The Review Group heard from both those within the life of the Mission and those in the wider District that the relationship between the District and the Mission was not as close as it could be, or as it apparently once was. The reasons why this would be the case were not always voiced in the same way, but clearly there is a general feeling that the relationship is not what it might be or should be. The Mission has a central place in the District, both physically and to some extent emotionally. However, this does not often seem to extend to a sense of shared responsibility for the work of the Mission. A greater understanding of the work of the Mission across the District would be helpful. 2 Options Considered 2.1 The Review Group believes that the time has come for some difficult decisions to be taken about the future of the Leeds Mission. A further period of indecision or seeking to maintain the status quo will increase the pressure on the finances of the Mission, and on those in positions of leadership and governance. Almost inevitably, it would lead to a closure of the building as a place of Christian presence in the centre of Leeds in a very short time. Doing nothing is therefore not an option. 2.2 The Review Group believes that now is an appropriate time for a more radical approach to be taken, as there is still a core of committed and reasonably active people involved in the Mission who have a heart for mission in the city centre. The Group has detected a willingness for alternative options to be considered, and the climate appears to be right for a new approach, which will help to secure the future for the Methodist presence in the city centre of Leeds. 2.3 The Review Group therefore considered in some detail a range of options for the future of the Leeds Mission: Ceasing to have a Methodist presence in the City Centre; Selling all or part of the Oxford Place site; Creating a Local Ecumenical Partnership; Ceasing Sunday worship; Ceasing to be a separately constituted Local Church; Separating responsibility for the Local Church and for the wider work, mission and ministry of the Mission. 2.4 The arguments for and against each option are set out in the full Report. The Review Group believes that a continuing, separately constituted Local Church at Oxford Place is needed. As the status quo is not a viable option, then an alternative governance structure is needed to address the issues which have become evident, and in order to secure the future for the work and ministry of the Mission and the worship life of the local church. 2.5 The Review Group believes that the option for the Oxford Place Local Church to continue, but for the responsibility for the premises and for the wider work, mission and ministry to be transferred to another body has the prospect of being a viable way forward for the retention of 6

the Methodist presence in the city centre. Thus the Managing Trusteeship for the Mission premises, and for all of the operations within it, would become the responsibility of the District. The Oxford Place Methodist Church would continue within the premises, but would become part of another Circuit in the District. The Review Group is convinced that this option will provide the best means of securing the future for the Leeds Mission. 3 Recommendations 3.1 The Review Group proposes that: (i) the Managing Trusteeship for the Oxford Place premises be undertaken by the Leeds District, and that the whole premises should be organised on the basis of a distinct and distinctive District responsibility; (ii) the Oxford Place Methodist Church continue as a separately constituted Local Church worshipping within, and at the heart of the building, making an appropriate financial contribution for its use of the premises; (iii) the future Circuit location of the Oxford Place Local Church be considered within the other reflections on the composition of Circuits within the District as part of the Way Forward for Mission agenda; (iv) detailed consideration is given to the future requirements for ministry in the Mission and for the Oxford Place Methodist Church and its new Circuit, and how this is to be financed between the District and the Circuit, in the light of a new vision for the Mission (see below). 3.2 Immediate action needs to be taken by the current Management Committee to address the urgent matters which are detailed in the Financial Report, whilst the more medium-term future is considered in the light of this Report. It is vital that the recommendations in the Financial Report are attended to, and a formal action plan adopted, by the Management Committee as a matter of urgency, if the Leeds Mission is to have any future, even in the short term. 3.3 A critical task is the creation of a renewed vision for Methodist mission and ministry within the city centre of Leeds which is owned by the District, the Local Church, and ecumenical and other partners. There are significant possibilities for expanding and/or adjusting the work of mission and ministry at Oxford Place as it reflects the distinctive charisms of Methodism in the city centre for the 21 st century. Several were voiced during the course of the Review. Part of the way forward for the Mission in its new guise will be through developing the concept of partnership with others, in Methodism, ecumenically and in more secular contexts. 3.4 Once the renewed vision for the Leeds Mission has been articulated, then a strategy for its achievement needs to be pursued. The District will need to review how both the premises at the Mission and its resources (i.e. including all of the human resources within the District as well as the finances etc directly at its disposal) can be utilised to facilitate the vision and strategy. 3.5 If the District is to take on the direct responsibility for the mission and ministry of the Mission as the Managing Trustees, then it will need a management arrangement which makes this a viable option. The Review Group believes that this could best be achieved by the establishment of a sub-group of the Trustees which would act on behalf of the District with delegated authority where appropriate, including the responsibility to create the new vision and strategy for the Mission and to manage the premises and the activities taking place. The Review Group would also recommend consideration of establishing an advisory group of partners, which would represent the interests not only of the District, and those of the Oxford Place Methodist Church and the new Circuit, but also the major users and the local community. 3.6 Recognising the complexity of the operation at Oxford Place, the current and anticipated business climate, and the changes in governance, etc recommended above, the Review Group recommends that changes are also made to the operational management of the Mission, along the lines outlined in the Financial Report. 7