The old saying, “You get what you pay for” still applies today, even in construction; and as the temperature rises and church operational costs increase during summer months, many churches learn this lesson the hard way.
Experts say this usually occurs when church leaders focus on cutting construction costs and overlook long-term expenses during the building process.
Gwenn E. McCormick writes in “Planning and Building Church Facilities” that “cutting $50,000 in construction costs is a bad bargain if it increases annual operational costs by $10,000. That would amount to paying 20 percent on the money saved every year the building is used — an expensive financial miscue.”
Instead, he advises church building committees to pay serious attention to operational efficiency by focusing on “life-cycle cost analysis, energy conservation measures, full utilization of space and maintenance estimates.”
Before committing to any building project, church leaders should become familiar with their current operational costs, according to Gary Swafford, director of church planting and building services at the Alabama Baptist State Board of Missions.
“When a church adds a building, they may not be able to determine the exact amount of increase in operational costs but they can approximate the additional expense,” he said. “This can be done by calculating the percentage of increase in square footage and adding the same percentage of increase to their operational costs. For example, when you add 25 percent more space, you will add approximately 25 percent to your operational costs.”
In addition to estimating additional square footage expenses, churches should determine how future costs will be affected by building a cheaper quality building, Swafford noted. This helps to ensure better stewardship of church finances for years to come.
“In the beginning, it is a temptation to build too cheap without counting the long-term costs,” he added. “I simply ask churches to do their homework and to the best of their ability determine how much additional operational costs will be incurred if they choose to use a cheaper quality building. In the end, they should build as high a quality building as they can afford even if it means building in phases because in the long-run money will be saved.”
For example, many Alabama Baptist churches choose metal multipurpose buildings for their cost effectiveness when adding additional space, according to Swafford. But if these buildings are constructed with minimal or low-grade insulation, the additional money in utility expense may exceed the savings in a relatively short period of time.
“The amount of money saved in the beginning needs to be weighed against the additional utility bills that will be paid through the life of the building,” he said.
“It may be more cost efficient to spend additional money on insulation so you will have long-term savings on utilities.”
Share with others: