Dear Fellow Community Members,

Salaamun Alaykum.

Hope that you are well InshAllah.

I would like to quote our 11th Holy Imam al-Hasan al-'Askari ('a.s) so that we may ponder on these wise words:

Referendum Date

As you may have heard, the Referendum will take place between 14th and 16th March 2013 InshAllah (with voting over three days). The Referendum is certainly one of the most important decisions that our Community has ever made. Therefore, we are very pleased that the number of people eligible to participate in it has been increased as a result of the members of the Jamaat members voting to allow all members and every person in their households, who are eligible for membership (as per the current constitution), to vote in this Referendum. This also includes ladies, widows and divorcees (whose spouses were members of KSIMC of Birmingham) and their households. More information on the protocols for the Referendum can be found here.

Why did the Referendum not take place sooner?

As you will be aware, when we had the first round of presentations on 23rd September 2012, some members of the Community were quite surprised to hear the costs for ‘Go’ option. There were several members of the Community (who were also previous members of the Building Committee) who wrote to the Executive Committee and the Trustees seeking a meeting with the Building Committee in order to prove that the ‘Go’ option could “move ahead at a new site within an affordable budget of less than 10 million pounds.” Given that there was a lot of commotion regarding the costs when we presented our original proposals and the fact that the Committee is open to feedback from the Community, we agreed to meet with them and hear their views.

What did the Committee learn from meeting with these members?

We had a meeting with them in December where they presented a few different proposals relating to the ‘Go’ option. Thereafter, we also had another meeting with them at the end of January. By going through the process of meeting with them and exchanging emails, we (including the Executive Committee, Trustees and these members of the Community) all realised that when it came to comparing things like for like, there was only a £650,000 cost difference between what the Building Committee published and what these members who wrote the letter proposed.

Were the original costs overinflated?

In addition to meeting with these members, we commissioned an independent audit of the costs that were published by the Building Committee. A company called Cavendish Bloor carried out the audit at a cost £432 (including VAT). Cavendish Bloor costed the same proposal that we originally made to the Community. Their report affirmed what Abaas Bhimji had presented and went further to state that the ‘Go’ option would cost around a million pounds more than what our estimates suggested due to inflation of construction costs. If you would like to read the report in full, you can find it here.

I pray that this now puts an end to any rumours in regards to the costings being inflated. I would also like to thank my colleague, Abaas Bhimji, for all of the patience that he has exercised over the last few months whilst he has had his professional integrity questioned.

What was the end outcome of the discussions that the Committee had?

Although there was not much of a difference between the Building Committee and the members who wrote to us when comparing like for like, it would be untrue if we said that we did not have our disagreements. The disagreements centred mainly on the scope of the project. The main suggestion that the members who wrote to us made involved reducing the scale of the facilities that the Committee were planning to build in order to reduce the amount that would be spent on the project.

For example, one of the suggestions that they made was to reduce the area allocated to Imambara, Ghusl Kafan and other community facilities. Given that our approach towards the project has been evidence based and data driven, we proceeded to analyse what the impact would be. If we did reduce these facilities to the level suggested, it would have meant that the new Imambara would not have been sufficient for our future needs.

As a Committee, we are striving to deliver a project that is suitable for the needs of the Community for the next 25 years and as such, we felt that it would be unwise to reduce the scope of the facilities in such a manner.

Nevertheless, at the end of the meetings between the Building Committee, Trustees, EC and the members who wrote to us, the following was agreed:

• If the Community decides to move, the ‘Go’ option as a concept and a vision was the right one to have in the long term.
• We need all the facilities presented in our ‘Go’ option, although we may struggle to initially raise the money for the entire project.
• In order to place less of a burden on the Community, parts of the ‘Go’ option should be built a bit later once funds are available (also known as phasing).

Does this mean the Committee will be presenting a different ‘Go’ option?

The vast majority of the Community facilities in the ‘Go’ option remain unchanged. However, we are now proposing that the facilities be phased in the following manner:

1. In phase 1 – to build the Mosque, Imambara, sports hall and other community facilities (e.g. Ghusl Kafan).
2. In phase 2 – to build the education building.
3. In phase 3 – to build a multi-storey car park if required or alternatively build a commercial development including flats and car parking.

You will note from the above that we have mentioned building a multi-storey car park if required. This is because from a cost point of view as we have mentioned previously, building a multi-storey car park is not our first preference. Our first preference would be to try and find a bigger piece of land and have surface level car parking. However, due to suitable pieces of land being in short supply, we have opted for a combination between surface level car parking and a small amount of underground car parking in order to satisfy the parking needs of our community. We would like to assure you that the decision to build underground has a rationale, which we will share with you in detail. Furthermore, the combined cost of underground car parking and surface level car parking works out cheaper than building the multi-storey as originally proposed.

The Way Forward

We will present more detailed information on the phasing for the ‘Go’ option in the next few days and an information pack will be sent to each member household for families to read and discuss.

I would also like to take this opportunity to update you on an issue that was raised by the Trustees at the Referendum meeting, regarding their involvement in the Building Committee. The Terms of Reference of the Building Committee state that 2 Trustees must also be part of the Building Committee. During the first 6 months I had not invited the Trustees to the Building Committee meetings – an oversight on my part. I have since rectified this matter the Trustees have since nominated Mushtaq Ismail and Muslim Dharamshi to represent them on the Committee. I wish to once again apologise to the Trustees for this oversight, and assure you that Trustees have now attended Building Committee meetings in their official capacity.

On a final note, the Committee would like to thank all of those community members who have made constructive contributions to the process of consultation over the past few months.

We hope you find this update useful. If you have any queries, concerns or suggestions, please contact a member of the Building Committee or email This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it..

InshAllah with us all united and supporting each other we can make this visionary project for our beloved community and its future generations a success.

I would like to end this notice with a verse (Chapter 3 verse 103) of the Holy Quran to reflect on,

“And hold firmly to the rope of Allah all together and do not become divided.”

Thank you for taking the time to read this.

With Salaams and Duas,

Shaheed