Monday, November 17, 2014

Good News, Potentially, For The Elected Vestry And Fr Kelley

On November 12, the California Supreme Court declined to review the appeal of the Appeals Court's decision by the dissidents and the ACA. This sends what is essentially an eviction action back to the trial court, based on the question of who actually owns the property. Following the parish bylaws and California corporation law, there is a strong case that the elected vestry owns the property, and the dissident group, along with "Bishop" Williams, must vacate it.

The cardinal virtues include justice and fortitude. I have got to say that the elected vestry and Fr Kelley have been good examples of pursuing justice and displaying fortitude in this matter. My own view is that the dissidents at this point need to recognize that they have very little chance of prevailing, and continued litigation will simply deplete parish resources. Although a strategy of delay may have seemed appropriate, the fact is that the parish dissidents are all in their 70s and 80s, while the elected vestry and Fr Kelley are at least a decade younger. An actuarial strategy will not succeed in the long term, and frankly, Bush, Omeirs, et al need to be looking to other things now.

The best solution at this point should be a negotiated settlement. The outlines of what would probably succeed are fairly clear: the dissidents and "Bishop" Williams vacate the property and end any claim to ownership and control. The dissidents pay all monies owed to Fr Kelley for salary and benefits to date. In return, the elected vestry does not pursue the ACA and the dissidents personally for expenses and damages. I hope something along this line can be worked out.

I do note that a report from the joint national synod of the ACA and APA says that the groups are continuing to pursue merger. Frankly, if I were clergy or vestry in any APA parish, I would be very wary of giving the ACA bishops any opportunity to seize any APA parish in the way they tried to seize St Mary's. If I were Bishop Grundorf, I would make a settlement of the St Mary's case, based on the ACA withdrawing any claim to the parish, a precondition to any further talks over merger. (I would guess, though, that any merger would also need to wait for the passing of Louis Falk, the initial cause of the split, in any case.)

But the parish dissidents, as well as the ACA bishops, are neither competent nor rational.