Before I make more general observations, two passages strike me. The first:
The Los Feliz Neighborhood Council (LFNC) found itself suddenly denied access [to the now-vacant bank building with its community room] for its regular monthly meeting November 17th when their keys—which they had used to gain entry a few hours earlier that day—no longer worked.This can only be characterized as erratic and somewhat bizarre conduct on the squatters' part. What on earth changed to make it necessary to lock them out with no notice? I can only guess that, with their hold on the property slipping away, they feel the need to assert whatever arbitrary authority is left to them.The Los Feliz Improvement Assoc. also found itself locked out of a meeting November 19th.
The second passage:
Bush, meanwhile, has indicated the church’s finances are in such dire straits, she, as the church’s most senior laity leader, can no longer countenance providing the 2nd floor community space for free and will lease it out, saying they have currently amassed about $2 million in legal fees defending their ousting of Kelley.So does Mrs Bush now want money to let the neighborhood groups back in the building, or what? We don't know. But the $2 million figure is a puzzle. Earlier this month, I estimated that income to the parish from all sources during the time the Bush group had possession of the bank accounts could not have been more than $800,000. Beyond that, they had to meet ordinary expenses, making money available for legal fees from regular income considerably less. We have fairly reliable information that the Bush group obtained $575,000 financing in November 2014.
This leaves somewhere in the order of $1 million, at least based on Mrs Bush's statement, that had to have come from someplace else. One explanation, which I can't rule out, is that Mrs Bush is simply exaggerating the amount to inflate her own importance. But clearly there's going to need to be a forensic audit -- and this will take place no matter what, since even if the Bush group is somehow able to retain control, the corporation will soon enough wind up in bankruptcy court, where a judge will want his own set of answers.
Otherwise, I'm seeing some movement toward greater neutrality by Ms Cohen, although if the writing is any indication, the whole set of circumstances surrounding the parish is more than a little beyond her cognitive powers. She went as far as interviewing John Hepworth, although whatever explanation he gave of the Patrimony of the Primate didn't take -- she refers in her account to the Primate, not the Patrimony!
The overall foggy impression in the story, I have a feeling, comes in large part from her reliance on Mrs Bush for the bulk of the account. I'm increasingly convinced that Mrs Bush has been in well over her head. Yet once more, I urge her family to get involved, as this isn't going to end well for her.
