Further on the ACA DOW, it is reported that the Episcopal Visitor, the "Rt Rev" Owen Rhys Williams, who had been living in an apartment around the corner from St Mary's, has not been seen since mid-July, nor his car nor his wife. He has presumably departed the area, though no one knows his current location. However, he had been irrelevant to the workings of the diocese ever since his designation, with the real power resting with Frederick Rivers and the tiny Fountain Valley clique. I can't imagine there will be many confirmations that will require his presence in the future, if any at all.
I was invited to a discussion in the courthouse cafeteria following the hearing, involving a dozen or so counsel, clergy, staff/volunteers, vestry, and other interested parties. I don't believe anything that was discussed was confidential, so I will provide an overall summary of what was said, leaving out a few specifics of legal strategy.
Mr Lengyel-Leahu stressed that it is in the parish's interest to get the litigation behind it, and it's also in the parish's interest to get the commercial space rented. The obstacle to renting the space is the clouded title stemming from the appeal of Judge Strobel's decision. It appears that an interim step will be to obtain a title insurance policy on the property, but even this is uncertain. He urged the parish to pursue smaller or shorter-term potential tenants who could make use of the space even with the longer-term legal issues unresolved.
Short of that, the parish doesn't currently have the income to meet even a bare-bones budget (roughly $150,000 a year was mentioned, which seems reasonable to me). Mr Lengyel-Leahu put it in terms of "you could lose everything."
The outcome of the hearing doesn't really change anything legally, which is also what Judge Murphy said yesterday. Although Mr Lancaster told Judge Murphy on January 8 that the appeal of Judge Strobel's decision had been "expedited", there have been repeated delays in getting parts of the trial record to the appeals court. Yesterday Judge Murphy pointed out that in fact there had been no request for expediting the appeal (i.e., Mr Lancaster lied to him), and he said it could easily be a year and a half before the case is argued.
While it's in the interest of the parish to get the litigation resolved, it seems fairly plain that it's in the interest of the ACA and the Bush group to drag things out. I suggested to Mr Lengyel-Leahu, in fact, that Mr Lancaster's strategy was to drag things out until everyone was dead -- he laughed, but I'm not sure he really disagreed. However, Mrs Bush was born in 1930. It's a puzzle to me that she would want to be preoccupied with litigation at this stage of her life -- not to mention that the editor of the local paper thinks she's destroyed her previously high reputation in the community. By the same token, the St Mary of the Angels situation has probably assured that no new parish will ever come into the ACA DOW as actuarial realities quickly catch up with it. I have the impression that Brian Marsh is pretending this isn't happening.
Mr Lengyel-Leahu suggested that an equitable solution to the litigation would be for Mrs Bush and the ACA to drop their claims on the property, their appeal, and their suit against Fr Kelley in return for the vestry dropping potential damage claims and civil fraud charges against Mrs Bush and the ACA. The vestry and Fr Kelley have always favored this approach, but it has never been accepted on the other side. Mr Lengyel-Leahu thinks that Mr Lancaster would probably insist on things his clients weren't entitled to in any negotiation, so prospects at this point seem remote.
