Screening and Review Reports Heard by Council
Diocesan Press Service. May 2, 1973 [73120]
GREENWICH, Conn. -- The Executive Council of the Episcopal Church devoted almost five hours at its meeting here today to several matters relating to its Screening and Review Committee, which approves empowerment grants in the church's General Convention Special Program (GCSP).
After receiving a seven-page report from an ad hoc Committee to Consider Membership on the Screening and Review Committee, presented by the chairman, the Very Rev. Dillard Robinson, Newark, N.J., the Council discharged the committee "with thanks."
Mr. Philip Masquelette, Houston, Tex., who has long been seeking to improve some of the administrative structures and procedures of the Screening and Review Committee, from which he resigned his membership in February, presented a series of resolutions on suggested revisions of the Charter of the committee.
The first resolution proposed to change the composition of the Screening and Review Committee, reducing the number of community representatives from seven to four, and increasing the number of Council members from four to six, and eliminating the representatives from the Union of Black Episcopalians.
To support his resolution to reduce the total membership from 14 to 11, Mr. Masquelette cited the $125,000 grant made to the Society for Urban Preservation, Inc., Washington, D.C., which was approved by the committee in December, 1972. He charged that this grant was made to a profit-making corporation and that the GCSP staff had "made less than full and adequate disclosure of this grant and the grant organization itself to the Bishop of Washington, the Screening and Review Committee and the Executive Council. "
" I ask you to recall, has anyone ever told you before this meeting that GCSP funds have been used to benefit any profit-making corporation and its stockholders ?" he asked.
"I submit that unless the charter of the Screening and Review Committee is amended," he said, "the GCSP staff will be able to recommend grants to profit corporations and private individuals as their stockholders again and again and again and to cause such grants to be approved by the committee. "
Presiding Bishop John E. Hines, in responding to Mr. Masquelette's resolution, introduced Mr. Robert Potter, New York City attorney, to the Council, saying, "Mr. Masquelette advised me concerning this after the February meeting and I felt that it was a matter I ought to refer to my chancellor and his legal authority."
Mr. Potter said that Mr. Masquelette's letter to the Presiding Bishop concerning the Society for Urban Preservation, Inc., contained two charges: one, that the organization was not incorporated, and two, that it was a profit-making organization.
Mr. Potter reported that he had ascertained from the president of the organization that "it was in fact incorporated," though the corporation franchise had been suspended for a short time for failure to pay franchise taxes. On March 23, 1973, Mr. Potter said, the Society was "reinstated and has full corporate capacity.'"
On the second charge, that the Society is a profit-making corporation, Mr. Potter said he had consulted with Council member Houston Wilson, Georgetown, Dela., who has served as a member of the Screening and Review Committee. Mr. Wilson, he said, had indicated "that there was nothing that he knew in policy statements or otherwise that required any grant to be to a non-profit organization. "
Legally, Mr. Potter said, the organization is a profit-making corporation, for "under federal tax laws it would be considered a taxable entity. However, that is from a lawyer's point of view."
"But," he said, "that is not necessarily what a layman considers it to be." He added that he had found that what was meant by the organization not being a profit-making corporation was that " if there are profits, they are reinvested in more housing."
Dr. Charles Willie, Syracuse, N.Y., speaking against the resolution, said, "I see no reason to change the composition of the committee. Even if we had all Council members on the Screening and Review Committee, it could still make mistakes." When put to a vote, the resolution lost by the vote of 21-12.
Mr. Masquelette's second resolution, to amend the charter to require certain biographical information for each person nominated to the Council for membership on the committee, was defeated by the same vote, 21-12.
The Council adopted a third resolution to amend the charter to set a quorum of eight or more of the 14 members for conducting the business of the committee, and to prohibit votes by mail, telegram or telephone. The vote was 19-15.
By a voice vote the Council adopted a resolution which requested a statement of criteria and procedures for grants to coalitions, to be submitted to the Council at its September 27 meeting in Louisville, Ky.
By a vote of 19-15, the Council voted to table Mr. Masquelette's resolution which would have required specific financial disclosures with each grant proposal.
The Council rejected, 24-7, a resolution which would require the Screening and Review Committee to submit "a policy statement setting forth priorities in funding to be distributed to prospective GCSP grant organizations, and an indication of types of activity to which GCSP grants will not ordinarily be made. "
The Council voted to direct the Screening and Review Committee to report in September on the matter of a policy with regard to funding profit-making and not-for- profit organizations.
For the first time since the grant procedures of the General Convention Special Program was amended by General Convention in 1970, three grants approved by the Screening and Review Committee but opposed by the bishops in the respective dioceses were referred to the Executive Council for action. Before the 1970 amendment, all grants, upon recommendation of the Screening and Review Committee, had to be approved by the Council, but since that time only grants that are opposed by a diocese need Council action.
The Council, by a vote of 20-11, requested the Presiding Bishop to appoint a committee of Council members to investigate the facts of a disputed grant to the Centro Joaquin Mueieta de Aztlan, Inc., of Los Angeles, Calif.
The Centro Joaquin de Aztlan, Inc., in operation for three years as a Talent Search Program under H.E.W., is a school for Chicano students who might not be able to attend a traditional university. The Centro provides opportunity for Chicano students to take preparatory courses for entrance into traditional schools or to acquire skills that are marketable in the job industry.
The Screening and Review Committee reported that it had approved funding the Centro in the amount of $47,250, but Bishop Francis Eric Bloy of Los Angeles opposed the funding of the project. According to the Rev. Canon Nicholas Kouletsis, in a letter on behalf of Bishop Bloy, the diocese opposed funding the Centro "because of the people involved proposing it" and because it would "now be a duplication of what is happening at the State universities and colleges in the State of California."
Bishop Bloy and Canon Kouletsis declined the invitation of the committee to be present at a hearing in New York City on April 30. Without complete information from the Diocese of Los Angeles, the Council felt that further investigation was needed.
The Presiding Bishop indicated that he intends to make an emergency grant to the project "to keep it alive, " pending the investigative work of the committee and the action of the Council in September.
The Council declined to override the vetoes of the bishops of two dioceses which opposed funding of projects in their dioceses as recommended by the Screening and Review Committee.
The Black Youth Forum, Durham, N.C., recommended for funding in the amount of $29,326, was opposed by the Diocese of North Carolina and thus referred to the Council for disposition.
The Black Youth Forum was described as an independent youth organization which addresses itself to the problems facing black youths. Begun in the summer of 1970, the organization is made up of high school and college age youth, mostly from low-income families. The Forum members have participated in a training program at a local radio station to acquire skills in radio production, management and broadcasting.
Suffragan Bishop W. Moultrie Moore, Jr., the acting ecclesiastical authority for Bishop Thomas Fraser, Jr., who has been ill, in a telegram to the committee, indicated that the diocese opposed the grant because the Forum has no clearly defined objectives, there seems to be no accountability to representative members of the black community, it is not identified with the progressive leadership in any of its objectives, the funding requested seemed unreasonable for 30 to 35 youths, and the leadership of the Forum changes frequently.
Bishop Gray Temple of South Carolina called attention to the funding a few years ago of Malcolm X University in Durham which, he said, seriously affected the relationship between the national church and the three dioceses in North Carolina and to some extent the two dioceses in South Carolina.
"I am convinced," he said, "in my own mind beyond the shadow of a doubt, if this Executive Council funds this organization over the veto of the Bishop of North Carolina, any relationship between these dioceses and the national church in the foreseeable future will come to an end. "
Kwame McDonald, a non-Council member of the Screening and Review Committee, in responding to Bishop Temple, said, " I don't know how to deal with the fact that we are still worried about Malcolm X (University), because Malcolm X (University) caused some political problems in North Carolina. Now all black programs have suffered since then. I just wonder why this keeps cropping up. I just don't think we are looking at this objectively."
The motion to concur with the Screening and Review Committee's recommendation to fund the project over the bishop's veto lost 19-7.
The third recommended project for funding by the Screening and Review Committee over the opposition of a diocese was the Minority Services, Inc., Archer, Fla., which plans to operate a bookstore in Gainesville, Fla., specializing in literature of the black culture. The committee recommended funding the project in the amount of $23,750.
Bishop Hamilton West of the Diocese of Florida had indicated that the diocese does not approve the funding of this project because it does not seem to be a safe investment of church money. Bishop West said of the black youth who would operate the store, that he had "nothing against them or their actions," but he opposed the grant "because of their inexperience, their lack of competent guidance, and the fact that literature of the black culture has more than adequate distribution points throughout the city and that this enterprise would not seem to make any significant contribution to the City of Gainesville."
In the debate, the Rev. Robert Parks, rector of Trinity Parish, New York City, and former dean of St. John's Cathedral, Jacksonville, Fla., spoke in favor of the resolution to sustain the recommendation of the Screening and Review Committee.
"I think the bishop (West) is absolutely correct, that they were passing a judgment on economic grounds," he said. But, he said, "I could make a case other than economics that would make this, I think, a very justifiable proposition."
"The basic issue here," he said, "is really not economics. This is a vehicle for education and experience for a group of young people we think ought to have " the grant.
Bishop Wilburn Campbell of West Virginia said he felt the issue was whether the Executive Council should "decide that we know more about how to operate church funds than the diocese of Florida" within its own diocese.
"The central heart of the issue is," continued Bishop Campbell, "shall we as Executive Council respect the integrity and autonomy of a diocese?"
The Very Rev. Dillard Robinson, Newark, N.J., said that the debate seemed to indicate that members of the Council regard the issue in terms of whether or not to override a bishop's veto. "I don't think we are being honest," he said. "We have no intentions whatsoever from what I gather at this time of ever overriding a bishop's veto."
The vote to sustain the recommendation of the committee that the project be funded over the opposition of the diocese was 20 yes and 11 no. Since the guidelines for making grants require a majority vote of the 41 Council members to override a bishop's veto, the motion was not sustained by one vote.
The Screening and Review Committee reported that it has made the following grants in the past two months: National Indian Youth Council, Albuquerque, N. Mex., $16,200; Lynn Eusan Institute, Houston, Tex., $30,000; Hilton Head Fishing Cooperative, Inc., Hilton Head, S.C., $28,914; the United Construction Workers Association, Seattle, Wash., $30,000; Black Panther Party (ambulance service), Winston-Salem, N.C., $35,700. Emergency grants were made to the Grass Roots Economic Development Corporation, Blacksburg, Va., $10,000, and to The Three Pyramids, Inc., Duxbury, Mass., $2,000.
The Council elected the following Screening and Review Committee to serve until the annual meeting, February, 1974: Community Representatives: Iris Zavala, San Juan, Puerto Rico; Quince Duncan, San Jose, Costa Rica; Howard Spencer, Jackson, Miss.; Kwame McDonald, Durham, N.C.; Byron Rushing, Boston, Mass.; Ms. Della Warrior, Albuquerque, N. Mex.; and Paul Schultze, Oakland, Calif.; from Union of Black Episcopalians: the Rev. Jesse Anderson, Jr., Washington, D.C. and the Ven. Irving H. Mayson, Detroit, Mich.; Council members: George Guernsey, St. Louis, Mo.; Mrs. Seaton Bailey, Griffin, Ga.; the Rev. Canon R. Stewart Wood, Jr., Indianapolis, Ind., and the Very Rev. Dillard Robinson, Newark, N.J.