OCA scandal

Feel free to tell our little section of the Internet why you're right. Forum rules apply.


User avatar
尼古拉前执事
Archon
Posts: 5126
Joined: Thu 24 October 2002 7:01 pm
Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Non-Phylitist
Location: United States of America
Contact:

"No Receipts Found" With Two Exceptions

Post by 尼古拉前执事 »

5.26.06 Latest News
http://ocanews.org/news/NoReceipts52606.html
+Tikhon Reveals Audit Result:
"No Receipts Found" With Two Exceptions: A $250,000 Promissory Note And
A $5,600 Reimbursement for a Vegas Trip

In a series of middle-of-the-night postings early Wednesday, May 24, and again late Thursday evening May 25, Bishop Tikhon has revealed details of the Spring Session of the OCA's Synod of Bishops whose (public) minutes are now posted on the OCA website.

+Tikhon's report is shocking, even in the context of the OCA scandal, for they include the first look at the 2004 audit which has yet to be released, and revelations of a previously undisclosed promissory note to Fr. Robert Kondratick for $250,000 signed by former Metropolitan Theodosius and prominent former and current members of the Administrative Committee of the OCA's Metropolitan Council.

What may be even more surprising is not what Bishop Tikhon reveals, but what the Minutes and Bishop Tikhon both fail to mention: the 2005 audit and the Proskauer Rose investigation.

At the beginning of Lent the Metropolitan himself suggested that the Spring Session would see both the 2004 and 2005 audits, as well as the report on the Proskauer Rose investigation. OCANews has confirmed that was not the case. The Synod was not made privy to anything concerning Proskauer Rose's investigation, neither the status of the investigation, the costs, nor even who will get the report. From other sources who wish to remain anonymous, OCANews can confirm that the investigation remains on-going.

Why only the 2004 audit was presented to the Synod, and not the 2005 audit remains a mystery

+Tikhon On The Audit

In a posting to the OrthodoxChristianity forum, +Tikhon wrote:

"Christ is risen! Indeed, He is risen!

There is no evidence that anyone has cheated anyone out of anything. If receipts cannot be found for the money given to intended recipients of charitable donations, that is a problem called 'no receipts were found.' It does not prove or suggest or indicate that money did not (reach?) recipients. .....

No evidence of wrong-doing has been presented to the Orthodox Church in America to date by the independent outside auditors, according to the independent outside auditor from that independent outside auditing firm who reported to the Holy Synod in person. I asked him outright, and rephrased the question various ways and he agreed that what I am saying to you right now is the truth. I even told the Secretary of the Holy Synod to record my question and the answer to it in the official minutes of our Holy Synod meeting.

Today, the Secretary of the Holy Synod read the minutes of the Holy Synod so far recorded by him for out [SIC] approval and comments. I noticed that he seemed to have left out the statement that I requested be placed in the official meeting. [SIC--should be "minutes"]

He then began to shuffle through his notes and said that he couldn't find the paper on which he had written that down. I asked to whom he had given his written notes, and he answered that he had given them to Father Paul Kucynda. He left the meeting to try and go find the page and it could not be located. So he asked me to repeat my question to which the auditor gave his 'Yes ,that is correct' answer and that the Secretary of the Holy Synod copied it down *again and read it back.

Then we continued with the last few minutes of the Spring Session of the Holy Synod, sang 'Shine, Shine' and the meeting was adjourned. Four Bishops could not stay and left immediately for airports without lunch".

+Tikhon on the Promissory Note

The Bishop continued:

"After a couple of highly placed persons in the Central Administration had said that they had never seen any promissory note whereby the Administrative Committee had promised to reimburse the former Chancellor annually, beginning in 2002, for $250,000 dollars of work on the church-owned residence in Syosset, work done at the direction of the Metropolitan Council and for which all receipts and invoices were on file in the
Administrative offices, that is, after maintenance work was done at the request of the OCA for work on the OCA?s house by the Kondraticks,

and after the work was done and the OCA could not pay the Kondraticks, because Matushka had paid for it herself out of the money left to her in a family bequest, they issued a promissory note for $250,000 dollars which promised them pay back in annual installments beginning in 2002. The promissory note was signed by all members of the Administrative Committee, Metropolitan Theodosius, Father Dimitri Oselinsky, Father Paul Kucynda, Alice Woog, JUDGE Harold Kalina, and Father Paul Kucynda a second time, and the signatures were notarized . (Emphasis in original.)

The fact that no one, the Metropolitan included, could locate such a document in the Syosset files (Father Kondratick is NOT the file clerk nor was he ever the file clerk) and that the Metropolitan had, prior to our Holy Synod meeting, been quoted publicly as saying that he?d never seen any promissory note, and since he repeated that more than once out loud, directly to me at this meeting, and since I said that I would be happy to give him a copy, the Secretary of the Holy Synod asked me to give him a copy. And I gave him my copy (It?s not the only copy or I would never have surrendered it in these days) he took it and recorded it in his minutes, OUR minutes."

+Tikhon Covers His Back

The Bishop continues:

"This message contains nothing that will not appear in those minutes that we approved before I and Bishop Nikolai, and Bishop Alejo, and Archbishop Kirill left the Chancery, after the last session to catch our flights. The only reason I am giving a preview of what will be on the public record, is that we all agreed with Archbishop Kirill's considered and stated opinion that it is sessions and proceedings of the Holy Synod which are confidential, as they take place, but that the minutes are not confidential.

So when I said to the Auditor, 'Would you say that it is true to state that your report will not show any evidence of criminal wrong-doing,' and he answered (more than once) to that question put to him more than once): 'Yes, it is true,' and since this was twice recorded by the Secretary of the Holy Synod in our presence (and the first time the statement disappeared during the time that Father Paul Kucynda had the minutes and since we agreed that the second copy would NOT be given to him).. (This will keep untoward suspicions away, since he is so obviously an interested party and should not appear to be guilty of anything.. It is hard to know whom to blame when files are missing consistently, and even right up to the present day and moment. As I say, the Chancellor of the OCA is historically not a file clerk, although he is charged to make sure that files are in order for the person who ultimately and finally has responsibility for them. I find it hard to consider it at all rational for anyone to blame a manager for missing files (and compound the blame by allowing so many people to opine that missing files were stolen by that manager) when a document of great value to that same manager is just another of those missing files!

I am not, of course (what an idea!) contradicting anything that was said by anyone at our Holy Synod meeting; in fact, I am faithfully reporting EXACTLY what was said, being 'in one mind' with all, so to speak!"

+Tikhon concluded his posting with a long plea that "attacks" on the Metropolitan and Fr. Kondratick now "cease".

Undisclosed Debt, Undisclosed Mortgages,

And An Embrassing Trip to Vegas

The Bishop's revelations do not reveal quite the whole story, according to informed sources; nor do the minutes published on the OCA website.

First, the promissory note:

It is the Metropolitan Council, not the Administrative Committee which has the statuatory authority to indebt the OCA. Thus the legality of the note is in question; not to mention the motives of those who signed such a undisclosed document. Both Kalina and Woog were both appointed to the Administrative Committee by +Theodosius on the recommendation of Fr. Kondratick.

Metropolitan Theodosius, Judge Kalina and Fr. Oselinsky have all retired from the Council; but Woog and Fr. Paul Kucynda are still members and may be expected to discuss the matter at the forthcoming Metropolitan Council meeting on June 13th in Syosset.

The OCA has acknowledged that it owes Fr. Kondtratick $111,500 for repairs to his church-owned residence in Syosset as part of the explanation it gave to Metropolitan Council members in preparation for their conference call last week. That "meeting" indebted the OCA for $1.7 million to repay this, as well as other vendors, and funds diverted from various charity and appeals over the past 5 years. (Read article here). If +Tikhon's claim is correct, the amount owed Fr. Kondratick may now more than double, calling into question the adequacy of the amount of the loan.

This apparent breach of statutory authority by a small group of people in the name of the Metropolitan Council was not singular. Although it was not discussed at the Synod meeting, OCANews has learned that during the conference call with the Metropolitan Council, Metropolitan Herman confirmed that "OCA property"has been mortgaged to cover the loan, but denied it was the Syosset property itself. He declined to identify to the Council which property was indeed mortgaged. This means Metropolitan Herman, the Administrative Committee and Bishop Nikolai have all sold OCA holdings, mortgaged OCA properties or indebted the OCA without the knowledge or consent of the Metropolitan Council.

Finally, one receipt apparently did escape being misplaced. The Bishops heard from the Auditor that Fr. Kondratick's son, Robert Jr., received $5,600 in church funds as reimbursement for a trip to Las Vegas.

-Mark Stokoe

User avatar
尼古拉前执事
Archon
Posts: 5126
Joined: Thu 24 October 2002 7:01 pm
Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Non-Phylitist
Location: United States of America
Contact:

11.15.06 More Trouble From Alaska

Post by 尼古拉前执事 »

11.15.06
More Trouble From Alaska
http://www.OCANews.org/news/AlaskaTrouble111506.html

First he confiscated stewardship of church lands from the OCA’s Alaskan Land Commission and refused to relinquish it. Now Dr. Lydia Black, professor emerita from the University of Alaska-Fairbanks and one of the most respected ethnographers of Alaska, accuses Bishop Nikolai of having seized her personal archives and refusing to return them. Such high-handedness by the Bishop of Alaska is not just the misfortune of those who live in his diocese, but actions which are causing serious trouble for the whole OCA.

As reported by OCANews.org last April, the unannounced sales of Alaskan Church properties resulted in hundreds of thousands of dollars flowing into OCA coffers between 1972-2001. (Read that story here: http://www.ocanews.org/news/NikolaiAlas ... 51706.html ) A months-long investigation by volunteers at OCANews.org has now uncovered documentation showing that since +Nikolai became the Bishop of Alaska, he has been quietly mortgaging Church properties throughout Alaska, mortgages that may result in hundreds of thousands of debt for the OCA.

The mounting mortgages in Alaska are one heretofore undisclosed reason why the 2004-2005 audits of the national Church accounts failed; and why no further audits can be fully completed. Until ownership of those lands, and now the debt on them, is resolved, the OCA cannot place its own financial affairs in order.

Dr. Black's "Sad Tale"

Dr. Lydia Black latest book "Russians in Alaska: 1732-1867" ( University of Alaska Press 2004) was reviewed as “one of the definitive works on the topic.” In addition to the Order of St. Herman, Dr. Black was awarded The Order of Friendship by the Russian Federation in 2000 for her scholarly commitment to Russian Alaska. Thus her charges against the Bishop are those of serious scholar. In an open letter posted on the Orthodox-Forum this week, Dr. Black writes:

“ In 2001, during the St. Herman’s pilgrimage, I was 76 years old and diagnosed with congestive heart failure. I had come to St. Herman’s Theological Seminary upon my retirement from University of Alaska-Fairbanks in 1998.

My tenure at St. Herman’s had arisen because, several years earlier, Fr. Michael Oleksa approached me, asking if I knew of a willing graduate student who, for a pittance, would sort out the Seminary’s archive which was stored in trash bags (following a flood here) in the basement. I told him that I was due to retire soon, and I would be more than happy to put my extensive expertise on Russian America to good use by serving the Church by sorting through what were presumably valuable - on historical, cultural and religious levels - documents, books and miscellaneous items.

So, in 1998, with Bishop Innocent’s approval, I was “hired” by the Seminary - my compensation was free housing. Keep in mind that as a retired professor, I have a pension, and I had a wise husband who, upon his death, left me several investments.

Among the many things which I undertook, I completed an inventory of all the materials which included possessions of St. Herman and Father Gerasim, unique native language liturgies, rare foreign language books, etc.

In conjunction with both state and federal granting agencies, I obtained funding for the Seminary to have items such as The Life of St. Nilus which was ostensibly given to St. Herman by his spiritual advisor restored and to procure appropriate archival and museum storage units and environmental controls. (The current whereabouts of The Life of St. Nilus are unclear - Mina Jacobs, the “Diocesan archivist” running +Nikolai’s Anchorage museum, claimed to have no knowledge of it when I asked about it.)

Along comes +Nikolai and the 2001 St. Herman’s pilgrimage. I went to the airport to meet the Bishop’s plane (he had made a previous visit before his consecration as Bishop of Alaska during which I was his guide on Spruce Island). I was wearing my Holy Cross of St. Herman which was awarded to me by Bishop Innocent (in 1999).

Bishop Nikolai arrived, I presented myself, and he commented (he seemed annoyed) to Fr. Kondratick, who was accompanying him, that there were no St. Herman’s medals in Anchorage....

On the day of my expulsion from the Seminary, I woke up at 5:00 a.m. and began helping the Seminary staff and students make accommodation for the many pilgrims. This included sharing my room with a pilgrim from the North Slope and his child. I worked in this capacity throughout the day, and at about 7:00 p.m., a visiting priest asked me to find sheets and make a bed for a guest (as I recall, possibly Fr. Kondratick, but my daughter does not recall this). I begged off, pleading tiredness, and retired to my room.

At approximately 10:00 p.m., someone pounded on the door - it was +Nikolai, and when I opened the door, +Nikolai proceeded to enter while yelling at me. He made a variety of statements, including “How dare you?” in reference to my begging off from making a bed, something about my living “off the charity of the Church” and then told me that I had until 8:00 a.m. the next morning to remove myself from Seminary premises.

In other words, he evicted me with approximately 10 hours’ notice, and the bulk of those hours constitute the middle of the night. Needless to say, I left many belongings behind, including all of my materials on professional commitments such as the Bicentennial of St. Innocent (1996 - two years before I retired from the University) documents which were exclusively mine but given the short notice I had and the size of the quarters which were available on less-than-24-hours’ notice, I could not take with me. As it was, I spent approximately $2,000 to pay professional movers to remove what I had time to remove and a considerable sum to house my two cats at the veterinarian’s office.

I was lucky to find a small apartment into which I could move on Saturday. I spent Friday at a friend’s house.

I recently had a request from Russia which required my St. Innocent’s papers to answer quickly, and when I requested their return, I was told that they belonged to the archive and that I needed Bishop Nikolai’s permission to obtain them. I have asked a lawyer to make this request, but so far, there has been no response (literally).“

More Charges

Critics of Dr. Black suggest that “she was running a private museum”. Dr. Black denies such criticisms.

She writes:

“Since I have many reputable friends and colleagues who can attest to my professionalism and with my record of furnishing my expertise to a variety of people and institutions, particularly those of Native Alaskan origin, for free, this accusation is laughable and is not in need of response.“

Dr. Black concludes her letter with additional charges against Bishop Nikolai: most notably that other items not taken to his new museum in Anchorage from the existing church museum in Kodiak were simply disposed of. Sources in Kodiak have confirmed to OCA News.org that ”Many of these items are historical items, and (local) people are upset, and concerned that remaining heirlooms don’t get 'decommissioned' or trashed. There are banners, grammotas, etc.”

Dr. Black’s charges have been substantiated by the former parish priest in Kodiak, Fr. Gerasim Vurik. Writing of the situation in Kodiak on the Orthodox- Forum this week as well, the now-retired Fr. Vurik states:

“....documents,artifacts, and historical records have been discarded, removed, and transferred elsewhere. Much has simply disappeared.

Dr Lydia speaks to these things. I can verify her work at Kodiak and the thoroughness of her cataloging as well as her conservation efforts. Under her guidance the museum was open to the public 5 days a week year around. Dr Lydia was very often in contact with other scholars working on Alaska history projects providing and receiving document copies to enhance the collection. She also placed her own private collection on loan to the Archives and Museum, items which have not been returned to her as requested.

The godson of Archmandrite Gerasim (Schmaltz) also placed items and documents on loan and despite requests to have them returned, has been ignored.”

Fr. Gerasim (Schmaltz) was the long-time guardian of the relics of St. Herman.

Mortgaging the Past

Such accusations come at a critical time for Bishop Nikolai, in that his repudiation of the OCA’s Alaskan Lands Commission has contributed to the failure of the OCA’s recent audits. Since stewardship of the almost 900 acres of land, including leases, is now in debate - the issue being whether the national church or the Bishop of Alaska alone controls the land - the external OCA Auditors were at a loss as to whether these lands were real assets; or whether any mortgages on those lands should be counted as diocesan or OCA debts.

And mortgages there are.

Recent searches of property transactions recorded by the Alaska Department of Natural Resources by dedicated OCA volunteers have revealed a web of land deals (including sales and mortgages) stretching back to 1972. (Land transactions before 1972 are not available on the internet. The Alaska Land Record files can be accessed at: http://www.dnr.state.ak.us/ssd/recoff/search.cfm.)

Any attempt to make sense of these existing public records is made difficult in that, at last count, there were 88 listed names under which Orthodox Church lands in Alaska may be recorded. A partial list includes:

Orthodox Church in America
Orthodox Church in America Alaska Diocese
Orthodox Church in America Alaska Diocese of The
Orthodox Church in America Diocese of Alaska
Orthodox Church in America Diocese of Sitka and Alaska
Orthodox Church in America Dioceses of Anchorage Orthodox Church in America Inc The
Orthodox Church in America Inc Bishop of the Diocese of Sitka
Orthodox Church in America Inc Diocese of Alaska
Orthodox Church in America Inc Diocese of Sitka and Alaska

Orthodox Church in America Inc Diocese of Sitka and Alaska The
Orthodox Church in America Inc The
Orthodox Church in America Inc The Diocese of Sitka and Alaska
Orthodox Church in America Sitka and Alaska Diocese of The
Orthodox Church in America The
Orthodox Church in America The Diocese of Sitka and Alaska
Orthodox Church in American Inc Diocese of Alaska
Orthodox Church in American Inc Diocese of Sitka and Alaska
Orthodox Church of America
Orthodox Church of America Alaska Diocese of The
Orthodox Church of America Inc
Orthodox Church of America Inc Diocese of Sitka Alaska
Orthodox Church of America Inc The
Orthodox Church of America The Trustee
Orthodox Church of Sitka and Alaska
Orthodox Diocese of Alaska
Orthodox Diocese of Alaska Chancery
Orthodox Diocese of Sitka Alaska Orthodox Church in America
Orthodox Diocese of Sitka and Alaska
Orthodox Diocese of Sitka and Alaska Orthodox Church
Orthodox Church in America Inc Diocese of Sitka and AK
Archbishop of the Russian Greek Eastern Catholic Orthodox
Archbishop of the Russian Greek Eastern Orthodox Church
Archbishop of Russian Greek Eastern Catholic Orthodox Church
Russian Greek Catholic Church of North America
Russian Greek Church
Russian Greek Church Mission Reserve
Russian Greek Eastern Catholic Orthodox Church
Russian Greek Mission Church
Russian Greek Mission Reserve
Russian Greek Orthodox Church
Russian Orthodox Greek Catholic Church of America Diocese AK
Russian Orthodox Catholic
Russian Orthodox Catholic Church of North America
Russian Orthodox CH TRE
Russian Orthodox Church
Russian Orthodox Church at Russian Mission
Russian Orthodox Church in America
Russian Orthodox Church in the Alaska Diocese The
Russian Orthodox Church of America
Russian Orthodox Church of America The
Russian Orthodox Church of Bethel
Russian Orthodox Church of North America
Russian Orthodox Church of North America The
Russian Orthodox Church The Alaska Diocese
Russian Orthodox Church The Alaska Diocese of
Russian Orthodox Diocese of Alaska
Russian Orthodox Diocese of Alaska OCA ST
Russian Orthodox Diocese of Sitka
Russian Orthodox Diocese of Sitka and Alaska
Russian Orthodox Diocise of Sitka and Alaska
Russian Orthodox Greek Cath
Russian Orthodox Greek Cathi
Russian Orthodox Greek Catholic Church
Russian Orthodox Greek Catholic Church North America
Russian Orthodox Greek Catholic Church of America
Russian Orthodox Greek Catholic Church of North America
Russian Orthodox Greek Church of America Diocese of Alaska
Russian Orthodox Greek Church of North America
Russian Orthodox Greek Catholic Church of North America
Sitka and Alaska Orthodox Church in America Inc
Sitka and Alaska Orthodox Church in America The Diocese of
Sitka and Alaska Orthodox Church of America Inc Diocese of
Alaska Diocese of Russian Orthodox
Alaska Diocese of the Orthodox Church in America

Recent Sales

After searching all these records, the recent history of the OCA Church lands in Alaska becomes clearer.

During the time of Bishop Innocent’s tenure (1995-2001) nine Alaskan Church properties were sold including two in Bethel, one in Bristol Bay, two in Kodiak, one in Kvichak, one in Sitka and one in Valdez. During this time there were four purchases or transfers of property to the Diocese/OCA – including three in Anchorage and one in Valdez. There were no recorded mortgages during this period. As an Auxiliary Bishop, the late Bishop Innocent (Gula) had no authority to buy, sell, lease, or mortgage Church property. Thus, all transactions were conducted by the OCA’s Central Administration in Syosset and its appointed agent(s).

Until late in 1999 one of these agents was Protodeacon Eric Wheeler. In response to a question from OCANews.org about his role, Wheeler writes:

"You can add me as the agent from Syosset -- it was one of my offical positions and one of the reasons I travelled to Alaska once a quarter.... Each sale and/or transaction was approved by the diocese and Syosset throughout the Innocent reign....The four exchanges were direct correlations to the transfer of property listed above. The Valdez sale was a transfer for damaged property tainted by the Exxon disaster for a environmentally sound parcel. The times when sales would take place -- Kodiak -- we would lose the property through adverse possession if we did not sell. I believe one of the Kodiak sales was for a right of way for the town they had been using anyway for many years..."

Bishop Nikolai

In Spring 2001 Bishop Nikolai replaced the newly- sacked +Innocent. In the summer 2006 issue of the the Alaskan diocese’s publication “North Star” +Nikolai asserts:

“Throughout my life I have understood the importance of financial accountability, recognizing that many generous institutions and individuals trust us to use funds as they were intended. All seminary funds are audited by a professional accounting firm in Kodiak and a local CPA in Anchorage audits our diocesan assets so that there is no question as to where monies are spent and nothing is hidden. These audits were initiated from the very beginning of my tenure here in Alaska and will continue.”

To evidence that “nothing is hidden” +Nikolai states:

"Since my arrival three parcels of the originally deeded land have been sold.

1) USS 656 (Cordova) .25 acres of the patented 2.94 which would have been lost to adverse possession if not sold. Sales price: $38,000.
2) USS 459 (Uganuk Bay). This property is an inaccessible fishing camp which would also have been lost to adverse possession if not sold – and we would not have known about the adverse possession had the squatter not informed us. Sales Price: $20,000.
3) USS 872 (Chuathbaluk). To accommodate installation of public utilities for the village. Acre for acre exchange, no cash involved."

In fact, land records indicate seven church parcels have been sold since +Nikolai assumed control: including two in Anchorage, two in Cordova, one in Iliamna and two in Kodiak. During this same period, there were eleven properties acquired by the diocese, including four in Anchorage, one in Bristol Bay, one in Iliamna, one in Juneau, two in Kodiak and two in Valdez.

The discrepancy between the Bishop’s admitted sales, and the seven recorded may be attributed, in part, to the Bishop’s carefully chosen, and easily overlooked caveat: “of originally deeded land”. He makes no claims concerning lands not included in the Treaty of 1867....

The Mortgages

As challenging as it is to have to parse a Bishop’s statements, it is what +Nikolai does not say that is most disturbing. For in his discussion of his oversight of the Alaskan Church lands, in which “nothing is hidden”, the Bishop fails to mention any of the mortgages he has taken out on these same lands.

In this article in the North Star, Bishop Nikolai wrote:

”With the sale of our building on 24th Street, we were able to purchase the current Chancery and a ten-plex across from the Cathedral. Later, in 2003 we purchased a large property at 605 A Street in downtown Anchorage giving us visibility in a central location.”

The Bishop’s article makes it appear that the sale of the 24th Street property was enough to buy the “current Chancery and a ten-plex across from the Cathedral”. What +Nikolai did not say was that was the proceeds of the 24th Street property PLUS two large mortgages that permitted him to purchase the new, larger property.

In Alaska, mortgages are commonly handled through conveyance of “Deeds of Trust”. There have been seven recorded Deeds of Trust, including six in Anchorage and one in Sitka, during +Nikolai’s reign. These are:

1). Doc. No. 2002-024171; $184,500;

Recorded 04/12/2002
2). Doc. No. 2002-047365; $ 472,000;

Rec. 07/16/2002
3). Doc. No. 2003-087740; $ 275,000;

Rec. 08/27/2003
4). Doc. No. 2003-088130; $ 250,000;

Rec. 08/27/2003
5). Doc. No. 2004-001229; $ 252,221;

Rec. 07/08/2004
6). Doc. No. 2004-081356; $ 33,000;

Rec. 10/29/2004
7). Doc. No. 2006-001498; $ 195,000;

Rec. 01/09/2006

Three of these loans, in turn, seem to have been paid off. These are known as Deeds of Reconveyance. These are:

Item 1 is nullified by Doc. No. 2006-000214,

recorded on 01/03/2006.
Item 2 is nullified by Doc. No. 2006-000201,

recorded on 01/03/2006.
Item 6 is nullified by Doc. No. 2006-021483,

recorded on 04/05/2006.

From publicly available records it appears that Deeds of Trust Nos. 3, 4, and 5 have not been released, and thus, +Nikolai has mortgaged Alaskan Church lands to the tune of almost a million dollars. That is, $972,227 to be exact.

However, since two of the loans are over three years old and one is over two years old, some, most or all of the debt may have been paid off, but not, as yet, recorded. Without knowing the loan agreements, one cannot know for sure. What is known is that the Bishop, while carefully choosing his words for the public record to suggest full disclosure, clearly failed to mention the existence of any mortgages.

The Larger Problem

Why is +Nikolai's authoritarian attitude –– which has led to the disregard of the rights of native peoples, volunteers and scholars as well as unreported financial dealings –– of any concern to the OCA as a whole?

In his recent speech to his diocesan assembly Bishop Nikolai himself makes this clear. +Nikolai stated:

“Alaska is the place that gives dignity to The Orthodox Church in America....Alaska is our Mother Diocese. She represents the beginnings of Orthodoxy in North America for every Orthodox Christian. We have the awesome responsibility of maintaining Her integrity to be what God intended.”

Seizing archives, dispersing collections, de-facto closing of museums, ignoring native traditions, etc., is an affront to the traditions of the whole OCA. Such high-handness is but a continuation of the attitudes and perspectives that have led the OCA into our current financial scandal; and that can be said without even mentioning the obvious disconnect between +Nikolai's claims of financial transparency and his failure to mention the mortgages.

Worse, the mortgages complicate the OCA's attempts to place its own financial affairs in order. Until ownership of Alaskan Church lands is fully resolved, no full audit is possible. Sadly, the Metropolitan and Synod seem unwilling or incapable of resolving this issue. The Metropolitan Council is only now discovering its voice. Perhaps it is the voice of the whole Church, in Council, that should speak: and sooner rather than later, lest the OCA find itself deeper and deeper in debt - or with less and less Alaskan patrimony with each passing year.

-Mark Stokoe

User avatar
尼古拉前执事
Archon
Posts: 5126
Joined: Thu 24 October 2002 7:01 pm
Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Non-Phylitist
Location: United States of America
Contact:

1.9.07 Interviews Continue: ADM, Stonewalling and Governance

Post by 尼古拉前执事 »

1.9.07 Interviews Continue
ADM, Stonewalling and Governance
An Interview with Michael McKibben

Stokoe (MS): Your name has been mentioned several times in relation to this OCA financial scandal; once by Deacon Eric Wheeler (see Wheeler's "Call to Accountability here) and again in the original grant proposal to Dwayne Andreas to fund St. Catherine's in Moscow (Read that article here).

McKibben (MTM): I first became aware of Deacon Eric's comments last year from Ben Williams who forwarded me a newsgroup posting. Ben and I co-authored Oriented Leadership for the OCA's stewardship and leadership development programs in the mid-90's. I remember the stonewalling that Deacon Eric now admits.

MS: Can you describe the circumstances surrounding the original ADM proposal?

MTM: The Soviet Union was collapsing. The Moscow Patriarchate had just donated the St. Catherine's property to the OCA. The Patriarchate and the OCA found a sympathetic supporter in Mr. Dwayne Andreas of ADM. Syosset was hopeful of being able to foster connections between Mr. Andreas and the Patriarchate, as well as get Mr. Andreas' assistance in renovating St. Catherine's into a parish complex and conference center.

MS: How did you personally get involved in this effort?

MTM: Fr. Bob Kondratick asked me to assist. I am a civil engineer by formal education with a working knowledge of property redevelopment. My late father was an accomplished civil engineer. My brother is a builder. I have experience raising funds for charities and was running a software development company at the time. In addition, Ben Williams and I were already presenting the stewardship and leadership development programs around the country for the OCA. This convergence of skills and experience made me a natural choice to work on it, I guess.

MS: Who wrote the original ADM grant request? Did you?

MTM: I drafted it. Someone at Syosset edited it; I believe that was Paul Hunchak. Paul seemed to have been editing most material coming out of Syosset then.

MS: Did you know that it had been approved, and that the money had been given?

MTM: I knew only that the initial $250,000 had been donated. Like everyone else, I only recently learned that the proposal had become so lucrative, totaling millions.

MS: At last count, $4,575.000, none of which has been accounted for. But let's go back to the beginning. What was the atmosphere in Syosset at this time? Excited? Business as usual?

MTM: As I recall, Fr. Kondratick and Fr. Kucynda were very excited about the opportunity. Mr. Andreas was already a benefactor to the Patriarchate and seemed ready to support OCA efforts that were in one way or another connected to the Moscow Patriarchate. I do remember that the proposal needed a direct tie to the Patriarchate to be of interest to Mr. Andreas.

MS: Did you have any idea that Mr. Andreas' donations would eventually total millions?

MTM: Well, I knew it was a worthy cause on paper. The property was in terrible shape from decades of abuse, so I knew that such a major re-development would eventually need that amount and more. Following that first donation, I accepted an invitation to travel to Moscow with Fr. Kondratick, Fr. Kucynda and others to survey St. Catherine's, to meet with the Patriarch Alexi and his officials, and plan the first steps of the grant proposal implementation. I even arranged meetings with well-known professors at Moscow State University and the Russian Academy of Sciences to discuss getting their assistance in setting up the initial technology infrastructure for St. Catherine's. Such technologies were scarce in Russia at the time, but those professors were able to get the technologies needed.

MS: But none of this was done, was it?

MTM: None of what we discussed happened. While I was initially designated a point man on the project, there seemed to be no interest from Syosset in getting the project moving. Once we returned from the Moscow trip, nothing happened, at least as far as I was concerned. Questions about next steps were fielded and then answers avoided. I have no idea what they may have done outside my involvement. It would appear from Deacon Eric's account that nothing happened beyond window dressing.

MS: If the monies were not spent on the projects for which the grant was written, do you know how they were spent?

MTM: No, I don't know. I lost touch with Syosset after that. That said, if those millions were not spent as solicited and designated, as Deacon Eric and Paul Hunchak assert, that is truly serious. I remember having many conversations with the folks at Syosset about the seriousness of misappropriating designated funds in a charity. As Deacon Eric described, Fr. Paul (Kucynda) had come to me with his concern about the sloppy bookkeeping at Syosset. I didn't want that sloppiness to extend to this project since I would have my name associated with it. We would be raising funds from a high-profile donor who would expect such standards. Therefore, I proposed that the ADM use of funds be audited by a major accounting firm. That is in the proposal. I guess that never happened either.

MS: So you are the one who included the requirement for auditing by a 'Big Six' firm in the ADM proposal?

MTM: Yes. Given the circumstances, it was appropriate and should have been done. I believe we had a great opportunity to provide a real service to our brothers and sisters in Russia who were and are experiencing highly uncertain lives.

MS: I understand you left the OCA shortly after this, after being quite an active Churchman. Do you mind sharing why?

MTM: Well, I offered my services to the Church in good faith. As you can see, that good faith was breached.

MS: Meaning?

MTM: Your site provides enough of the reasons to sufficiently answer the question. There were somewhat related circumstances involving our diocese and parish that, when combined, made continuing participation unbearable.

MS: You left the OCA: did you leave the Church?

MTM: In the intervening years I was a founding member of an Antiochian Mission in Columbus, Ohio. My family has recently begun worshipping at a new OCA mission in North Columbus,. Our new parish is dedicated to All Saints of North America. Let's hope the prayers of our North American Saints will help pull the OCA through this crisis. We have also continued throughout to support Fr. Daniel Byantoro in his efforts to establish the Orthodox Church in Indonesia.

MS: Any impressions of the current scandal, given you have not been close to the OCA over much of this intervening period?

MTM: Having read through your archives, I am appalled. At first I found the stonewalling baffling, and then the motives came into focus. The wrongdoers are scrambling for cover. The most depressing aspect of this scandal is that the 'lack of trust' issues were the primary topic of attention back in 1993 when I was asked to facilitate the Administrative Summit held at St. Tikhon's. I believe we had a breakthrough at that Summit, but the subsequent Administrative Task Force died without a whimper. I encountered more hidden agendas in the Task Force participants than Carter has liver pills. I stepped away from the OCA then, when it became apparent that the leadership of the Church was only giving lip service to fixing the problems creating this lack of trust. A lack of commitment to real improvement, added to the existence of the ADM secret slush fund, resulted in a formula for shenanigans. I personally felt used as a facade by Syosset, to give the impression to the Church at large that Syosset was listening, when they were not.

MS: You are a successful businessman, author, leadership consultant. In your opinion, how do we make this right?

MTM: At the time I withdrew, in early 1994, I was rebuilding a major communications application for AT&T. By comparison, what the OCA needed administratively was not rocket science. It could have and should have been up and running within months of the 1992 Audit which enumerated the needed reforms. The fact that those recommendations are still not operational, 14 years later, is unconscionable.

It seems to me the solution is two-fold: tactical and strategic. Tactically, trust has been violated and laws likely broken. These problems need to be addressed immediately and the chips need to fall where they may. Strategically, our governance disaster has been a long time coming - since autocephaly, I believe.

We have been improperly attempting to place hierarchy and conciliarity on opposite ends of the shelf, rather than realizing that they are both attributes of the relationships among the Persons of the Holy Trinity, which can only be viewed as a whole. I believe the relationship among the Divine Persons of the Holy Trinity provide us all the guidance we need to make it right. Hierarchy and conciliarity are balancing principles that only find their true expression in their interrelationship. Ben Williams and I, in our book Oriented Leadership, tried to present a practical governance solution rooted in Holy Tradition: hierarchical conciliarity.

MS: What are the basic concepts behind the idea of hierarchical conciliarity?

MTM: The theological concept is that hierarchy represents an order and authority to the relationships among Father, Son and Holy Spirit, with the Father being the first among equals in honor - often represented by a triangle in iconography. The equally venerable concept of conciliarity represents a relationship of love, respect and mutual accountability among the three Persons of the Holy Trinity - a circle in iconography. Hierarchy and conciliarity can only be fully understood in relationship to each other - a triangle with its three points touching the circle in iconography, as in the icon of the Holy Trinity. Hierarchy without conciliarity leads to tyranny. Conciliarity without hierarchy leads to disorder. Hierarchy, therefore, is the first among equals with conciliarity. This position of honor should be comforting to leaders, but rather seems to be seen by them as a threat, which has led to a brazen, systematic disregard for accountability and fiduciary duty.

This scandal is most disturbing in the way certain players are attempting to bludgeon conciliarity with a hierarchical club. It seems that many leaders in this scandal have lost sight of their pastoral calling.

MS: You mentioned that you think our governance problem began at autocephaly. Will you elaborate?

MTM: When I facilitated the Administrative Task Force, one of our committees uncovered a telling shortcoming in the OCA Statute: the Statute contains no statements about performance accountability and contains no consequences for non-performance. This finding never made it out of committee. In my opinion, this was the most important finding of the Task Force; however, it seemed to touch a sensitive nerve that no one wanted to touch. I now believe that nerve was the legacy of Fr. Alexander Schmemann, the architect of OCA autocephaly. I believe that Fr. Alexander oversaw the drafting of all governance documents for autocephaly, including the Statutes. Fr. Alexander was a capable theologian and clergyman. Organizational governance dynamics do not appear to have been his strong suit, though. That is not a criticism, just an observation.

In my opinion while our governance documents were sufficient to obtain autocephaly and legal status, they were not adequate for day-to-day governance. That work has yet to be done. However, in the years subsequent to autocephaly, Fr. Alexander's influence was so strong that he was able through personal energy, charisma, rhetoric and intellect to overcome any shortcomings in the written governance documents. Since his death, the unfortunate situation in the OCA today shows that those governance guidelines cannot stand on their own.

MS: Thanks, Mike for your comments.

MTM: You are welcome.

User avatar
drewmeister2
Member
Posts: 235
Joined: Sun 21 August 2005 8:45 pm
Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Jurisdiction: GOC/HOTCA
Location: Arizona
Contact:

Post by drewmeister2 »

Metropolitan Herman Officially Suspends

Special Commission

• Asserts Future Work, If Any, To Be Determined

And Directed By Him

• Orders Any Future Reports To Go To Him

Metropolitan Herman has officially suspended the Special Investigative Commission. In a letter, dated May 4th, to the Chairman of the Commission, Archbishop Job, the Metropolitan pronounced what amounts to a death sentence on the Commission, while setting forth a clear challenge to the Metropolitan Council as a whole. In the letter the Metropolitan claims that all future investigation, if any, will be determined and directed by the Metropolitan himself; and that further reports of the Commission, if any, should be delivered to him - not the Council. The letter reads in full:

“May 4, 2007

Your Eminence:

Christ is Risen! Indeed He is Risen!

This letter will follow up our discussion earlier today wherein you asked me to address your questions concerning the status of the Special Investigative Committee. I have checked with Jim Perry and he confirms that he spoke with you over a month ago communicating to you my instructions. If for some reason this communication was not clearly communicated, let me restate it.

At present, the Committee’s work has been suspended until the hearing concerning Father Kondratick has been completed. Given that two of the members of the Committee are involved in the hearing and one member has been removed, it is not practical for it to continue at this time. What work, if any, will be assigned to the Committee at the conclusion of the hearing has not yet been determined, but I will give you further direction as soon as we get the hearing behind us. In response to your question concerning to whom the Committee reports, as Metropolitan and as the person who appointed the Committee, it reports to me.

I hope this answers all your questions. Please communicate to each Committee member and to Alexandra Makosky my gratitude for all of the work that they have done in service to the Church.

Thanking your Eminence for your labors, and with best wishes, I am

Your brother and concelebrant,

+Herman”

Commission members contacted by OCANews.org confirmed the letter’s authenticity but, as has been their custom, declined comment.

Nescott Removed

The Metropolitan’s suspension of the Commission as a whole comes only weeks after his arbitrary removal of Attorney Gregg Nescott from the Commission and the Metropolitan Council. Many theories have been advanced as to why the Metropolitan dismissed Nescott, the official reason having been thoroughly discredited. (Read that story here) Questions regarding the Nescott dismissal still abound:

• Where is evidence of primatial outrage and umbrage over the fact that a thief, perhaps in the employ of Syosset itself, could easily steal such a confidential Report?

• Why weren’t those entrusted with document security at Syosset - who actually “disclosed” information by losing a copy of the report - dealt with as severely and swiftly as was Nescott, who “disclosed” nothing?

Perhaps the simplest explanation is the best: Syosset actually feared Nescott more than the theft of the Report. Mr. Nescott was in the bad habit of asking the “wrong” questions and, alone among the Metropolitan Council members, professionally qualified to openly challenge the advice of Syosset’s lawyers.

The Report may have already gone, but Nescott clearly had to go.

The Report Withheld

Having lost a copy of the Report, the Metropolitan nonetheless continues to refuse to release the Report of the Special Commission despite the vote of the Metropolitan Council to do so. (Read that story here)

Officially some fifty or so individuals, at least, have seen the Special Commission’s Report. These include members of the Commission itself, Metropolitan Council delegates and members of the Holy Synod of Bishops. ( Of course, this official number does not include other individuals who surely have become privy to its findings because of lax security....)

The contents of the Report have been damaging enough for the former Chancellor to have been suspended from priestly functions and summoned to appear before a church court. Yet, those who have seen the Report are quick to point out that while it is a damaging document with regard to one individual, it too contains little of substance which was not already publicly known. In fact, this very point was made repeatedly by those at the March Metropolitan Council meeting who spoke against releasing the Report. In their opinion, the Report merely documents what the Metropolitan Council and the Synod had already been told in December 2006 by attorneys for Proskauer Rose, by auditors for Lambrides, Lamos, and Moulthorp, and what the Church’s own website had published at the same time.

What was totally new in the Report were the various recommendations to the Synod and to the Metropolitan Council, These recommendation were made as part of the Council’s attempt to fulfill its fiduciary responsibilities to the OCA. The Council ultimately agreed with the Commission, and adopted 8 of 10 recommendations by a vote of 22 in favor, with one abstention. (Read that story here) So one must ask: What information is so damaging, so scandalous in the Commission’s Report that, while it is is sufficient to indict Fr. Kondratick on the one hand, Syosset fears to disseminate it to the Church, on the other?

Just as Nescott’s removal was not about “disclosure”, the withholding of the Report is not about “information”.

The Commission Suspended

With the Special Commission now suspended, and the determination of its future claimed by the Metropolitan as his sole prerogative, it appears that the Commission has served its purpose for Syosset. Until now the Special Commission has only been allowed to digest materials uncovered by Proskauer Rose and others and present that material in writing to Church authorities. The Commission has not been allowed, either by design or default, to go further, that is, to “investigate” anything. The term “Investigative” was a misnomer from the beginning. When a Commission is not allowed to interview witnesses, nor receive all the documents it requests, its work is not much of an “investigation”. Although the Commission looked at strong evidence against one individual and produced a document which reflected the only conclusion that could be drawn, based upon the information given, it does not mean that all its questions were asked and all answers given....

Questions Unasked

In fact, it is easy to see that not all the questions were asked, or allowed to be asked, in the first place. One need only re-read the articles on the OCA’s own website (OCA.org) from this past December to suggest the work of the Special Investigative Commission has hardly begun, despite the Metropolitan’s letter.

For example:

OCA.org says: Trips were taken to various locales.
Were these trips taken solely by one individual?

That question was never allowed. Why?

OCA.org says: Multiple credit card charges for personal items and luxury hotels were documented.
Were these charges made to the benefit of only one individual? That question was never allowed. Why?

OCA.org says: An undocumented cash economy depleted much of the annual appeals monies for the years under review, 2001-2005.
Was only one individual the beneficiary of such cash payments? That question was never allowed. Why?

Did only one employee at Syosset have knowledge of these things? That question was never allowed. Why?

Was the system at Syosset so broken that one individual alone, as Syosset claims, could have done all these things? That question was never allowed. Why?

Archbishop Job asked for a “Commission”; Syosset has offered only “Omission”.

The Brum Doctrine Triumphant


The Church now knows some of the what, when and hows of the scandal - but does it really know the “whos”? Clearly not until the above questions are answered. Is that the reason for continuing secrecy, cover-up and lack of disclosure? Nescott, the Commission, the Report have been removed, suspended and withheld. Clearly, the Metropolitan Council is next in line to fall victim to the silence of Syosset. Is it any wonder that "Best Practices", sans protection for whistleblowers, is among Syosset's highest priorities for the upcoming meeting?

Will the Metropolitan Council at its June 12-13 meeting allow itself to be relegated back to impotency? By acquiescing to the Metropolitan’s latest application of the Brum Doctrine - that all church bodies are simply “consultative” - the Metropolitan Council risks undoing all the efforts it has made at resolving the Scandal over the past 19 months. And so the long defeat will continue...

-Mark Stokoe

http://www.ocanews.org/news/HermanSuspe ... 52107.html

Orthodoxia i Thanatos

www.YouTube.com/GreekOrthodoxTV

Post Reply