Slog
News & ArtsWednesday, January 25, 2012
Homo City Gave $7.1 Million to the Anti-Gay Seattle Archdiocese Last Year
Posted by Dominic Holden on Wed, Jan 25, 2012 at 5:18 PM
I want to make one thing clear: I think that an anti-gay institution like the Archdiocese of Seattle can do vital charity work without spreading its anti-gay cooties to the needy. I've long been a fan of its subsidiaries like Catholic Community Services and the Seattle Archdiocesan Housing Authority, for instance, and I don't believe either nonprofit denies services based on the sexual orientation of the recipients. That said, I was curious how much money the city contributes to the Archdiocese of Seattle, given that the organization is now running a lobbying campaign against a same-sex marriage bill.
But—while advocacy doesn't necessarily taint the charity work—make no mistake: The goodwill of Catholic Community Services and the Seattle Archdiocesan Housing Authority are tied to the lobbying efforts. For example, the Catholic Action Network web page telling people to "send a message to your state Senator and your two Representatives urging them to support the current law and the traditional definition of marriage as a union between a man and a woman" appears directly under the logo for Catholic Community Services and the Seattle Archdiocesan Housing Authority. Meanwhile, Catholic Community Services is also promoting Catholic Advocacy Day to lobby lawmakers along with Archbishop Peter J. Sartain, who issued the proclamation against gay marriage along with three other Washington State bishops.
It turns out that the city contributes quite a lot to this hybrid of wholesome charity and discriminatory advocacy.
A records request with the City of Seattle reveals that the city gave the Archdiocesan Housing Authority $1,550,986 in 2011 and has pledged $1,168,395 in 2012. Meanwhile, the city gave Catholic Community Services $5,595,591 in 2011 and has pledged $3,151,274 this year. That's over $7.1 million last year and $4.3 million this year.
Looking at the 2010 annual report for the archdiocese's Catholic Community Services (.pdf), I found that 72 percent of all its money comes from government. Only a tiny, tiny fraction (10 percent) comes from public contributions. (That annual report opens with a statement from Archbishop Sartain.)
Again, there's is no j'accuse going on here about the money being abused for political purposes. But here's something to consider: Progressive Catholic parishioners place lots of money on those collection plates every Sunday and, yeah, they're fine with it trickling up from their parish into the archdiocese's coffers. Because the archdiocese does such good work. It's true—they do do good work. But not necessarily with the collection plate money. The good work is funded mostly out of tax dollars. It's hard to say where all that money from the collection plates go: Presumably some of it goes into the anti-gay campaigns.
1
How do I know none of my tax money, via them, went to political advocacy or discrimination, and was 100% spent in Seattle?
If they don't want to fund abortion with tax money, then this is equally fair.
If they don't want to fund abortion with tax money, then this is equally fair.
2
I believe that this kind of written appeal to manipulate our rights through our laws crosses a line that should not be crossed by organizations enjoying religious tax exempt status.
Specific instruction to parishioners to engage in direct political action against any minority group in my opinion goes outside the bounds of protected religious organizing and expression and becomes political organizing and expression.
Civil same-sex marriage does not undermine the right of individuals to freely associate with religious organizations that seek to encourage traditional marriage values nor does it obstruct the ability to practice the values of religious marriage.
Gay and Lesbian people are also tax payers. Tax payers whose taxes make up for funds not collected by those who enjoy tax exempt status.
Dear Archbishop Sartain
I have decided to file a formal complaint with the IRS (form 13909) and will now encourage others to do the same. You have brought disgrace to the Catholic Church of Seattle and the State of Washington with your actions of pushing disdain and contempt of others to your paritioners.
Its a complete disgrace. The pope actually sends Archbishop Sartain to Washington to pit neighbor against neighbor.
Although raised a Catholic myself I will be damned if I am going to sit and watch the pope try to keep my neighbor under his thumb.
Specific instruction to parishioners to engage in direct political action against any minority group in my opinion goes outside the bounds of protected religious organizing and expression and becomes political organizing and expression.
Civil same-sex marriage does not undermine the right of individuals to freely associate with religious organizations that seek to encourage traditional marriage values nor does it obstruct the ability to practice the values of religious marriage.
Gay and Lesbian people are also tax payers. Tax payers whose taxes make up for funds not collected by those who enjoy tax exempt status.
Dear Archbishop Sartain
I have decided to file a formal complaint with the IRS (form 13909) and will now encourage others to do the same. You have brought disgrace to the Catholic Church of Seattle and the State of Washington with your actions of pushing disdain and contempt of others to your paritioners.
Its a complete disgrace. The pope actually sends Archbishop Sartain to Washington to pit neighbor against neighbor.
Although raised a Catholic myself I will be damned if I am going to sit and watch the pope try to keep my neighbor under his thumb.
3
I for one appreciate the hard and generous work of Catholic Community Services and Catholic Housing Services. As Olympia and city governments have cut spending, it's the Catholic Church and other religious organizations that picked up the slack and have help more people!
Thank you CCS/CHS!
Thank you CCS/CHS!
4
CCS is indeed an awesome organization that does really fantastic work in our community. They do not do political advocacy of any kind; they're not allowed to.
However, they have a parent organization that does. And that parent organization, unfortunately, has chosen to declare war on the rights of the people in our community. So that's a problem. Maybe they should have their funding taken away and given to another organization that is human-rights-friendly.
However, they have a parent organization that does. And that parent organization, unfortunately, has chosen to declare war on the rights of the people in our community. So that's a problem. Maybe they should have their funding taken away and given to another organization that is human-rights-friendly.
5
Dom, while I agree with your sentiments, it's a post like this that plays right into the religious right's fear that the ultimate goal of the marriage equality legislation is to force religious institutions to pack up and leave. They keep using the example of Catholic adoption services in Washington, D.C. Now, if the Seattle decides to cut funding because of the church's stance on gay marriage, they will have one more feather in their faux-persecution hat.
6
@5 The religious right SHOULD fear financial retribution for anti-gay or any other anti-human declarations.
7
So the archdiocese publishes a slick annual report that says every last dollar they received in revenue for social services, they spent on program needs within that program year. I'm not any good at interpreting annual reports, but I know when I was responsible for a chunk of nonprofit budget it was devilishly hard to spend your whole budget without going over, because you often don't know when you contract for goods and services exactly what the total bill will be. Vendor list prices go up and down due to promotions and price changes from their own suppliers, and shipping costs can surprise you. But when all those uncontrollable birds come home to roost on the last day of the fiscal year, if money is left in your budget, there's a good chance you'll lose it next year; if you've overspent, you get your knuckles rapped or worse.
The obvious question for the city is what kind of accountability they demand from agencies like the archdiocese. Can they demand, and receive, proof of expenditures down to invoice level? If not, why not? Or (big black eye for the city) do they just shovel money into the bishop's gaping maw and get nothing in return except that 4-page placemat, + pax vobiscum, see ya next year?
The obvious question for the city is what kind of accountability they demand from agencies like the archdiocese. Can they demand, and receive, proof of expenditures down to invoice level? If not, why not? Or (big black eye for the city) do they just shovel money into the bishop's gaping maw and get nothing in return except that 4-page placemat, + pax vobiscum, see ya next year?
8
Which City agency provides funding, Dom? Office of Housing? Human Services? I'd like to know who to call and complain to tomorrow...
10
@7, CCS gets audited every year, as does everyone who gets United Way money. Yes, "down to the invoice level". I don't know what kind of flighty org you were associated with, or how deeply, but the big agencies that get city (and county, state, federal) money are pretty tightly controlled. A $120 million 50(c)3 is not something taken lightly.
11
What I want to know is: justice why in the HELL are Seattle taxpayers contributing millions of dollars each year to subsidiaries of one of the wealthiest money-making organizations on the planet? Regardless of the good work they do, why isn't the Church of Rome supporting these organizations with their own, nearly limitless financially resources? Why does MY tax money have to subsidize them?
13
@1 and 7,
When a non-profit receives government funding, they sign a contract to provide specific services. If the funder wants the right to review supporting documentation right down to invoices, employee timesheets, etc., they can write that into the contract -- and believe me, they DO write it into the contract. (In practice, perhaps they merely examine the reports of the independent accounting firms which regularly and rigorously audit nonprofits that receive government funding, including CCS.) And rest assured that if government money was found to be somehow trickling up to the Archdiocese for purposes other than that for which it was granted, the contract would permit the funder to recover that money. I don't have a City of Seattle contract at hand at the moment (I'm more familiar with WA state contracts), but you must think the city government people around here are pretty stupid, if you think the questions @1 have not occurred to them or that all they expect in return for their funding investment is a four page advertisement.
Sorry, I get a little ranty when people ask these questions (accountability and auditing are a HUGE THING in the responsible nonprofit world) like "I'm the first person to have ever thought of this!"
When a non-profit receives government funding, they sign a contract to provide specific services. If the funder wants the right to review supporting documentation right down to invoices, employee timesheets, etc., they can write that into the contract -- and believe me, they DO write it into the contract. (In practice, perhaps they merely examine the reports of the independent accounting firms which regularly and rigorously audit nonprofits that receive government funding, including CCS.) And rest assured that if government money was found to be somehow trickling up to the Archdiocese for purposes other than that for which it was granted, the contract would permit the funder to recover that money. I don't have a City of Seattle contract at hand at the moment (I'm more familiar with WA state contracts), but you must think the city government people around here are pretty stupid, if you think the questions @1 have not occurred to them or that all they expect in return for their funding investment is a four page advertisement.
Sorry, I get a little ranty when people ask these questions (accountability and auditing are a HUGE THING in the responsible nonprofit world) like "I'm the first person to have ever thought of this!"
14
@11, it doesn't have to. It can change. There's been support in city government and among taxpayers to enter into service contracts and make contributions to a provider like this that can fill gaps in human services the City itself couldn't for twice the taxpayer money (especially these days, with our current mayor deciding we don't even need an Office of Housing, much less a more robust one that could fill CCS's shoes).
That said, it's reprehensible to have Sartain using the good name of CCS for such a stupid thing as this. He seems to think CCS is his little prestige puppet - so long as we taxpayers don't shirk our responsibilities for the services we pull from CCS I'm quite in favor of moving to end the contracts and contributions.
That said, it's reprehensible to have Sartain using the good name of CCS for such a stupid thing as this. He seems to think CCS is his little prestige puppet - so long as we taxpayers don't shirk our responsibilities for the services we pull from CCS I'm quite in favor of moving to end the contracts and contributions.
15
Like any large institution, what gets funded or promoted can get kooky.
I remember taking my parents to St. John the Baptist in Kent and they had this speaker who was supposed to be anti-abortion, but what she launched into was a 30 minute diatribe about "all the men who ruined her life".
It was like listening to an epic poem written Alanis Morissette...I wanted to rip my ears off and drop them in the font it was so bad. I even wrote them asking them to review the content of the person and evaluate her mental state.
I remember taking my parents to St. John the Baptist in Kent and they had this speaker who was supposed to be anti-abortion, but what she launched into was a 30 minute diatribe about "all the men who ruined her life".
It was like listening to an epic poem written Alanis Morissette...I wanted to rip my ears off and drop them in the font it was so bad. I even wrote them asking them to review the content of the person and evaluate her mental state.
17
@ Fnarf & 13, thanks for the responses. I won't be naming the flighty org I was a part of, but I was a bench scientist using a mix of unrestricted funds, government and foundation grants, and some fees-for-service. I had a lot of respect for the green-eyeshade types because of all the heavy lifting they did that I was spared, but the testiness sometimes got to me. Money people who've been steeped in accountancy should remember that a lot of it seems like black arts to ordinary people, just as I presume the particulars of my research would be to them.
The thing that always gave me fits was that Purchasing would not encumber funds immediately when I bought something, checkbook-style. It came off my budget not when the invoice arrived, not when the check was cut, but when the check was actually cashed. The variability in timing was insane. (This was when PO's were multipart forms and getting a single finalized copy was very time-consuming; I assume with computerized purchasing systems it would now be much easier.)
My one big triumph was when the CFO decided suddenly in a lean year that for any outside money the R&D group won, he would immediately subtract an identical amount from our institutionally-provided base budget, that year and all succeeding years. Not a great way to encourage grant-writing. I had a federal grant at the time which allowed me to use a percentage of my base budget as required match, and I nervously made the case to the CEO that reducing my base budget by the amount of the grant therefore cut the amount of the promised match and violated the terms of the grant. He called the CFO in and asked him if what I said was true; on getting a grudging confirmation, he told him to put the money back—not just for me, but all the rest of the grant-receiving R&D labs too.
More...
The thing that always gave me fits was that Purchasing would not encumber funds immediately when I bought something, checkbook-style. It came off my budget not when the invoice arrived, not when the check was cut, but when the check was actually cashed. The variability in timing was insane. (This was when PO's were multipart forms and getting a single finalized copy was very time-consuming; I assume with computerized purchasing systems it would now be much easier.)
My one big triumph was when the CFO decided suddenly in a lean year that for any outside money the R&D group won, he would immediately subtract an identical amount from our institutionally-provided base budget, that year and all succeeding years. Not a great way to encourage grant-writing. I had a federal grant at the time which allowed me to use a percentage of my base budget as required match, and I nervously made the case to the CEO that reducing my base budget by the amount of the grant therefore cut the amount of the promised match and violated the terms of the grant. He called the CFO in and asked him if what I said was true; on getting a grudging confirmation, he told him to put the money back—not just for me, but all the rest of the grant-receiving R&D labs too.
18
What was all that blather about, Rob, other than "I", "I", "I".
Unfortunately, as has been said 2,183 times on SLOG alone, this isn't against federal tax laws.
And unfortunately, the Archidiocese and CCS are huge gorillas in housing and social services and there's really no other one entity in this area that could pick up the work they do, so the City's not going to slap their hands. And also unfortunately (but definitely evident for the last 500 years at least), the Vatican is not going to use its resources to do that work.
Unfortunately, as has been said 2,183 times on SLOG alone, this isn't against federal tax laws.
And unfortunately, the Archidiocese and CCS are huge gorillas in housing and social services and there's really no other one entity in this area that could pick up the work they do, so the City's not going to slap their hands. And also unfortunately (but definitely evident for the last 500 years at least), the Vatican is not going to use its resources to do that work.
19
@18:
I suppose you're right; they have to save all those resources to cover the pay-outs on the scores of child rape prosecutions they quietly settle out-of-court every year...
I suppose you're right; they have to save all those resources to cover the pay-outs on the scores of child rape prosecutions they quietly settle out-of-court every year...
20
God Hates Ken Hutcherson, by the way.
He/She/It told me so:
http://pstonews.com/2012/01/24/god-hates…
-jw
He/She/It told me so:
http://pstonews.com/2012/01/24/god-hates…
-jw
21
@19, unfortunately again, the Vatican does not pay out one dime for rapist priest settlements. They make the various parishes go bankrupt or sell their properties. The Vatican gives orders, not money.
22
At Blessed Sacrament in the U-District, they announce where the collection money goes. They've been collecting for the St. Vincent de Paul society for the past couple of weeks and is having a clothing drive Sunday.
23
Dear customer @18,
Thank you for your interest in our product.
We are sorry that it does not seem to meet your blather needs at this time.
Please feel free to contact our office for a full refund.
Thank you for your interest in our product.
We are sorry that it does not seem to meet your blather needs at this time.
Please feel free to contact our office for a full refund.
24
What about the Archdiocese of Portland? Do they get money from the City of Portland, or from Multnomah County? They were among the top (if not the top) financial contributors to Measure 36, the ballot measure that amended our state's constitution to selectively erase basic civil protections from gay and lesbian families...
25
I would also like to know who to contact about these contracts. CCS does amazing things, but there are also other organizations in Seattle that do amazing things which don't have a bigoted, hurtful parent organization. If enough of us bug the city, and a few of these contracts are taken away or even threatened to be taken away, I wonder how it would change the outcome.
I was hoping the Catholic Church for some reason would have learned from their past discriminatory behavior and actually give some real thought on their view of the lgbt community. I understand this was wishful thinking. So I would guess we will all be getting an official church apology in about 50-75 years.
I was hoping the Catholic Church for some reason would have learned from their past discriminatory behavior and actually give some real thought on their view of the lgbt community. I understand this was wishful thinking. So I would guess we will all be getting an official church apology in about 50-75 years.
Advertisement
Most Commented on Slog
-
Hating People Doesn't Make Them Thinner by Jen Graves
-
Los Angeles Gay Bar Bans Bachelorette Parties Until Marriage Equality Is Attained by David Schmader
-
Fill in the Blank by Grant Brissey
-
This Reminds Me of the Great Calculator Scare of the Late '70s/Early '80s by David Schmader
-
Idiot Tries to Defend Bigoted Anti-Gay-Marriage Preacher on Anderson Cooper by Paul Constant
-
Six Moms with Too Much Time on Their Hands and a Shitty Website Decide to Fight Gay Superheroes by Paul Constant
-
The Sunday Morning News by Unpaid Intern
-
What the Hell Is Wrong With Seattle's Pride Parade? by Dominic Holden
-
The Saturday Morning News by Unpaid Intern
-
Why Mayor McGinn's Wife Canceled Her Family's Seattle Times Subscription by Eli Sanders
RSS
Facebook
Twitter
Comments (25) RSS