Data is sketchy, but estimate suggests mission budget would decrease by 20 percent from 2006
By John H. Adams, The Layman Online, April 27, 2006
LOUISVILLE, Ky. – The General Assembly Council closed the doors to observers today to begin figuring out how much the Presbyterian Church (USA) can spend on its Mission Program for the rest of 2006 and during the 2007 and 2008 budget years.
While members of the council received sealed packets marked “confidential” that included further details, the only publicly released material was a projection of Mission Program revenue for 2007.
John Detterick, the council’s executive director, handed out that single sheet, which was titled “Cost of Essential Work.” The budget number he used was $97,047,763.23, a 20 percent decrease from the $116-million mission budget that was approved by the General Assembly for 2006.
More dramatically, Detterick’s projection is 32.6 percent below the $144 million approved for 2001, the first year of the decade and the start of major budget shortfalls that have required two previous staff reductions, including the elimination of 30 missionary assignments.
Detterick acknowledged that the 2007 revenue forecast is guesswork. “We don’t know how much revenue we’re going to get,” he said. “We’re having to project revenue for 2007 and 2008. We ended up doing a worst-case scenario, saying, ‘Let’s assume everything goes to hell in a handbasket at the General Assembly.’ We also did a best-case scenario. We did not build the budget on either of them. It’s in the middle.”
Without being privy to further details, observers were confused by the 2007 figures. The revenue forecast is nearly $20 million below the current 2005 budget, which also must be reduced. Yet, previous staff projections were that budget cuts for the three years would total $9.1 million.
Mission Support Services deputy Director Joey Bailey gave a brief explanation, noting that the 2007 budget did not reflect $5.6 million in revenue from conferences. He did not elaborate, but left the impression that money would be included in the 2008 budget.
Also absent from the 2007 estimate was any indication of how membership fluctuations are affecting the budget forecasts. During the council’s meeting in February, a report by the council’s Mission Support Services Committee included staff projections of record-setting membership losses of 65,000 in 2005 and 85,000 in 2006.
Bailey told The Layman Online that those projections were made by the Office of the General Assembly and that he did not know how they were computed. Congregations are required to report their membership figures annually as of Dec. 31. The Office of the General Assembly compiles those figures and publishes them in an annual publication called “Comparative Statistics.”
Kerry Clements, associate stated clerk of the Office of the General Assembly, said the 2005 figures have not been completed. “They are being tweaked now,” said Clements, who would not offer a guess on how closely the final numbers would be to the OGA’s estimate for 2005. He said the figures should be available in about two weeks.
The 2005 figures are important for a number of reasons. They determine the basis for setting the per-capita rate for support for the General Assembly, synods and presbyteries. They also provide a basis for projecting revenue from special offerings and other mission support.
Detterick’s 2007 estimates included overall projections for the six priority areas in the Mission Work Plan, which previously had been approved by the General Assembly Council. Those priorities are 1) evangelism and witness, 2) justice and compassion, 3) spirituality and discipline, 4) leadership and vocation, 5) essential support, and 6) other.
Without further details, they do not translate directly into the work of the three major divisions in the denomination: Worldwide Ministries, Congregational Ministries and National Ministries. Nor do they provide a clue where some of the more controversial programs of the denomination – such as the Washington Office, the World Council of Churches, the National Council of Churches, the Peacemaking Program and the Advisory Committee on Social Witness Policy – would fit into the “essentials.”
And Detterick’s revenue estimates did not line up with higher priority ministries getting a larger share of the money. For instance, he projected a total budget of $19.3 million for evangelism and witness and $25.9 million for justice and compassion.
Questioned about the estimates, Detterick said some of the priorities were narrowly defined – not requiring as much staff support – while others were broader in scope.
Council member Manley Olsen, a long-time promoter of the Re-Imagining God movement that the 1994 General Assembly declared beyond the bounds of the Christian faith, commented about the priorities. “Some place along the way, I assume we’re going to find out what evangelism means. The numbers don’t mean much.”
Detterick said the private meetings would help the council members come to grip with issues like that.
They also will shelter the council members from constituencies lobbying for their pet projects, according to Nancy Kahaian of Michigan City, Ind., the council’s chair. She said one of the purposes of meeting privately to discuss the detailed budget proposals was to prevent the kind of lobbying that often takes place in the budget process, particularly when major cuts are being made.
For the record, the doors were closed because of “personnel” matters – determining who keeps his or her job and who will be laid off. No figures have been released as to how many employees will have to be dismissed to provide the essential services.
After Detterick’s presentation, there was a spirited debate over who should be allowed to attend the meetings. The council’s executive committee proposed to the full council that only elected council members attend. That would exclude more than 15 corresponding and at-large members.
Episcopal Bishop Douglas E. Theuner, a non-elected ecumenical member of the council and no stranger to controversy over personnel or budgeting, expressed his objection to being excluded from the meeting. “The way you’ve structured this, I can’t participate in most of this meeting,” he said. “It’s a waste of my time, your time and my money. It’s disconcerting to set time and money aside to participate in something you can’t participate in.”
Theuner is the retired bishop of the diocese of New Hampshire. His job was filled by V. Eugene Robinson, who left his wife and family to live with a homosexual partner and now is the first openly gay bishop in the Episcopal Church (USA). Theuner, who supported Robinson’s election and preached at his investiture, has been a vocal opponent of evangelicals in the fast-splintering EC(USA).
Several council members urged that the budget deliberations be open to Theuner and other non-elected members. But they lost their case in a 26-23 vote on an amendment that would have allowed non-elected members to attend the private sessions.
By a voice vote, the full council approved the private meetings. The council also approved a list of 17 staff members who would be allowed to attend some portions of the meetings.
“I suspect that every one of you will be unhappy with some or a few of the cuts we have made,” Detterick told the council. “It’s possible somebody might want to make a change. But something else that’s in would have to be taken out. You have the ability to talk about whose job you would restore. I don’t think it’s appropriate or fair to be talking about people’s lives in public session.”