Susan Snook Brown Title IV appeal

October 15, 2024

To: The Rt. Rev. Nicholas Knisely From: Members of Christ Church, Coronado, CA (diocese of San Diego) Re: Appeal of the dismissal of Title IV complaint concerning The Rt. Rev. Susan Brown Snook

We, the undersigned members of Christ Church Coronado, are appealing the dismissal of the Title IV inquiry into the conduct of The Rt. Rev. Susan Brown Snook (the “Bishop”) in her handling of the controversies at Christ Church concerning The Rev. Dr. Regan Schutz (the “Rector”).

We remain convinced that Canon IV. 4, Standards of Conduct apply in this situation. The Bishop’s dereliction of duty to the Rector resulted in thousands of dollars spent without discovery. Her June 20, 2024, letter to Christ Church Coronado revealed her action of ordering the Rector to Administrative Leave without pursuing or establishing merit for why legal intervention was required. Her counsel, lack of intervention and/or due process, has been material, substantial and of clear and weighty importance to the ministry of Christ Church, Coronado.

The dismissal of our complaint dated August 26, 2024, does not engage or respond to the severity of our substantiated allegations which include negligence, misrepresentation, dishonesty and fraud, all of which appear to us to be Conduct Unbecoming a Member of the Clergy.

Instead, it reduced the allegations of our Title IV complaint to the following two points 1) The

Bishop placing the Rector on Administrative Leave and 2) Sharing the reasons for the Bishop’s decision to place the Rector on Administrative leave in a written communication to the congregation of Christ Church Coronado, principally the fact that the Rector had engaged an attorney who had sent the congregation one or more demand letters.

This is not an accurate or comprehensive summary of our allegations and concerns. As a part of our appeal, we request a comprehensive review of the fact pattern presented and allegations therein of the Bishop’s actions and inactions.

Our goal in this appeal is to initiate an intervention with the Bishop to provide accountability for past breaches of office, but also, and more importantly, to enable a future of remediation in the form of training and other support so that this is not repeated. We mention this here since it was stated in the dismissal that our allegations were retributive in nature, and we would like to emphasize that they are not. The disposition of Mtr Regan with respect to our parish is following a distinct and wholly separate process and our allegations presented here have no direct pertinence to those processes. As we write this, the Vestry of Christ Church has, or will imminently follow a dissolution of pastoral relationship with Christ Church. While we are motivated by what we believe are past harms and injustices foisted upon Mtr Regan, the Bishop was not the sole agent of those, and the Bishop’s role in the current Title III process between our church and Mtr Regan is ministerial (in the legal sense).

2

Looking towards the future, we have much to do to heal our church. We would hope to have the help of a disinterested Bishop to aid us in helping us as a congregation learn to speak with each other openly and with open hearts about sensitive things.

Below are the specific allegations which we believe broke relevant canons:

Failure to Protect the Rector from Facing Retaliation After Sexual Harassment Bishop Snook abdicated the duties of her ministerial office by dishonestly ignoring sexual harassment allegations within the Church, and then failing to help protect the Rector from retaliation against

by members of the Vestry. This exposed the Church to ever greater civil

liability, and thus is a violation of the Canonical duty to safeguard the property and funds of the Church and Community.

There are credible allegations of sexual harassment by the former Senior Warden of Christ Church by three different women including

. The details of these allegations and

Bishop Snook’s complicity in protecting the perpetrator and enablers rather than the victims are clearly outlined in our complaint but were not addressed in the dismissal. As stated in our complaint, we are happy to provide further documentation and address questions. Despite being a victim of sexual harassment, the Rector was advised by the Bishop to handle the matter internally. There was no care or offer of services to the Rector. There was no effort to provide a pastoral response. The Rector faced ongoing retaliation for bringing sexual harassment to light by select vestry members who colluded with the Bishop to subjugate tenure at Christ Church but also

and work to end not just

career as a priest.

3

The Bishop claims that she put the Rector on administrative leave because

put

in an

adversarial relationship with the church but our substantiated claim is that our Rector, the Rev. Dr. Regan Schutz, had no choice but to respond to a system orchestrated by the Bishop that had first taken an adversarial position against against why

. A Title III process of removal was first initiated

, an adversarial move. We believe a fuller investigation of events at the time illustrate needed legal representation.

Lack of Due Process Bishop Snook failed to observe proper procedure by working with individual members of the Church outside of the whole Vestry to initiate a Title III process against the Rector.

In January 2023, Bob Ketts was elected to the Vestry and became the Junior Warden of Christ Church. Shortly after,

began a campaign to discredit the Rector. Mr. Ketts alleged that

multiple parishioners were leaving the church due to the Rector being unwilling to reconcile with them. To date, Mr. Ketts cannot clearly articulate any of the alleged complaints against the Rector. Senior Warden

and the Rector attempted several times to come up with a

means to resolve these alleged anonymous issues. Mr. Ketts went to the Diocese outside of the chain of command without the knowledge of the Rector, Senior Warden, or the Vestry to initiate a Title III process against the Rector. Bishop Snook’s Canon to the Ordinary helped guide Mr. Ketts in action taken against the Rector. The Bishop and Diocesan leadership team focused on prosecuting vague accusations rather than following the appropriate process and supporting the Rector.

4

Additionally, in her letter to the congregation announcing that she was placing

.

on

administrative leave, Bishop Snook identified Bob Ketts, a primary instigator against

and

the individual working with the diocese to prosecute Regan outside of due process as the people’s warden to whom parishioners should bring their concerns. This is a clear and shocking conflict of interest.

Order to Scrub Public Minutes The Office of the Bishop demonstrated dishonest conduct when Canon Lynch requested the removal of public minutes from the vestry minutes record that include exonerations of the Rector’s actions.

Following Bishop Snook’s letter to the congregation, Bishop Snook assigned Canon Gwenn Lynch as an interim liaison and to help with day-to-day office work and assignment of clergy in the absence of the Rector. Canon Gwenn requested in writing via email to Senior Warden Yvonne Rowe to remove public minutes from a Special Vestry Meeting from

(the

congregational newsletter where meeting minutes are posted). The Senior Warden Yvonne Rowe contacted vestry member and Treasurer Brett Molenaar immediately and notified

of this

request. Both the Senior Warden and the Treasurer agreed that it was best to inform the Church’s attorney Mr. Robert Brockman of the request, who found the request extremely concerning. The request to scrub public Vestry meeting minutes from the record seems wildly out of line if not illegal, especially coming from the office of the Bishop. Both the Senior Warden and the Treasurer agree this request if executed would be a violation of their fiduciary obligations as

5

officers of a California 501(c)3 corporation. This request is evermore concerning as the meeting minutes from the April 17, 2024 Special Vestry Meeting requested to be removed by Canon Gwenn was the meeting in which the former Senior Warden Jo Hunsaker, and the former Junior Warden Christian Ellinger were brought in to speak to the claims made against the Rector by Mr. Ketts. Jo Hunsaker and Christian Ellinger were the presiding wardens during the time period in which Mr. Ketts’ alleged anonymous complaints were made. Mr. Ketts was not on Vestry and was not in a leadership role within the church during that period.

In summary, we are hopeful that bringing light to the serious allegations brought forth in our complaint will lead to justice, accountability and restore trust that has been lost in the leadership of The Episcopal Church, specifically Rev. Susan Brown Snook and the Title IV process. Thank you for considering our appeal.

Respectfully submitted,

6