Anonymous has left a new comment on your post "WHO YA GONNA BELIEVE?":
So much different interpretations. Clarification please on this issue.
AnonymousMay 5, 2016 at 11:29 PM
Diana, what about the minutes that Tim published in his blog?
DianaMay 5, 2016 at 11:36 PM
Dear Anonymous at 11:29 pm,
What about it???? It did not contradict what Mr. Genarinni said to PNC news. According to the minutes of September 7, 2011, it stated:
"Recently, our legal counsel, Ed Terlaje, has reviewed the legal structure of significant assets to assure they are set up as separate legal entities within the Archdiocese. The Redemptoris Mater Seminary ("RMS") is an asset Ed is currently working on."
"Separate legal entities WITHIN the Archdiocese." Sounds like it is still under the Archdiocese but a "corporation sole" of its own.
"In a review of RMS Articles and Bylaws, as well as several meetings with the RMS original incorporators, an issue has arisen that needs AFC review."
Now why does The Diana leave out this sentence? Ummmm, do you think it could be because "an issue has arisen"???? And what issue would that be do you think?
"Attorney Terlaje, however, tells PNC that he had objected to the transfer of the RMS property and he says he had already conveyed this message in a letter he wrote to the archdiocesan finance council."
And here's an addendum. The Diana is trying to make it out like the AFC was wanting to transfer the property away from the archdiocese and Terlaje told them not to. You have to be really, really stupid to believe that (but then look at what else the idiot kiko's believe!!).
The AFC is tasked with considering the financial requests of the archbishop. It is then the AFC's duty to seek counsel from the legal counsel before making a decision. Once they received Terlaje's counsel, 4 of the 5 members of the AFC voted NOT to transfer the asset. And guess who voted YES? Msgr. David C. Lurch Quitugua. The AFC's decision was memorialized the next day in a letter to then-rector Pablo Rodriguez (who has mysteriously disappeared). Here's the letter:
"However, after several meetings, the RMS incorporators are hesitant to do so (modify the articles and by-laws to protect the control of the archbishop), but have asked that the assets be deeded to RMS without modification."