Friday, October 7, 2016


We asked Father Jeff who the church is insured with.

"I'm sorry, I don't have the answer," he told us.

The AFC is now comprised of nine members, including incumbents, new members and returning members.
Guam - The Archdiocese of Agana today announced that they reconstituted the Archdiocesan Finance Council after several months of vacancies on the council, which will have the task of, among other things, evaluating the church's assets in preparation for potential litigation.

Father Jeff San Nicolas, the delegate to temporary archdiocese administrator Archbishop Savio Hon Tai Fai, called for a last minute news conference to announce the new members of the Archdiocesan Finance Council. The council is made up of incumbent members, new members and returning members. 

They are:
Incumbent Peter Sonny Ada, president of Ada's Trust and investment;
incumbent Attorney John Weisenberger;
new member Attorney Eduardo "Champ" Calvo of Calvo Fisher and Jacob;
new member Rick Duenas of Western Sales and Trading;
new member Art Ilagan, insurnace commissioner of the Department of Revenue and Taxation;
new member Dr. Mary Okada, president of Guam Community College;
new member Toni Sanford president of Sanford Technology;
returning member Joseph Rivera, CFO of Calvo Enterprises; and
returning member Richard Untalan, president of CU Holdings.

"After careful consideration of the background and expertise of each of these individuals, I am confident, along with Archbishop Hon that this group will help move the archdiocese forward during this time in our church's history," stated San Nicolas.

San Nicolas says the members were chosen because of their background in business, finance, law, tax, insurance, banking, real property and institutional management. He also says that all members are active in the community and have served in a variety of non profit, government, educational and church leadership roles.

One of the council's main tasks will be to assess the church's assets and address potential lawsuits that may be brought forth as a result of the lifting of the civil statute of limitations on child sex abuse.

"As a diocese, we need to address that and we need to put in those controls and this council, we're hoping, will help us to do that," noted San Nicolas.

The council will carefully review financial matters for the church and assess their assets. We asked Father Jeff who the church is insured with.

"I'm sorry, I don't have the answer," he told us.


  1. They have relied on the insurance of the faithful all these years. It's something they assumed they could rely on since the faithful on Guam easily turned the blind eye until Tim exposed all the churches dirty laundry. Thank you Tim for all the hard work and criticisms you've endured.

  2. Fr. Jeff doesn't know the answer and he did not volunteer to find out (even though we can all guess (correctly!) who the largest insurer would be). Why hide that info? that's a legitimate business transaction. Or, is something else cooking? Another reason why we should continue to remain skeptical of the Archdiocese (Hon and company).

  3. i told you " Lyin Jeff" he is a two faced liar not to be trusted.

  4. Champ Calvo? He is behind some of the biggest corruption scandals of this administration! $14 million YTK and now $100 million for Simon Sanchez. There is so much more. Why should we trust someone who is the target of some FBI investigations to oversee our church finances ????

    1. Be that if it may, but when my love for you is in the right place....then thanks be to God. Be sure to throw rocks in the right place 10:09 lest you are not crushed by some other mountain.

    2. hey, Anonymous October 7, 2016 at 10:09 AM

      I'm going to think positive thoughts about your comment, you stated Champ Calvo, did this and that, not going to argue with that, like with Msgr James, the calumny was started to muddy the waters ...

      The positives are, now that Mr. Calvo is willingly working for the Lord, maybe he can reach his true potential and do better for the financial future of our Church, which in turn will benefit us...

      I'm sure Mr. Calvo can and will exceed any past limits placed upon him in past financial endeavors...

    3. Let's not forget that Champ Calvo has a personal vendetta against David Lujan and they are embroiled in very nasty litigation. That's probably why Calvo was the lawyer pushing behind the scenes against the passage of the bill on the statute of limitations. Just know that Calvo will do everything he can to destroy David Lujan EVEN if that means doing harm to all the victims of Apuron's sex abuse that Lujan represents. Don't say I didn't warn you.

    4. Don't lose thought that the real culprit denies, deflects, and what's the other "d" - deceive?

    5. have the names of the "two lawyers" who spoke to the priests against bill 326 been revealed?

    6. Well one of them was Champ Calvo.

    7. Going to have to agree here is anonymous. Everyone in the legal community knows the extreme animosity between Champ Calvo and David Lujan. That is why Champ Calvo was one of the attorneys trying to torpedo the bill that lifts the statute of limitations - all because it would benefit David Lujan's clients. I don't think anyone here really understands the magnitude of the hate Calvo has for Lujan. Now that he is in this position, the victims will never have a chance for justice. Just wait. And watch.


      Calvo Fisher & Jacob LLP v. Lujan (Cal. Ct. App. - Feb. 19, 2015)

      Thursday, February 19, 2015

      Lawyers can make a lot of money. They can also spend a lot of money.

      All of which happens here.

      Which lawyer would you rather be? You could be David Lujan -- a big-time attorney in Guam -- who (among other things) took a case in which he proved to a jury that his client, Junior, was an heir of Larry Hillbroom, who was one of the founders of DHL Worldwide Express and who disappeared while piloting a plane near Saipan. That victory won his client over $90 million. For which Lujan received a contingency fee of roughly 38 percent.

      Not bad. Not bad at all.

      So that sounds like a pretty good choice.

      But with every silver lining there's a cloud. Eventually, Junior reaches the age of majority and files a lawsuit against Lujan in California, represented by Girardi Keese, that claims that Lujan conspired with others to fraudulently increase his contingent fee from 38 percent to 56 percent. That's a big-time suit itself, seeking multiple millions. Plus Lujan eventually wants to file a defamation suit against Girardi Keese (in Guam) for stuff it allegedly said about him in a press conference, and some additional ancillary litigation as well.

      Which means Lujan's going to need a lawyer.

      Enter Lujan's attorney friend, Eduardo Calvo. Also in Guam. Who agrees to represent Lujan in the various actions.

      Not for free. Not at all.

      Calvo ends up billing almost $1.5 million to Lujan. Who only pays a little over $300,000. These two former friends talk a ton about the various lawsuits -- pretty much every day -- but also fight a ton about the amount of fees that Lujan's being charged.

      Hence the future lawsuit between Calvo and Lujan. Over fees.

      Ultimately, that case goes to trial. And Calvo wins a little under a million bucks -- the full amount he sought. Plus another $300,000+ in prejudgment interest.

      Not bad. Not bad at all.

      But it gets even better. Then Calvo files a motion for costs, which is (of course) disputed, but he gets nearly all his costs awarded. More critically, he also files a motion for fees. Which he also wins. To the tune of another $1.5 million-plus.

      So choosing being Calvo, rather than Lujan, doesn't sound so bad either.

      Mind you, both of 'em end up with tons of money. But both of them also end up with huge, years-long headaches. Plus one fewer friend.

      But need I remind you that we're talking multiple millions of dollars?

      Tough choices.

    9. FROM KUAM

      Lujan files suit against Calvo & Clark
      Posted: May 26, 2010 4:05 PM
      Updated: May 26, 2010 4:05 PM
      by Mindy Aguon

      Guam - Local attorney David Lujan has filed a civil suit in the Superior Court against his former legal counsel, the law firm of Calvo & Clark. Lujan alleges the law firm overbilled him for legal representation in civil suits filed against him in Guam and California.

      Calvo & Clark issued a statement responding to the allegations in the lawsuit. Attorney William Hebert from the firm's San Francisco office says the suit is "without merit", and a transparent attempt to deflect attention from the lawsuit the firm filed against Lujan in California back in April for failing to pay his legal bills. The firm was successful in getting Lujan's lawsuit dismissed in California.

      Calvo & Clark partner in the firm's Guam office, Eduardo Calvo said, "It's disappointing to us that David, who as an experienced trial lawyer, knows how difficult the challenge was and how much we were able to accomplish on his behalf, would fail to pay his bill. David was closely involved in the case at all times and received regular monthly bills that reflected the work we were doing on the case."

    10. And do you know the name of the law firm which represented Calvo against Lujan...and do you who that law firm is representing now? Do you know that that law firm is where your Sunday collection is going? Do you know who sent it there?

    11. Aside from being a lawyer, Champ is also some kind of a financial whiz kid, a talent he probably inherited from his late father. We can only pray that Calvo uses this singular talent for the good of our church. It should be good for one's soul also.

    12. regardless of who's been named, i'm looking at these afc appointments with caution. there's no basis for me to suddenly give 100% trust to hon et al after the events of the past few weeks. so until I see otherwise, my view is that his strategy is unchanged: ncw- and asset-protection first, before justice.


  5. Jeff your very person fails to convey trust to the people. i refer to you as "Lyin Jeff" because you are a liar who i know is silently supporting NCW working against those you claim to serve. You are a Lyin fake!

    1. Hey, 10:56 your words enough to make a grown man cry!

  6. Some questions, assuming the Archdiocese is indeed insured:
    1) Are the interests of that insurance company represented in the reconstituted AFC?
    2) If so, doesn't that constitute a conflict of interest?
    3) Did the lawyer(s) for that insurance company lobby for the veto of Bill 326-33?
    4) Does John Weisenbeger's wife Liza still work for the Chancery?
    5) If so, isn't John's presence on the AFC constitute a conflict of interest?

  7. Not convinced this AFC has prudently been chosen in the best intetest of Church Financial administration. I see at least two names who should not be seated on AFC.

  8. Rose de los Reyes (Seattle, WA)October 7, 2016 at 1:33 PM

    The question, “Who is the Church insured with?” is more a reflection on the sophomoric experience of the reporter about commercial insurance coverage policies than it is a reflection on Fr. Jeff not knowing the Church’s present insurer. Obviously the reporter asked that question in the context of pinning down on to which insurance company the Church will make a claim once the Church is sued for childhood sexual abuse by clergy.

    Commercial insurance coverage for a Church, take the Archdiocese of Agana for example, may include many types of insurance coverage and even many layers of coverage. And each of those types and layers may be provided by different insurance companies usually depending on which insurer provided the best coverage for the least premiums. The answer to the reporter’s question isn’t as simple as me knowing that my automobile insurance is through Allstate or that my medical insurance is with Group Health. To add to the maze of insurance coverage a Church may have as it relates to clergy sexual abuse claims, is that the liability or personal injury insurance policy(ies) in effect at the time of the injury (at the time of the abuse) is the insurance policy from which the Church will make a claim. For example, Walter Denton’s injury occurred in 1977. If Walter files a lawsuit against the Church, the Church has to figure out which of its policy was in effect in 1977 that provided for liability and/or personal injury coverage in order for the Church to make a claim for its defense in this lawsuit and/or for the award the Church will have to pay Walter when he prevails in his lawsuit. The Church will not make that claim on its present liability or personal injury insurer. If the abuse occurred for multiple years, three years, for example, and the Church changed insurance companies from one year to the next, then it has to make a claim to the various insurance companies who provided coverage for that three year period. In a way, it was a blessing that Fr. Jeff couldn’t provide a name of an insurance company when he was asked that question. It would have brought a misunderstanding in that many of us will assume that the insurance company he would have named would be the one on the hook for the child sexual abuse claims that will be forthcoming.

    Large commercial entities with many properties, one whose existence is premised on contact with the public, provides many services, etc. will have a complicated structure of insurance coverage. In anticipation of any forthcoming clergy sexual abuse lawsuits, one of the first things the Church, the Finance Council has to do is the dig out all the insurance policies the diocese has ever had, even starting from when Fr. Louis Brouillard came into the diocese in 1948 since he is known to have and has admitted to sexually abusing children while in his capacity as a member of the diocese’s clergy.

    1. Thanks for the explanation, Rose. While true, the Delegate to the Apostolic Administrator has to have a better answer than I DON’T KNOW. We’ve been dealing with I DON’T KNOW, and IT’S SOMEWHERE for several years. Guam is the center of the world right now. The main man in this drama is the Apostolic Administrator, and in his absence, his Delegate. He does not get to say I DON’T KNOW especially on this question since it centers on the question which is at the very heart of the controversy: who is liable.

      Remember, it was this same Delegate who went on a public war a couple weeks ago against the legislation aimed at holding the archdiocese liable. He had a long prepared explanation for that. My recommendation is that he NO LONGER be the spokesperson at these conferences. He never should have been chosen for the position of Delegate in the first place, but since he’s there, let’s at least let someone who knows what he’s talking about address the press. Perhaps the new president of the finance council should at least be at these conferences since so much of what is going on has to do with law suits and finances.

    2. fr jeff's lack of an answer is amazing. what a mess the archdiocese truly is. how can the 2nd to the chief not know who the archdiocese is insured with? he could've at least said "one" or "several," and that it's too complex to explain in a news conference, but will make the info available as soon as possible.

      saying "i don't have an answer" to a question like that signals either an unwillingness to give an answer, or an inability to give one, or both. so what that tells me is that the person is either hiding something and is being uncooperative, or is incapable. neither case is good.

    3. Tim got it right. Fr. Jeff is such a joke impossible to take him seriously. He holds no respect at a press conference. If he held respect i would certainly not blog about him here. Best thing Fr.Jeff can do is go minister to the superior of the Sisters of Mercy. One big happy family mutual love for Apuron.

    4. Rose de los Reyes (Seattle, WA)October 9, 2016 at 1:07 PM

      Whoa, Tim! My comment was specific to the one line [most unfortunate] statement with which you titled this article and how folks, like Fr. Jeff, don’t normally have the names of their organization’s insurance carrier off the top of their head [then I went off course and into explaining about the insurance claims and coverage]. I was not commenting on Fr. Jeff’s qualifications, abilities, or even his job performance to-date as Apostolic Delegate and de-facto spokesperson of the Archdiocese. Nor did I forget his Sept. 20th press conference about saving the Church’s assets (how can anyone who heard that statement he delivered forget that idiotic Filoni-Kiko-Hon induced battle cry to save the Church’s materialistic assets, and in the process reminded us of how the Church's spiritual assets went down the drain that day ???!!!)

      If we’re talking now about Fr. Jeff and his job performance both as Apostolic Delegate and de-facto Archdiocese spokesperson --- which is a theme that I notice on this this thread of comments --- I have many thoughts on that subject. One thing I make a point to do is that when the Archdiocese takes a step toward the proper (and truthful and transparent) direction, I give them kudos. If it does the opposite, I’m one of the ones throwing the figurative rotten tomatoes and tar-and-feathering Fr. Jeff (who is the face of the Archdiocese --- a job hazard as spokesperson) out of disappointment and disgust. My praises and criticisms are not a matter of allegiance or non-allegiance to the Church’s leadership. Like most of us, I’m watching their every move as closely as I can and making the assessment if whether the step is on track the track toward the Church's good health, weather it's transparent and wise, and truthful, or it's just plain idiotic!

    5. Hi Rose, as you can clearly see, I was not taking issue with your observation. I was clearly taking issue with Fr. Jeff's response, which was, especially in light of this crisis, embarrassingly inept. However, I also happen to know why the reporter asked it. It has to do with a certain new member of the finance council. And I believe Jeff purposely said "I don't know" because he KNEW exactly why the reporter was asking the question. Jeff was in on the visit from the "officious intermeddlers." The press knows who they are and what their role was, and the reporter, you might say, was trying to flush out the fox in the hen house. This is why Jeff jumped to "I don't know." My point from the beginning was that this is simply NOT AN ACCEPTABLE answer from a man in his position. I'm sure you would agree.

    6. Rose de los Reyes (Seattle, WA)October 9, 2016 at 1:53 PM

      Hi, Tim. I like the new Tiger logo you have there. Obviously, you had more information that I did. And now I know more! Thanks for the update. If that was the case, the reporter should have been more tough in her questioning and framed her question first and given it context. That way, it would force a response out of Fr. Jeff in addressing the membership of an officious intermeddler in the Finance Council. If he/the Archdiocese strive to be transparent, that would have been an opportunity for him to address an issue that was likely in many people's minds.

  9. Rose de los Reyes (Seattle, WA)October 7, 2016 at 2:11 PM

    Kudos to the Archdiocese for assembling the Finance Council !!! Kudos for the press conference on providing information on the members of this newly assembled Finance Council !!! Thank you to the members for willing to serve the Church with your time, skills, experience, and God given talents. We all have seen in recent years how the Church went downhill when Abp Apuron summarily fired the true Finance Council in 2011. It’s time to help put the Church back on track and you have big job ahead of you as the Church clean-ups the mess and moves onward and upward!

    1. There are some extremely problematic people on this finance council. I'm hoping that some of those named are considered merely transitional in the name of compromise for the moment. That's all I'll say for now. WATCHING.

    2. My two cents -
      If anyone, affiliated with the Church, cannot or does not acknowledge that the NCW is the problem, and that it needs to be entirely reformed or shut down, DO NOT TRUST THEM.

    3. Exactly my sediments Tim. The same goes for the Sex Abuse Committee.

    4. yes i agree Tim. AFC is troubling.
      Notice also at the press conference ten days ago Fr.Jeff announced the re construction of the AFC. To reconstruct to get the right people on board would take at least two weeks to organize. No..Few days later Fr.Jeff announces members. In other words Fr.Jeff had already formed the AFC made up of those carrying his agenda. AFC problematic made up of certain names not to be trusted.

  10. Rose de los Reyes (Seattle, WA)October 9, 2016 at 1:41 PM

    I re-iterate my praise for the ladies and gentlemen who agreed to serve in this council. They have a tough job ahead. Practically speaking take, for example, the amount of time their tasks ahead would demand of them. I can envision some of the work in research alone that they have to do to sort out even just a handful of matters they are tasked to sort out. I could see the work being a full time job and more! Not living on the island and not having any background or pre-conceived prejudices on any of these members; going solely on their professional background, their training, experience and, obviously, their talents (or they wouldn’t have been in the professions in which they are) this looks like a good team. I say this with a “forest-from-the-trees” perspective. I have read comments above along the lines of questionable ethics and membership with and potential allegiance to the NCW which, rightly so, don’t bode well with the locals in-the-know. Despite that, I don’t forget that these folks are adults and they are professionals. When they convene for their Finance Council meetings, I have confidence that they are mature and professional enough to leave their prejudices outside the meeting room, and focus on the work at hand with the end goal of restoring the Church to great health. It is only the respectful thing to do to first wait for their work product before we tar-and-feather them.

    For the two or three about whom commenters have reservations, keep in mind that there are nine members in the Council. It is presumptuous to assume that the remaining seven or six would not have the skill set and proper ethics necessary to spot and thwart any plan, decision, or direction that would be adverse to the goal of stabilizing and strengthening the financial health of the Church.

    1. For the record, two of the "professionals" on this council are already on the council. They were both approached by the CCOG more than a year ago in the hopes of recruiting their assistance to address the Yona property issue. They were both presented with the Bronze opinion showing that the cleverly constructed Declaration of Deed Restriction (also the work of “professionals”) acted as an “absolute conveyance in fee simple.” Both of these “professionals” blew off the CCOG and chose to pay no attention to the 70 Million Dollar heist.

      For the record, another “professional” on this council is committed to frustrating all efforts at compensation for any victims for reasons I choose not to state at this point. Much depends on who will be named the president of the council. JW has been successful because it has QUESTIONED EVERYTHING. And I mean EVERYTHING! And we will continued to do so.