Our Separate Ways

From the Ugnayan MMC:

To: The CFC Global Family

We would like to announce that effective May 5, 2008, Bishop Gabriel Reyes has resigned as CFC's National Spiritual Director (see attached). We have already replied to him (also attached) thanking him for the time and attention he has given to our community. We ask you all to continue for pray for Bishop Reyes.

We are now in the process of filling this vacuum in the national front.

All local areas have their respective spiritual directors. We ask that you continue to engage them and seek their counsel, particularly in these difficult times.

Once again, we ask everyone to relate in love with each other and especially with those outside our community. God bless us all.

THE CFC INTERNATIONAL COUNCIL

--
CFC UGNAYAN MULTIMEDIA CENTER
COUPLES FOR CHRIST

The attached communications were, from Bishop Reyes:






And the IC's response:




I am hoping beyond hope that the Easter Group stays quiet during this difficult time for us, and not use the Bishop's resignation as another way to further their cause. I hope.

What a week, huh?

By the way, I added a couple of things to the blog. One is the document archive over to the right, which is a work in progress. The other is the online readers counter, a little widget I put up on top ^ and over to the right >, that shows how many are currently reading along with you. Say Hi!

Good night, mga Kapatid. I did say I was tired, but I never said I was going to quit. Not yet, at least.

God bless us all.

More News...and an Analysis

News about the "split" is starting to appear more regularly in the news:

In Newsbreak

and

The Manila Standard


Here's the analysis, and a quote from the forwarded email that says it all:

"I agree with his point of view that we should not allow the pride of two leaders lead to the breakup of the community."

THE CFC CRISIS: WHAT WENT WRONG AND ITS RESOLUTION

(A PSYCHIATRIST’S POINT OF VIEW)

By

Dr Vic S. Cabuquit

CFC-North B

Introduction

The Couples for Christ, the foremost Catholic lay organization, is 26 years old this year. It has grown into a world-wide network of about one million members. Its thrust has been mainly on evangelization, beginning with the couples themselves and gradually branching into several family and social ministries, offering a unique "womb to tomb" type of evangelization that has reached all the corners of this country and in 160 countries in the world.

It has done remarkably well in its efforts to make a difference, particularly for the poor and indeed, it has achieved accolades from all sectors of society. The plaudits though may have lulled CFC into a false sense of achievement. And pride is just a step away from this.

Now, CFC is on the throes of its most severe crisis; a crisis within its ranks, a crisis amongst its leaders. During the last few years, there had been tell-tale signs of a looming crisis. Unfortunately, these signs were largely ignored.

What Went Wrong? (1)

The decline in membership was one sign. From a high of about 1.2 million members, CFC’s membership dropped to a low of 900,000 in a period of just five years. New members were hard to recruit; participants in Christian Life Programmes (CLPs) were disappointingly low. Ominously, members were simply dropping out. The reasons were varied: different priorities, conflict with members/leaders, wrong charism, lost zeal. Some preferred to stay in the background, as if waiting for the penny to drop.

The significant drop in membership resulted in a decrease in tithes, a perennial problem going from bad to worse. The unexplained CFC debts, which, for a time, ballooned to millions of pesos, further worsened the situation. Overall, there was lack of transparency in how money was being handled. There were instances when money was being spent in advance, that the council was spending beyond its means. This cavalier attitude on finances was reflected in the absence of year-end financial reports and an aversion to so-called "corporate" auditing procedures. Members were asking amongst themselves, "how is our money being spent?" The council’s reply, equally cavalier, was, "trust us."

Another sign centred on the interminable tenures of the members of the Executive Council, the governing body of CFC. Key figures like Frank Padilla, Tony Meloto, Lachie Agana, and Roquel Ponte, had had uninterrupted memberships in the council for about a quarter of a century; an endless merry-go-round of multiple positions and of course, attractive perks. It was not uncommon, for example, for Frank Padilla to report to Frank Padilla who would also report to Frank Padilla. Padilla, in an audacious retort to probing e-mails last year, rationalized this anomaly by claiming no one outside of the council was competent enough to do multiple jobs. These astute men were able to wield a kind of collusive leadership because they themselves were the ones who determined who would constitute the Elder’s Assembly, ostensibly the body with the final say on CFC policies. It was observed that the members of the Executive Council, to preserve their territoriality, nominated only those members who they saw fit as friendly and obedient to their cause. Members who asked too many questions, especially the awkward questions, were excluded. The ‘awkward’ members who somehow managed to get in the council did not last long and were speedily replaced. "Obedience" was the unofficial mantra for that select group.

What Went Wrong? (2)

The Executive Council was dominated by two individuals. Frank Padilla and Tony Meloto: both brilliant, headstrong, and ambitious. One can say that they epitomized CFC. Padilla is a great communicator: excellent in speech and prose. But he often exudes a stiff countenance, lacks a sense of humour, and comes off as an obsessive, controlling icon.

Meloto is a first class strategist, an exceptional man who can readily walk his talk. He has more charisma than Padilla. He has an incredible memory which can be quite disarming. He has the knack of making the other person feel important. Like Padilla, Meloto is passionately controlling.

In the hierarchy of things, Padilla is the mentor, Meloto is the protégé. That is, until Gawad Kalinga. The success of Gawad Kalinga, rightly or wrongly attributed to Meloto, upset the hierarchical apple cart. GK generated so much positive publicity that it created a bandwagon effect. Every Tom, Dick, and Harry wanted to be part of the ground-breaking phenomenon called GK. Meloto began to reap laurels from all quarters. Meloto basked in the limelight. Meloto felt heady with success. Can pride be far behind?

A significant event that catalysed the crisis was the Ramon Magsaysay Award given to Meloto, as an individual achievement. Significantly, the announcement of the award was met with less than cacophonous jubilation by the CFC. Many were wondering, "why Meloto, why not CFC?" There were unconfirmed but widely believed reports that there were attempts by some backroom boys (actually girls) to prevent Meloto from garnering the individual award. To make a long story short, Meloto and CFC, represented by Padilla, received individual and group awards, unprecedented in the history of Asia’s equivalent of the Nobel Prize. It was plain the backroom boys (girls) were able to strike a compromise.

But the arrow had been released, and CFC bled. Many felt that Meloto should have declined the honour as an individual achievement because it was not he but CFC which created, nurtured, and sustained GK. The fact that Meloto accepted the award meant he thought otherwise.

As Executive Director, Meloto controlled GK. Controlled, with a capital C. Meloto became the face of GK, a fact not all discouraged by the council. It turned out to be a big time blunder. The GK bandwagon rolled on but somewhere along the way, CFC’s evangelical wheel suffered a puncture. It was now becoming evident that GK, spearheaded by Meloto, was getting too big at the expense of CFC. CFC programmes were taking a backseat in favour of GK activities. CFC talks were being cancelled or postponed because of GK. On a personal note, the protégé has now overshadowed his mentor. Not a good recipe for equanimity. When two brilliant, headstrong, and ambitious egos clash, a crisis inevitably erupts. Publicly, Meloto would say Padilla remains as his mentor. But Meloto was less than vociferous, let alone enthusiastic, in proclaiming CFC during his numerous public orations. Meloto’s star shone so brightly that some political commentators started to consider him as presidential timbre.

As GK Chair, Padilla was out of the media limelight. For the first time, people were talking more about the protégé than the mentor. Padilla was quite supportive of GK from its inception up to as late as November 2006. Padilla has high regards for Meloto and the feeling is mutual. Both had developed a very close bond after being together so long in the council. That is why his trenchant defense of GK in his paper CFC-GK2 was no surprise.

But his paper CFC-GK3, released six months later, was a shocking surprise. In it, he spun 180 degrees from his former position on GK. In GK2, he was all for it; in GK3, he was against it, raising the spectre of a split between the original wholistic, global, Catholic CFC from the CFC-GK, which has turned, in Padilla’s opinion, into a mere social phenomenon. Padilla, in a brilliant anticipatory move, got the bishops involved. He knew that when push comes to shove, the bishops would be on his side. He was right, as subsequent events showed. The gambit worked like a charm.

Are You Pride? Come In

What drove Padilla, in just six months, to change his ideological suit from GK2 to GK3? In that six- month period, Padilla, Meloto, and Agana resigned from the Executive Council for reasons largely unexplained. It is not certain if their resignations were for good or for the meantime, with the elections coming in about four months. Speculations abound, from the sublime to the ridiculous. But their resignations had one stunning effect: they were out of the Executive Council, their power base for so long. Suddenly, they found themselves out looking in. A thoroughly unfamiliar position for the trio.

Padilla, whose creativity and energy require power and position, felt like fish out of water. The report, most likely true, that he was surprised and piqued that he was not re-nominated, speaks of his penchant to remain in control. Meloto, surprisingly (perhaps not really, for his protégé, an obtrusive young chap, whose loyalty to him is second to none, took over as Executive Director of GK, ) coped better than Padilla in the aftermath of their resignations.

Psychologically, any man who publicly declares he has no need for power and position actually hungers for them. Padilla and Meloto are such men. Meloto does it more subtly, though. For Padilla, there has to be a stage to showcase his admittedly prodigious talents; one smart way to get back on track was to get back people’s attention. He got their attention indeed with his CFC-GK3 paper.

Read on its own, the CFC-GK3 paper is a bombshell. In measured tones and exquisite prose, he seemingly hit the bull’s-eye. But read in tandem with his CFC-GK2 paper (something highly recommended) written barely six months earlier, one realizes that all his GK3 arguments are hollow and shallow, and a bellow from someone who is barely mellow.

For he could as well have rebutted the GK3 issues he raised by quoting his own defense in GK2. Call it semantic somersault. Call it erudite contradictions. Call it strange ruminations but this kind of thinking needs further observation. It is worrisome. He was the GK chair all those years the problems were incubating. His hands, one may argue, are also tainted.

Nevertheless, his moves rattled everyone. The Executive Council members, headed by the disenchantingly ineffective Joe Tale, did not know what hit them. Tale, who is really a nice chap, was not impressive in communicating the council’s defense and Padilla simply found him and the rest vulnerable. Meloto’s sepulchral silence did not help the council’s cause. And people wondered why. "Our house was on fire and he did not do anything," noted an insightful member.

The Choices We Have to Make

Now, CFC is virtually rendered split into two factions: the original CFC (with GK) and the CFC (with Foundation for Family and Life or FFL). It might as well read "Meloto versus Padilla." Curiously, both deny a continuing desire for power or position. But both suffer from cognitive dissonance: what they say do not tally with what they do.

Consider these: Meloto’s influence in CFC-GK remains potent. The CFC Executive Council and the majority of the Board of Elders are loyal to him. His hold on GK is secure: lock, stock, and barrel. He remains the power behind GK. Padilla, who implored members to trust him, is now the President of the CFC-FFL and will surely be the leader of his group. He may act coy about it but a clamour for his leadership is too tempting to ignore.

Talk about not wanting power and position. That is cognitive dissonance.


Updated:

More news links in the comments.

Side Notes: On Gifts, Strings, and Everything In Between Pt. 2

Gifts with strings attached are difficult to appreciate. Here's is the next set of emails between Frank Padilla and Dylan Wilk.

Frank Padilla wrote:

Hello Dylan.

It is not right to say that the money was given to him for GK, but not to GK. He asked that people donate to GK in lieu of presents, and that is what people did. The money is for GK, but of course given in honor of the occasion. Look, I also gave money that time. When we have brethren celebrating birthdays or anniversaries, we usually just greet them. On very special occasions, like the 25th, we would give a gift. But people gave more BECAUSE THE MONEY WAS FOR GK. While people love and honor Tony & Lyn, they would not have given the amounts they gave if it was not for GK. And so it is not right that Tony has personal discretion over the fund. Just like any other GK money, it is only GK that should decide how money should be spent. And by the way, the funds were not just used for GK purposes but for personal. Should we have a list of all payments made so that we will actually see?
This so-called TM fund in GK is totally different from the Fulltimers Fund in CFC. First, as I said, this is other people's money, though given on the occasion of his anniversary, but now is GK money, while the FFund is my own money. Second, no fund was set up at the start, and the so-called TM fund was only set up later (because it was already being used for personal purposes), while from the start the FFund was deliberately set up for its specific purpose.

God bless.


At 05:24 PM 4/19/2007, you wrote:

Hi tito,

It seems I misunderstood when I was told that there was a question mark over the funds for the Meloto's 25th anniversary. I didn't know that any other money had been raised and so assumed it was my gift, hence my urgency in trying to clarify it with you. However, I've now verified and there seems to have been no impropriety at all in the way those funds were used either. If by 'personal fund' you mean a fund that he had personal discretion over, I don't see anything wrong in that as long as the funds were still used for GK purposes, which they were. That is no different to the fulltime workers fund that I believe you have discretion over. The money was given to him after all for GK, not to GK.

God bless,

Dylan

At 03:24 PM 4/22/2007, you wrote:

Hi tito,

OK I see the distinction between this and the full-timers fund; I didn't realise that was your money. I've asked two people who should know and been told there was no personal expense taken out of this fund and everything was spent for GK purposes, albeit things outside the usual GK programs (e.g. burial expenses, false teeth, etc for beneficiaries). However I'll do more research because, like you, I don't want even the slightest hint of impropriety in GK.

But it doesn't sound likely to me that even if there was some personal expense, that this would be at TM's explicit direction. You have known him far longer than me and you know he has totally detached himself from money. He has many people around him who are willing to pay his personal expenses (e.g. me). All the prize money he received from the Haydee Yorac, Ramon Magsaysay, etc plus all his speaking honoraria have been given straight to GK. This does not sound like the Tony Meloto we know. I suspect if this happened then it's probably someone taking the initiative to use this fund. Anyway, further research will be done and I'm sure if there has been any personal expense, he will make a corresponding donation to GK to cover it.

Tito, since we're on this subject, there's something I'd like to ask you about again because it's been on my mind ever since it happened and I'd like you to clear it up and put my mind at rest. About 2 years ago I discovered that some ANCOP money, donations from non-CFC members for the poor, had been used for CFC events and equipment in 2 or 3 areas in Europe. When I alerted you to it, your response was that if anything like this was going on, you expect to hear about it from the Borjas and not from me. Despite several requests from me, no action was taken to return the funds to ANCOP and no-one as far as I know was ever reprimanded for it. I've never told anyone about this but I'll be very honest, ever since then there has been a question mark in my mind about your integrity. Then recently you suggested I make up a false email address and pretend to be someone else to get information out of the Boo Chanco letter writer. This also shocked me because there was a perfectly legitimate route available to us which didn't involve deception, namely you simply asking Sandra who had emailed her.

Tito, I'm not trying to throw bricks at you and I'm not trying to be accusatory, I'm simply telling you what's on my mind. I haven't shared this with anyone but I would very much like you to put my mind at rest. As I continue to repeat, I have the highest regard for you.

God bless,

Dylan


Frank Padilla wrote:

Gerry already asked Sandra and she said it was not her, and I told you so. You were the one who said the letter writer claimed to be Lyn's relative, and I just said that that was what we suspected all along. Then you said I should investigate, but I suggested it should be you. That is when the suggestion came in. It was intended for good, that we both find out in a simple manner who indeed was the letter writer. In truth, I did not want to do such things (like a spy), and so I did not want to do it, but since it was for good, and would have easily settled a lot of things, I thought you might have no problem doing it so I suggested you do it.

Regarding Europe, I cannot remember what you say. I doubt very much if I put you off and told you I should just hear from the Borjas and not from you. I am not like that. I take in whatever inputs and comments anyone has, and in fact I have always had that posture throughout the world. Perhaps I could have said I would like to hear the report from the Borjas, which would have been very different from how what you are saying sounds. I also doubt that you gave me several requests, because just one request would have been sufficient for me to pass it on to the Borjas or anyone else concerned for action. If you did request, then I would indeed have passed it on. I would also have stated clearly that no Ancop funds should be used for CFC. If no action was taken, I am no longer accountable for that, because it is not my task to keep following up on everything happening everywhere in the global family. It would have been your task to follow up, and if after some follow ups nothing is done, I would have connected you directly with the Borjas and even arranged a meeting for you to thresh everything out. Anyway, I seem to remember the incident vaguely, and perhaps that whole thing has already been settled. If not, please do bring it up.

Regarding the TM fund, I am not suggesting that there are improprieties in the sense of blatant personal use. I even personally do not mind if some personal expenses are spent. But it is a matter of principle. If it belongs to GK, then it is GK that decides what it is spent for. Even if it is spent for outside the usual GK programs as you say, it should not be at Tony's discretion. Our helping brethren with burial, false teeth, etc., are for our own personal account, not for GK. Now you say it might be someone taking the initiative to use the fund. Well, again, it belongs to GK.

Just clarity re honoraria and prize moneys. It has been an established principle in CFC that all these belong to the community. I always turned over in full whatever honoraria outside groups gave me. Further, there would be no honoraria or prize money if not for GK and the work of all of us. These really do not belong to him, but to God and to His work.
God bless.

This exchange seems to have no ending, but it does. The last word is hotly contested....he who has the last word wins. But is the winner the better man? I think they give a good insight into what motivates each one.

Side Notes: On Gifts, Strings, and Everything In Between

A little background:

Dylan Wilk is married to Anna, Tony Meloto's daughter. He is the owner of the infamous "second-hand BMW" mentioned in the Lorenzo Cruz email that also questioned his assets. To learn more about him, please refer to the following link:

http://www.4-small-businesses.co.uk/top-small-businesses-idea-004.html

After Frank Padilla's GK-3 paper, the enmity between Frank and Tony solidified.

Here is a partial quote from the GK-3 paper :

TWO: Tony as “founder,” “father” or “driving force.”

REALITY: God gave GK to CFC. GK has no human founder. Jesus said to call no one
on earth “father,” since we all have only one Father, who is God.4 Further, being father is practically the same as being founder, since a father (with the mother) gives life to a child. The “driving force” behind GK is the Holy Spirit.

GOD’S INTENT: God intends to do a miraculous work through GK. God intends such
miraculous work to get the world to look to Him and recognize His majesty.

CONCERN: To call Tony or anyone else the founder, father or driving force is to put the person in place of God. Further, it makes GK simply of human and not divine origin. Still further, God is a jealous God and this can put Tony in jeopardy.

THE SOLUTION IS SIMPLE: Let us not build the cult of any one person. What should be promoted, and this will be sufficient for marketing purposes, is Gawad Kalinga and not any one person. In fact, since Tony by his own claim is now just a volunteer, the ones who should be at the forefront should be the GK Chair, Joe, and the GK Executive Director, Luis.6

Footnote.
6
It follows that Joe and Luis will be the ones to sign MOAs and contracts, represent GK officially, and speak at major GK events.

After GK-3 was released on Easter Sunday (hence the moniker, "Easter Group"), Tony admitted to feeling hurt and all communications ceased between Frank and Tony. Tony continued his work advocating GK here and abroad. His son-in-law Dylan had temporarily relocated to the USA with Anna to help further GK's causes there.

Frank Padilla's inquiry into Dylan's activities in the USA prompted this email exchange. To those wondering how I come across these emails; these are currently being distributed and forwarded in the CFC community by concerned members. I'm not the only one privy to these emails.

Date: Wed, 18 Apr 2007 15:31:01 +0800

To: "Issa Cuevas-Santos"

From: Frank Padilla

Subject: Re: gk recollection

If there is only one talk, then I am speaking about Lamentations. So there will be no need for a talk outline anymore. God bless.

Frank Padilla wrote:

By the way, you do not know about this GK Recollection? During our time, it certainly was not approved by the GK Board. Is Dylan now handling formation for GK? God bless.

From: Dylan Wilk

Subject: Re: Fwd: Re: gk recollection

To: Frank Padilla

Hi tito Frank,

As you know, I have been giving talks about GK both to CFC and non-CFC members every time I have been to the US for the past 3 years. I usually just pray and make a few notes but don't write the talks out in full unless I intend other people besides myself to give them after I leave. In fact, you yourself have approved them all when that has been the case (e.g. 'Renewing the Face of the Earth', 'Crossing the Jordan' and 'Shepherding a Nation').

The 'recollection' I gave in a few places in the US a couple of months ago was a talk entitled 'The Heart of GK' and it was specifically for GK partners and volunteers, which included both CFC and non-CFC members. It included my personal sharing about CFC and as I reported to you after I came back, several people (that I know of) agreed to take the CLP after listening to it.

I don't have a written up version of the talk, only a few scribbled notes.

By the way, I just heard that you were told by somebody that my 25th anniversary gift to the Melotos was misused. To make absolutely sure that you have the correct facts, all I gave the Melotos was a card saying that I would build 50 houses in each of their hometowns. They never touched the money. It was taken from my GK account and sent directly to the sites. Everything has been liquidated and accounted for.

This is yet another example of somebody completely fabricating an extremely vicious lie and feeding it to you. Could you let me know where it came from?

Thanks and God bless,

Dylan

Frank Padilla wrote:

Hello Dylan. I think it was the US that talked about a GK Recollection (12 talks?). Jorge Villanueva of GK Europe is also scheduled to give a GK recollection. I just asked Issa about it (see 4/17 email below), but I did not say it was yours. So is there any other GK Recollection with a series of talks? Your talking about GK including your personal sharing is of course OK. You are free to do that anywhere. But if our CFC brethren are called for a formal GK recollection, that is what I would like to be aware of.

By the way, you and Luis and Joe never responded to my email of 3/29 asking about your formal role or goals in going to the US for 6 months. As far as I know, the US Council is also unaware. Don't you think that we need to coordinate these things, if you are going to be relating with CFC members on such an extensive basis?

I also did not hear anything from you about the last GK Board meeting, as you had told me that you would bring up to them my suggestion, which you agree with, of having an open dialogue to tackle all issues.

You are right about people fabricating vicious lies -- no, not what was told to me, but what was told to you. Nothing is being mentioned by any of us regarding your building a village for the Melotos. There is no issue at all about that. What is being mentioned, and I know about it, is the money raised during the Melotos' 25th anniversary where contributions to GK were given in lieu of gifts. This money was placed in GK, and rightly so. But it has been treated as a personal fund, where Tony draws for personal expenses, rather than being GK's money as it truly is. Now it is my turn to ask you: could you let me know who told you? Perhaps one of the Council members, since it was brought up, just as an aside, during our meeting just last Monday?

Yes there is a lot of loose talk. Yes we get all heated up when we hear one-sided and at times erroneous reports. So the important thing is to have a dialogue, or a meeting where every issue is surfaced and people really speak out and we look for the truth. For my part I have nothing to hide. I am open to being asked anything. I promise not to be angry or defensive. I am not onion-skinned or vindictive. When I have some important issues, I put it on paper (like CFC and GK - 3) rather than talking behind people's backs. I desire only the good of all. All I want is to surface the truth, since the enemy works in darkness and exploits all of us. I am still waiting for that meeting.

God bless.

Questions:

Frank's statement, "I just asked Issa about it (see 4/17 email below), but I did not say it was yours." may have been true in context, but the implication of Dylan's involvment was certainly present in his email to Issa,

"During our time, it certainly was not approved by the GK Board. Is Dylan now handling formation for GK?"

One would also wonder why Frank Padilla feels the need to be involved in these matters when he had resigned as CFC Director and GK Chair back in February, as documented in the Feb-March issue of the Ugnayan:

Collective Responsibility

We take collective responsibility for the disillusionment that causes elders to even
leave the community. We, in the Council, have tried to give our all but it seems not good enough. We have simply fallen short of God’s expectations. And we repent of these, of course.

But we need to suffer the consequences. The council, in recognition of all of these, is willing to face the consequences. So as of today, our brother Tony Meloto, our brother Lachie Agana and myself are out of the CFC Council and out of the Gawad Kalinga board. I will no longer be CFC Director and GK Chair and our brother Tony will no longer be the GK Executive Director. The four other brothers of the Council will continue as a Council. The three of us - Tony, myself and Lachie - will continue to serve in whatever capacity that the Council deems proper for us or whatever they ask of us.

There is a need for drastic purification of the body. This is our Lamentations. We strongly reaffirm our brotherhood and sisterhood in the Council. We strongly affirm our love for one another. The Council is one in this decision; in making this decision we simply look to God’s mercy not just upon us, but upon our whole community.

A note to readers:

I'm now putting a lot more information in each post, including links to documents, sound bites, and official statements/articles. Please do click on the links embedded in the post, they will help you look at all aspects of the issues.

Coming up...the rest of the email exchange between Dylan and Frank, as well as more on the "gifts" and the "giver."

The Easter Egg Hunt continues....

Side Notes: Questions Answered, Pt. 4

What are the "affidavits"?



There are 5 affidavits from workers in the home office. They detail complaints about a male and female elder and their alleged procedural, financial, and adminstrative "lapses", and certain personal concerns of these workers.

These affidavits were labeled by Frank Padilla as a "witchhunt", the details of which were found in the recently deleted Zeny Gimenez email.

These affidavits came about after the three-man resignation.

To date, these affidavits have not been acted upon. They have been shelved by the 4-man council in an attempt to keep the peace. No further investigations were done....for now.

Scene 3 - Of Camels, Straws, and Backs.

Feb 13, 2007. At the Council Meeting.



In light of the recent attacks on his character and motives, Tony Meloto announces his resignation.

Frank Padilla followed suit.

Lachie Agana was requested by both Tony and Frank to resign as well. He did.

Hence The Three Musketeers dismount and give up the reigns...


D'Artagnan, in this saga, is a woman...


End of Act I