TRC proposed budget December 2010

December 6, 2010

The Riverside Church Council, Worship Commission, and Clergy
The Riverside Church
New York, NY 10027

Dear brothers and sisters,

The Riverside Church proudly calls herself a “social justice” church. Sadly, her spending tells another story.

Congregants have been purposely kept uninformed that nearly two dozen people employed by The Riverside Church now earn six-figure salaries, and that many lower-earning employees have quietly been let go in the past two years without acknowledgement or mention. While raises have been given to the higher-earning employees, all ministry budgets have been cut.

The numbers are pretty simple.

The median household income in New York City in 2008 was $51,000; in 2009 it dropped to $47,000. New Yorkers spend, on average, 50% of their earnings on housing. So the non-housing portion of the median household is $23,500 per year.
In 2009, 3 million New York City residents lived in poverty, where poverty is defined as a three-family household earning less than $18,000 per year. In 2010, it appears New York City’s poverty rate has approached 21.3% of our population.

Since Riverside boasts being an “international” church, I’ll put the figures in an international context. An employee earning $100,000 per year is in the top 0.66% of the wealthiest humans on the planet. An employee earning $200,000 per year is in the top 0.01% globally. A small cadre of Riverside employees are being paid church salaries that place them among 0.66-0.01% wealthiest humans on earth. These numbers do not include clergy housing allowances, which are not taxed. Needless to say, most New Yorkers are not given untaxed housing funds to pay for their housing.

The congregation doesn’t have this information, but is asked to vote on a budget that is squarely based on this spending pattern. Our pulpit resounds with sermons discussing “need” and “greed.” But our spending is to be based on a Wall Street financier or “keeping-up-with-the-wealthy-parish-downtown” model. How is this in keeping with our mission of social justice? How is it Christian?

The newly proposed budget demands $1.2 million for finance and communications, while cutting all forms of ministry budgets. Information from several church departments suggests that a few individuals are unilaterally making budgetary decisions without informing the Council, let alone the congregation, of the details and ramifications of those choices. Such conduct is undemocratic and may violate New York corporate law. Furthermore, it exposes every member of the church’s governing body to personal liability for corporate malfeasance. Those governing the church have joint and several responsibilities to know the full details of the institution’s spending, including salaries and job descriptions, and to ensure that it the institution’s money is spent in furtherance of her religious and corporate mission.

Last January I told Council President Jean Schmidt that, legally and morally, every dollar the church spends must be evaluated by one question: Is this spending in keeping with/furtherance of our mission? That is the legal and moral standard we must meet.

So the ugly question looms: How can The Riverside Church claim to be a social justice church if she lives by capitalist greed rather than Christian ministry?

While the people who live in Harlem, New York City, the U.S.A., and the rest of the globe face the devastation of the greatest economic depression since the 1920’s, those making governing decisions at Riverside are placing a small number of people among the wealthiest in the world, while contributing to the economic despair of our local economy with stealth lay-offs and ministry cuts. None of this is being reported to the congregation, or possibly even to the members of the Council, under the guise of privacy concerns. (As a non-profit corporation full financial disclosure is required by law. It is easy to protect privacy by deleting names associated with salary figures, but salaries must be disclosed for governing officers to make fiscally responsible decisions and meet their legal obligations of fiduciary duty.)

For Riverside to minister in keeping with her social justice mission, no one “needs” a luxury salary. No one “needs” to earn hundreds of times the median income of other New Yorkers. No one earning over $100,000 “needs” a housing allowance. Ghandi lived in a mut hut. Bill Coffin lived in a small apartment. No one “needs” the Lord to buy them a Mercedes-Benz. If the only employees Riverside is attracting are those who demand luxury salaries, then we are attracting the wrong candidates for our mission.

Social justice begins with our example inside the church. Our acts speak louder than our words. Our spending is a strong, public act. And right now, our acts are not acts of social justice.

Before voting on the proposed budget, I urge every voting member of the congregation to demand a full and accurate accounting of all salaries (with names deleted) for every department, along with the hours each individual works for the church, and a full accounting of other benefits, flagging those benefits that are untaxed, as well as a list of the positions that have been cut, their salaries and job duties. Members should consider the percentage of the budget that goes to building maintenance, salaries, finance, and actual ministries. Members should consider expenditures for technology and consultants, and whether these costs duplicate salaried positions and are in fact necessary.

Once this information is provided, I urge every voting member to consider whether each dollar of the budget of the Riverside Church is an act of social justice. And then vote on the proposed budget accordingly.

As for myself, I will continue to donate $1.00 per year to the church until her spending is consistent with her mission. I did not join Riverside to pay to make a few people ultra-wealthy. I joined to minister to those in need. Thus, I continue to donate directly to those in need through the food pantry, clothing ministries, and other charities that actually minister to those in true need.

And for the record, I plan to vote against the proposed budget because it violates our legal and religious mission, and is antithetical to Christ’s ministry and teaching.

Jennifer Hoult, Esq.
Member, The Riverside Church