dm_mccabe

I still remain convinced that a resolution short of years of litigation is in the best interests of the community and the Church. I recognize that any emerging religion goes through a tough time in its formative years. I also recognize past mistakes of the Church. More importantly, I recognize that resolving conflict does not always require a war to the end, even when one is right. The Church won its suit against the City. But that did not result in peace for the Church, or lead the City to treat us in a better fashion. I believe the Church would be vindicated in the present case. Yet I am just as convinced that protracted litigation would not only be counter-productive but, in fact, destructive to the Church and the community.

Just as certainly, I recognize the need for any organization to take responsibility

for its acts. I could argue all day about the circumstances surrounding the unfortunate death of and how the Church is not to blame. But resolution, not talk or argument, is what is required, Responsibility, not blame, is what must be addressed. That is why I made the proposal to you which I continue to believe is in the best interests of all.

Let me reiterate that proposal.

That the Church accept a pre-trial intervention on the medical charge.

2) That the Church institute a “compliance program” to include:

Employing on a full-time basis a licensed medical doctor, who need

not be a Scientologist, to service our Church facilities including the many hotels we maintain for visiting parishioners.

Implementing a policy that such a medical doctor would perform

on the premises only routine medical services limited to treatment of minor injuries (cuts and bruises) and garden variety illnesses (colds and flu). All other illnesses or injuries would be referred to a hospital or clinic not on Church premises.

Precluding the boarding, in any of our facilities, of anyone with an

illness that is more than minor or garden variety in nature.