RobertKlitzkie,Esq.

22BakiCt.,Yigo,GU96929
(671)6536607
klitzkie@hotmail.com

September1,2016

Re:YoarealpropertydeededawaybyApuron

DearArchbishopHonandmembersofthePresbyteralCounsel:

WhenDavidSablan,RichardUntalanandImadeourpresentationonAugust11,I
volunteered1tomakesuggestionsthatmighthelptheArchdioceserecoverfeetitletothe
referencedproperty.IindicatedthatinorderformetobesurethatArchbishopHon
sincerelydesiredreturnoffeesimpletitleunencumberedbythedeedrestrictionwhich
readsinpertinentpart,INPERPETUALUSEASASEEtwoactionsonhispart
wouldbenecessary:

1) a correctionofHonstheisnodoubtcommentretheownershipof
thereferencedproperty
2) a correction in the Umatuna Si Yuos for November 29 that
deliberately ran a grossly misleading , bogus certificate of title for the
referenced land. (See accompanying copy of the Umatuna and VI,
supra.)

Iwillpostponereiterationofthosemattersatleasttemporally2infavorofexplaining
whatIthinkcouldbedonetorecovertheYoapropertyfreeoftheINPERPETUAL
USEASASEErestrictionsothatitonceagainbecomesanunencumberedpartof
thepatrimonyoftheArchdioceseofAgaaandnottheprivatefiefofthe
NeocatechumenalWay.TherealityisthattheYoarealtyisnolongerpartofthe
patrimonyoftheArchdiocesebecauseApurongaveitawayonNovember22,2011by
meansoftheDeclarationofDeedRestriction(DDR)asaptlydemonstratedintheBronze
Opinion.*UnfortunatelyArchbishopHonhasrepeatedlysaidthattheArchdioceseowns
thepropertybutsubjecttotheINPERPETUALUSEASASEErestriction.

ArchbishopHonspositionisunfortunateforthreereasons:

First, reference to the to the language of the DDR itself and to the
explanationcontainedintheBronzeOpinion*showsthatitisincorrect
1

Icommentasanobservernotasyourlawyer.Youshouldshowthislettercontainingmyobservationsto
yourlawyer.

2
NBthatMsgr.DavidC.QuituguaismentionedintheDDRandtheUmatunawherehepublishedthe
boguscertificateoftitle.

Second, Archbishop Hons stance gives credence to the position ofthe

verypersonwhogavethepropertyaway,Apuron
Third,itignoresthefactthatonlyaconveyance,

i.e.adeed,fromthe
RMSCorporationtoArchdiocese(i.e.thecorporationsole)canremove
theINPERPETUALUSEASASEErestriction.

NeithertheArchbishopofAgaanortheboardofdirectorscanremovetheIN
PERPETUALUSEASASEErestriction.Onlyaconveyancebacktothe
Archdiocesecan.

Severalconsiderationsareinvolvedinthereturnofthepropertytothepatrimonyofthe
Archdiocese:
1) ArchbishopHonmustcometogripswiththefactthatApurongavetheproperty
away.
2) ArchbishopHonshouldnotcontinuetoempowerApuron.
3) ArchbishopHonshouldtenderadraftcorporateresolutiontotheboardof
directorsoftheRMSCorporationauthorizingtheexecutionofaGrantDeedin
favoroftheDioceses.
4) ArchbishopHonshouldtenderadraftresolutiontotheboardofguarantorsofthe
RMSCorporationauthorizingtheexecutionofaGrantDeedinfavorofthe
Diocese.
5) TheproperlyexecutedGrantDeedmustberecordedinthechainoftitleofthe
realproperty.
6) Papersasper3),4)and5)weredisplayedattheAugust11meeting.
7) IpresentedthepapersalongwithsuggestionsastohowtodustthemofftoEd
Terlaje,Esq.onAugust19.
8) If5)wereaccomplishedfeesimpletitlewouldvestintheArchdiocese.Because
ofthedoctrineofmergertheINPERPETUALUSEASASEErestriction
wouldmergeintotheArchdiocesestitleandbenullified.
9) CAVEAT:3)through9)dependonArchbishopHonsabilitytoprocureseveral
signatures,e.g.Apurons,theGennarinisandFr.Pochettis.SinceArchbishop
HonhassteadfastlymaintainedthathedoesntknowApuronswhereaboutsthis
solutionmaynotbefeasible.
10) AbsentthecooperationofApuron,theGennarinisandFr.Pochetti

etal.this
solutionwontwork.
11) ArchbishopHonasApostolicAdministratoroftheArchdiocesemustconsider
thenecessityoflitigationinordertobringthepropertyhome.

ArchbishopHonhasimpliedlycommittedhimselftolitigationinhisNewsReleaseof
August19whichreadsinpertinentpart:

Thus, I hereby sincerely ask the collaboration of all the faithful to act
with obedience to the directive of the Holy See. And, in particular, I
request that community which now enjoys in perpetuity the use of the
"property" to spontaneously and effectively renounce, without any
2

litigation, such a benefit obtained from the Archdiocese of Agaa.Sucha

courageous act of renouncing will certainly earn respect and recognition
from the HolySee,aswellasmany faithful,thePresbyterial[sic]Council,
andmyself.

TheChurchwillupdatethefaithfulasitprogressesinthisarea.

The implication is that if the community doesnt spontaneously and effectively

renounce,litigationmaylie.Thefaithfulwillbelookingforwardtotheupdates.

TheApostolicAdministratorandthePresbyteralCounselwouldbewelladvisedto
reviewtheAugust31StatementConcerningtheYoaPropertybyformermembersof
theArchdiocesanFinanceCouncil.Iespeciallycallyourattentiontothelastparagraphof
thestatementwhichreads:

Unbeknownst to us, Archbishop Apuron, with the help of Monsignor David,

Fr. Pius, Fr. Adrian, and the NCW, secretly and without consulting and
securing the consent of theAFC,letalone theCollege ofConsultersandthe
Vatican, transferred theYonapropertytotheRMSandrecordedthedeedon
November 22, 2011. This is why the November16letterwasneverdeliveredto
us until after November 22 and why the Vicar General andArchbishopwereso
vehement in their reaction to us that we were holding a meeting to discuss the
issue. They wanted to eliminate and preempt the possibility that we will
discover during a meeting of the AFC that they had alreadysecretlytransferred
the property, a disclosure that would have ignited a canonical firestorm. We
were fired to hide the fact that the archbishop and others secretly and in
violation of canon law, and perhaps civil law as well, not to mention their
fiduciary responsibility to the Catholic faithful, gave away the Yona
property to the RMS, a separate entity controlled by the NCW, for free.
[Emphasissupplied.]

That statement needs to bereadthroughthelensof18GCA10105,10106and10107

whicharesetout,withmyemphasis,inpertinentpartbelow:

10105. Property to be Held in Trust. From and after the filing with the
Director of Revenue &Taxationofthesaidarticlesofincorporation,verifiedby
affidavit or affirmation as aforesaid and accompanied by the copy of the
commission, certificate of election, of letters of appointment of the bishop,
shall become a corporation sole, andalltemporalities,estatesandproperties
ofthechurchtheretoforeadministeredormanagedbyhimassuchbishop,
shall be held in trust by himasacorporationsolefortheuse,purpose,behoof,
and sole benefit of his religious denomination, or church, including
hospitals, schools, colleges, orphan asylums, parsonages, and cemeteries
thereof.
3

 10106. Successors, Commissions, or Certificates of Election. The successors

in office of any bishop, chief priest, or presiding elder incorporated as a
corporation sole shall become the corporation sole on accession to office, and
shall be permitted to transact business as such on filing with the Director of
Revenue & Taxation a copy of their commissions, certificates of election, or
letters of appointment duly certified to be correct by any notary public or clerk
of a court of record. For filing of every such copy of a commission, certificate,
or letters the said Director of Revenue & Taxation shall collect thesumofFive
Dollars ($5.00). During a vacancy in the office of bishop, of any church
incorporated as a corporation sole, the person or persons authorized and
empowered by the rules, regulations, or discipline of the religious
denomination, society, or church represented by the corporation sole to
administer the temporalities and manage the estates and property of the
corporation soleduringthevacancyshallexerciseallthepowerandauthority
ofthecorporationsoleduringsuchvacancy.

10107. Purchase, Sale, etc., of Property. Any corporation sole may purchase
and hold real estate and personal property foritschurch,charitable,benevolent,
or educational purposes, and may receive bequests or gifts for such purposes.
Such corporation may mortgage or sell real property held by it upon
obtaining an order for that purpose from the Superior Court but before
making the order proof must be made to the satisfaction of thecourtthatnotice
of the application for leave to mortgage or sellhasbeengivenbypublicationor
otherwise in such manner and for such time as said court or the judge thereof
may have directed, and that it is to the interest of the corporation that leave to
mortgage or sell shouldbegranted.Theapplicationforleavetomortgageorsell
must be made by petition, duly verified by the bishop, chief priest,orpresiding
elder, acting as corporation sole, and may be opposed by any member of the
religious denomination, society, or church represented by the corporation sole
Provided, however,thatincaseswheretherules,regulations,anddisciplineof
the religious denomination, society, or church concerned, represented by such
corporation sole, regulate the methods of acquiring, holding, selling, and
mortgaging real estate and personal property, such rules, regulations, and
disciplineshallcontrolandtheinterventionofthecourtsshallnotbenecessary.

TheAugust31StatementConcerningtheYoaPropertyformermembersofthe
ArchdiocesanFinanceCouncilindicatesthattherequisite10107approvalsand
consentswerenotobtained.

InsummaryApuron,assistedbyatleasttwoothers,gavetheYoapropertyaway.The
feesimpletitletotheproperty,absenttheINPERPETUALUSEASASEE
restrictioncanbereturnedtotheArchdioceseofAgaabymeansofagrantdeed
authorizedbytheboardofdirectorsandtheboardofguarantorsoftheRMSCorporation.
TheabilitytoobtainthenecessarysignaturesofApuron,theGennarinisandFr.Pochetti
isnecessarytopursuethisoption.
4


AnotheroptionistolitigatethematterasperArchbishopHonsstatementofAugust19.
TheAugust31StatementConcerningtheYoaPropertybytheformermembersofthe
ArchdiocesanFinanceCounciloughttobeofgreatassistancehere.(Onceagain,I
recommendthatyoushowthislettertoyourlawyer.)

Anotheroptionistodonothingoritsfunctionalequivalent,talkingaboutremovalofthe
INPERPETUALUSEASASEErestrictionasthoughitcanbeaffectedwithout
conveyingthefeebacktotheArchdiocese.
Employing the third option, i.e. doing nothing, amounts to a surrender to Apuron and
Pius and the humiliation of Archbishop Hon, a result that to loyal Catholics would be
abhorrent.

As per final sentence of Archbishop Hons August 19 statement, The Church will
updatethefaithfulasitprogressesinthisarea,weeagerlyanticipatetheupdate.

Sincerely,

RobertKlitzkie

*IhavesenttheBronzeOpinioninaseparateemail.TheBronzeOpinioniscertainlynot
easyreading.Inanattempttohelpyougetthroughtheverbiage,Itooktolibertyof
highlightingkeyportionsoftheOpinion.Belowisthedirectorytothekeypoints.Setout
alsoarelinkstothetermsfeesimpleandconveyance.

I. Thekeypartsoftheopinionareonpp.2,3,5,8,9,15,17,20and28.

II. Pages2and20areBronzesfindingthattheDeclarationofDeedRestriction
(DDR)conveyedthefeesimpleinteresttotheRMSCorp.
Heresalinktoadefinitionoffeesimple:
https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/fee_simple

III. Pages3,5,9and20opinethattransferred,soldandconveyedarewords
ofconveyance.
Hereslinktothedefinitionofconveyance:
Conveyancelegaldefinitionofconveyance

IV. Page8completedivestmentoftheGrantorsright,titleandinterest

V. Pages17and20opinethatthetransactionisgovernedbycivil,i.e.Guam,lawnot
Churchlaw.

VI. Page28istheDecreeofDesignationshowingthenameofMsgr.DavidC.
QuituguawhowasnamedintheDecreeofDesignationincorporatedintothe
DDRwhichenjoinedtheVicarGeneralQuituguato:
5


PERFORMEVERYACTANDTHINGTHATISNECESSARYOR
APPROPROPRIATETOACCOMPLISHTHEPURPOSEHEREIN,[all
capsin
theoriginal]

QuituguawasalsoresponsiblefortheNovember29Umatunainwhichthebogus
certificateoftitlewaspublished.