FAMILY CONNECTIONS AND CONFLICT OF INTERESTS
In a small community such as the IC, it is uncomfortable and yet necessary to discuss family relations. It is a matter of honesty to ensure that all church members be aware of the family relations within their community and how these relations often impact decisions and actions within the IC. This is particularly important when family relations have been an issue in controversial matters such as the mining case. There are several large families in the IC and though many aware of them, not all church members are. This chapter will therefore seek to explain what family relations were in place when the EXCOM made the contracts with Eden inc. in 2008 and 2009 and then later in 2022, and when the EXCOM tried to direct the discussion about the mining case at Session in 2022. I will first present a figure outlining the family relations:
TABLE
It is interesting to note that in fact it is one extended family who is fighting for the interests of Eden inc. and helping the present EXCOM to maintain power, while the rest of the church members – who either disagree explicitly with the mining operation, the conduct of the EXCOM, or have questions – are mostly unrelated families and individuals.
The Previous Contracts (2008 and 2009)
It seems to be an unwritten rule of the EXCOM that when an EXCOM member is related to a person involved in an agenda item, that the member steps out of the meeting when said agenda item is discussed. Whether this unwritten rule – to step out of the meeting because of family ties when an item is discussed) applies only to the discussion or also to voting is unknown to the author of this document.
When the previous contracts were signed in 2008 and 2009, the EXCOM was as follows: President Eric Guðmundsson, Secretary-Treasurer Sandra Mar Huldudóttir, Pastor Björgvin Snorrason, Elías Theodórsson, Björgvin Ibsen, Monette Indahl and Sólveig Hjördís Jónsdóttir.
Björgvin Snorrason is the father-in-law of Kristinn Ólafsson, co-owner of Eden.: Ólafsson is married to Cecilie B. Björgvinsdóttir, daughter of Snorrason. Snorrason voted when a decision was made whether to make a contract with his son-in-law’s company or not.
Other Contracts/Offers
Raufarhólshellir Cave
The EXCOM 2016–2019 received a bid from a Portuguese investor (who is an Adventist) concerning the utilization of Raufarhólshellir Cave, and later a bid from him concerning the utilization of Breiðabólstaður property.[1] The way the co-owners of Eden and their relatives reacted to these bids was different from how these same individuals reacted when it came to the contracts between the IC and Eden.
In the summer of 2016, the EXCOM was negotiating with Kynnisferðir inc. (Eiríkur Ingvarsson had contacted them on behalf of the IC). The company wanted to rent Raufarhólshellir Cave. Ingvarsson was the negotiator for the IC. Negotiations with Kynnisferðir inc. were abandoned and negotiations with Raufarhóll inc. began. Before those second negotiations were concluded, the IC received another bid for the cave rental from the Portuguese investor Ruben Dias.[2]
It is worth comparing the two business offers that were on the table of the EXCOM.[3] They were in many respects different and it is unfortunate that as of yet these matters have not been sufficiently written about. What can be noted is that Raufarhóll inc. wanted to rent the cave for sixteen years (2016–2032) with a right to extend the contract until 2047; and it can be noted that Dias wanted, amongst other things, to return tithe in Iceland, close the cave on the Sabbath, and connect the cave operation to evangelism.[4]
Many EXCOM members preferred the bid from Dias. When some EXCOM members wanted to look closer at Dias’s bid, Eiríkur Ingvarsson and his father-in-law Ólafur Kristinsson (who was an EXCOM member at the time) pressed the EXCOM not to abandon negotiation with Raufarhóll inc. Ingvarsson said that the IC was risking a lawsuit[5] and Kristinsson said it would be unethical not to finish the negotiations.[6] EXCOM member Anna Margrét Þorbjarnardóttir contacted a lawyer who told her that it would not be possible to sue the IC for a contract which the IC had not finalized.[7]
The EXCOM decided to make a contract with Raufarhóll inc. EXCOM members Þorbjarnardóttir and Jónsdóttir had their protest against the vote noted in the minutes: They felt that the EXCOM was taking the decision in a hurry, instead of giving itself sufficient time to calmly consider both the bids before making a decision. They also thought this contract should have been announced more fully to church members before a decision was made.[8]
The present rental model will, however, not change anytime soon, for 30 August 2022 the EXCOM decided to extend the contract with Raufarhóll inc. until 2047.[9] For some reason Treasurer Judel Ditta did not mention this in her report to Session 2022.
The Health Center That Did Not Become a Reality
In December 2016, Ruben Dias contacted the EXCOM with another business idea. He envisioned the construction of a health center with a manmade lagoon and a hotel on the heath on the Breiðabólstaður property. The project would have a domino effect on the activities of the IC: Employees would be Adventists from other countries who, by arriving to the country, would strengthen the Church’s work in Iceland. Furthermore, the work of a health center would be in harmony with the goals and works of the Seventh-day Adventist Church (health work is part of the global work of the Church).
Early 2018, two extraordinary Sessions were held. At these Sessions, the EXCOM introduced their negotiations with Dias and the project. Ólafur Kristinsson (who by then had left the EXCOM) and Eiríkur Ingvarsson protested harshly against the project and said that the EXCOM was not capable of making such decisions on their own. It was moved that a negotiation committee be established and the motion was accepted to a certain point. The EXCOM continued their negotiations with Dias on their own.[10] The negotiations did not work out, however. According to Ruben Dias, who wrote a letter to the EXCOM concerning the matter, one of the reasons for the failure was that a few church members went to the Ölfus municipality commission and spoke against the project and delayed and hindered the bureaucratic process until the investors estimated these activities as a serious threat to the project and felt compelled to give it up.[11]
It has been shown above that the co-owners of Eden seem to have fought against contracts which the EXCOM wanted to do when those contracts were not with Eden or made via their network.
The New Contract (2022)
When the new contract with Eden was signed in January 2022, the family relations between the EXCOM members (2019–2023) and the co-owners of Eden were even stronger than when the older contracts with Eden were signed. The 2019–2023 EXCOM members are as follows: President Gavin Anthony, Executive Secretary Þóra Sigríður Jónsdóttir, Treasurer Judel Ditta, Njörður Ólason, Sandra Mar Huldudóttir, Signý Harpa Hjartardóttir, and Örn Jónsson.
Gavin Anthony is married to Þorbjörg Ásta Þorbjarnardóttir. She is cousin to Cecilie Björgvinsdóttir who is the wife of Kristinn Ólafsson, co-owner of Eden, in the following way: their mothers (Anna Jóna and Ásta respectively) are sisters
Örn Jónsson and Cecilie Björgvinsdóttir are cousins. Jónsson’s mother (Anna) and Cecilie’s father (Björgvin Snorrason) are siblings
Gavin Anthony and Örn Jónsson – the two EXCOM members who are related/connected to Kristinn Ólafsson, co-owner of Eden – are also connected to each other through family ties: Anthony’s sister-in-law, Helga Magnea Þorbjarnardóttir, is married to the brother of Örn Jónsson
Njörður Ólason works for Björgun, a daughter company of Hornsteinn. The contract between the IC and Eden is based on Eden’s co-operation/contract with Horsteinn/Heidelberg Materials
The present EXCOM members are seven. Of those seven, two have family ties to the co-owners of Eden (Anthony and Jónsson). A third member works for a company that is indirectly connected to Eden. How can it be deemed just that such a small group of people, connected to Eden in various ways, can make a unilateral decision to give Eden access to the most valuable resource of the IC?
Session 2022
In the meeting documents for Session 2022, one item in the otherwise traditional Index was novel: a report on the mining operation. In this report, the EXCOM presented the following motion to the Session: all discussion concerning the mining case should cease. It is therefore informative to look at who the delegates at Session in 2022 were and how many of them are connected to the EXCOM members and the co-owners of Eden.[12]
Each delegate represents ten church members of his church. Delegates should therefore only constitute 10% of the total number of their respective congregations. To best represent their congregation, delegates should represent the spectrum of their congregation when it comes to sex, age, and theological tendency (conservative/liberal), and family blocks. Such distribution could be seen in the delegate groups who came from the Hafnarfjörður, Árnes, Keflavík, and Vestmannaeyjar churches. In these churches, most members are not related, and this was reflected in the choice of delegates: very few of them were related.
The Conference Church had a right to five delegates. Yet for Session 2022, they only had three delegates. Of those three, two are married. The Conference Church members in Akureyri requested a more distributed representation and also asked for the full quota of five delegates. The EXCOM rejected these requests and refused to explain why.[13] It is noteworthy that Conference Church members in Akureyri requested that Sólveig Hjördís Jónsdóttir be made a delegate (she was one of the five church members who signed the open letter of 5 December 2021).
When it comes to Reykjavík church the distribution of delegates is quite different from the other churches. Eiríkur Ingvarsson, co-owner of Eden, and his wife, are both delegates. And of the 15 delegates, six come from the same family, a family which is connected to Executive Secretary Þóra Sigríður Jónsdóttir. (These six delegates are Freyja Rut Garðarsdóttir, Harald Óskarsson, Heba Magnúsdóttir, Indro Candi, Leó Blær Haraldsson, Marina Candi). Here is a schema to explain the family relations:
TABLE
These six delegates represent 60 church members. Why are the delegates of 60 church members all from the same family? Was it impossible to choose somebody else from the other 54 church members who were from another family? Either a great discrimination and nepotism is going on where one family is allowed to have an abnormally many delegates. Or the other 54 church members are just “names on the books.” But if the latter is the case, it would of course be honest to review the membership register to ensure that it reflects the actual participation in the church and that it does not give the congregation and abnormally great delegate power.
It is also worth pointing out the connections between the two Session chairs to the mining case. The two chairs were Helgi Jónsson and Brynjar Ólafsson.
Helgi Jónsson and the wife of Eden co-owner Kristinn Ólafsson are cousins. Jónsson was elected as one of the two chairs of Session 2022 – at this Session the mining case was on everyone’s mind.
Brynjar Ólafsson is the brother of Eden co-owner Kristinn Ólafsson. Brynjar Ólafsson is also Eden co-owner Eiríkur Ingvarsson’s brother-in-law. Brynjar Ólafsson is the chair of the Committee concerning the Utilization of Breiðabólstaður Property (2021–?). The Committee utilized many of the ideas of Eiríkur Ingvarsson.[14] Brynjar Ólafsson presented the committee’s report to delegates at Session in September 2022. He urged them that some of the business ideas had to be pushed through as soon as possible, it was so time sensitive to grab certain business opportunities. Brynjar Ólafsson was also elected as one of the two chairs at Session 2022 – at this Session the mining case was on everyone’s mind.
Conclusion
Choice of delegates seems to have been strange for Session 2022:
Conference Church members had 3 delegates instead of 5 (those who could have come as delegates are known for their criticism of the mining operation)
Reykjavík church sent Eiríkur Ingvarsson and his wife as delegates, as well as six other delegates who were all from the same family which Executive Secretary Þóra Sigríður Jónsdóttir belongs to. Thus, the church had a very narrow representation instead of a normal distribution of delegates across the spectrum in the church
[1] Witnesses to the two business bids and the whole process surrounding them are the EXCOM members of 2016–2019, as well as all delegates who attended the extraordinary Session in 2018. Documentation supporting the text of this document includes the unpublished EXCOM minutes from these years.
[2] Ruben Dias is Vice President for Communication for the Adventist lay-people association Adventist Laymen’s Services and Industries (ASI). “ASI Officers,” ASIMinistries.org, https://asiministries.org/about-asi/officers-board/.
[3] There is neither time nor space here to treat this subject as is necessary. It is the hope of the author that this subject will be discussed in print soon so that it can be explained in its entirety to church members.
[4] Ruben Dias, emails to the EXCOM, 30 May and 23 June 2016. The EXCOM members (2016–2019) are witnesses to this, as well as Ruben Dias.
[5] The EXCOM, item 2016/160, 29 June 2016.
[6] EXCOM members (2016–2019) are witnesses.
[7] “Anna Margrét Þorbjarnardóttir noted that she had contacted a lawyer and asked him whether the IC could be sued for some reason. Her lawyer’s reply was unequivocal: It is not possible to sue somebody for not having signed a contract.” The EXCOM, item 2016/160, 29 June 2016.
[8] The EXCOM, resolution 2016/165, 30 June 2016.
[9] Samtakastjórn, resolution 2022/86, 30 August 2022.
[10] For what occurred at the two extraordinary Sessions, cf. the minutes from those Sessions.
[11] “There were several reasons and somehow complex issues that added up to this hard decision. The main point is that we concluded that the Icelandic culture and business environment is unique and different from what the group is comfortable to undertake. The way business is generally conducted in Iceland, the cultural expectations, and the unique complexity of the local church culture were critical factors that had a heavy weight on our decision.
There were several factors and incidents that made it very difficult to keep the group motivated and confident in its capacity to operate in this business setting. During these couple of years, we found that although small in number, there has always been a stronghold of opposition within the Icelandic church membership, that would like to see the project fail at any cost. It became even more evident during the due diligence process. In our conversations with the local municipality, we were informed that some local members continued to boycott and jeopardize our initiatives by trying to negatively influence the municipality against our efforts. This permanent threat considerably weighted on the risk assessment.” Ruben Dias, letter to the EXCOM, 30 June 2019, meeting documents for Session 2019, pp. 71–72.
[12] The delegate register is found in the meeting documents for Session 2022, p. 16.
[13] Cf. the interaction of Conference Church members and the EXCOM, e.g., Jón Hjörleifur Stefánsson, email to the EXCOM, 4 September 2022.
[14] Committee concerning the Utilization of Breiðabólstaður Property, Report of the committee, November 2021, pp. 5–6. Other committee members were: Treasurer Judel Ditta, Indro Candi, Sandra Mar Huldudóttir, Steinþór Jónsson, and TED representative Audrey Anderson. Apart from present and previous church employees, two out of three laypersons were from the two families (who have been so prominent in the mining case) represented in the figures in this chapter. Unlike all the other committee reports, the present EXCOM felt it was important to have a direct link to this report in the weekly IC newsletter Kirkjufréttir, from the time the report was turned in, until 30 September 2022.