Resolution 5:
Sustainability Principles
Last Update: September 26, 2025
Status
This resolution will not be submitted to the Convention by the Committee on Resolutions. See Rules of Order 1.5.
Resolution Text:
Resolved, That the 176th Convention of the Diocese of California affirms and seeks to implement General Convention Resolution A020 (2022) supporting the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals, and encourages its congregations and institutions to work towards achieving those goals;
Resolved, That this convention directs the Executive Council, in consultation with the Standing Committee, to develop a Statement of Sustainability Principles for their fiduciary roles, reflecting sustainable decision-making choices for future generations; and
Resolved, That the Executive Council report to the 178th Convention its findings and actions responding to this resolution, including constitution and canon amendments as may be appropriate.
Explanation:
The 80th General Convention expresses its support for Sustainable Development Goals (A020 – GC2022: note 1) and encourages all parishes, dioceses, and jurisdictions to support the United Nation’s Decade of Action (2020-2030) to achieve Sustainable Development Goals.
What is Sustainability? In the charter for the UCLA Sustainability Committee (note 2), sustainability is defined as: “the integration of environmental health, social equity and economic vitality in order to create thriving, healthy, diverse and resilient communities for this generation and generations to come. The practice of sustainability recognizes how these issues are interconnected and requires a systems approach and an acknowledgement of complexity.” Sustainable practices support ecological, human, and economic health and vitality. Sustainability presumes that resources are finite and should be used conservatively and wisely with a view to long-term priorities and consequences of the ways in which resources are used. In simplest terms, sustainability is about our children and our grandchildren, and the world we will leave them.
The Executive Council is the legal Board of Directors for the Diocese of California and shares some fiduciary duties with the Standing Committee. The legal standard of Fiduciary Duties for Directors of California Nonprofit Public Benefit Corporations is outlined in a DioCal Executive Council document (note 3). On pages 1–5, the duties and conduct a director is held accountable for are identified as 1) Duty of Care, 2) Duty of Loyalty, and 3) New Standards of Conduct for California Nonprofits.
The United Nations Environment Programme Finance Initiative (UNEP FI) and its Fiduciary Duty in the 21st Century study (note 4) shares the practice of Environmental, Social, and Governance (ESG) factors in the fiduciary role for investors. Policymakers have encouraged and imposed new requirements. The financial sector has been applying this economic model to a more sustainable pathway. Economies are updating their frameworks for both the private and public sectors. DioCal’s investment portfolio is managed with the Domestic and Foreign Missionary Society’s (DFMS) $450 mm portfolio, where ESG fiduciary policies are applied.
The subsequent Fiduciary Duty in the 21st Century Final Report makes recommendations on how the fiduciary duties have evolved over the past 15 – 20 years. A comparison is available as noted below (Note 5).
The Church Pension Fund Sustainability Report (note 6) was written as a response to the General Convention’s “Divestment and Just Transition” resolution (A089 – GC 2022). The CPF provides a five-page summary with an explanation of: 1) Corporate Values and Environmental Sustainability; 2) Investments and Environmental Sustainability; and 3) Collaboration Across the Church. It’s also interesting to note that Examples of integrated finance and sustainability policies align with one another as shown in Page 16 (Box 3) and are consistent with CPG’s Corporate Values.
In summation, the Executive Council and Standing Committee need to evaluate how the Fiduciary Role and Duties have evolved and Integrate sustainability principles into a concise document so that all our diocesan bodies will be better positioned to perform.
References
1 Encourage Support of the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals {A020 – GC 2022 }
2 UCLA’s Comprehensive Sustainability Plan
3 Fiduciary Duties of Directors {DioCal Executive Council – Documents}
4Fiduciary Duty in the 21st Century {UN Environment Programme – Finance Initiative}
5Comparison of traditional and modern fiduciary duties from Fiduciary Duty in the 21st Century Final Report {UNEP FI}
6The Church Pension Fund Sustainability Report {Response to Resolution A089 – GC2022}
Frequently Asked Questions can be found here.
Fiscal Impact:
This resolution would have no impact on the diocesan budget.
Submitted by:
Warren J. Wong, Delegate – St. James, SF wjwstjames@gmail.com (San Francisco Deanery)
Emily Hopkins – Resurrection, Pleasant Hill emilyhopkins4@gmail.com (Contra Costa Deanery)
Convention rules limit the Committee on Resolutions to submitting no more than five resolutions to the convention for debate and vote. Of the six resolutions proposed this year, the committee finds this resolution to be the least ready to be submitted. Sustainability is an important objective and should be addressed by diocesan leadership. However, the Committee on Resolutions finds that this resolution lacks a clear definition of sustainability. While the text of the resolution refers to “fiduciary roles,” the explanation appears to go far beyond that, potentially including all 17 United Nations Sustainable Development Goals. This creates an apparent conflict in scope between the resolution itself and the rationale for it. The committee is also concerned about adding significant work for the Executive Council at a time when it will be implementing many new goals from the Strategic Visioning Plan, work that would include interpreting the resolution as well as acting on it. The proponents appear to have acknowledged that potential conflict by extending the due date for the requested statement from the 2026 convention to the 2027 convention. The committee concluded that the extra time would be better utilized by refining the resolution and its explanation to provide a clearer and more focused definition of the intended outcome.
We understand the resolutions committee experienced some confusion, given the many interwoven and interdependent strands that create the fabric of sustainability. The practice of sustainability recognizes how these issues — environmental health, social equity, and economic vitality — are interconnected and requires a systems approach and an acknowledgement of complexity.
We choose not to withdraw this resolution.
Sustainability is the existential and moral issue of our time, as underscored by the continued support over decades by the Episcopal Church for the UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs).
No organization can fully address all 17 SDGs, but we are charged to address what we can, and that is why we chose the lens of fiduciary responsibility, because financial decisions are moral choices. And we provided a working definition and several existing models of sustainability as a fiduciary responsibility that could be adapted or adopted for the Diocese of California.
With all due respect, it is not the purview of the Resolutions Committee to determine the scope of work for Executive Council; that is the role of Convention.
We regret that Convention will not have the opportunity to discuss and vote on developing Sustainability Principles in 2025, for consideration and action at General Convention in 2027. The clock is ticking, the climate crisis is accelerating, and the time for embracing sustainability is now. We hope that this resolution will inspire our members at all levels, within the church and in our communities and circles of influence, to make decisions that integrate environmental health, social equity, and economic vitality in order to create thriving, healthy, diverse, and resilient communities for this generation and generations to come.