Ouster of NAACP Executive Director May Be Imminent : Civil rights: Group’s governing board is to meet Saturday to discuss Chavis’ status. He has lost members’ support since secretly settling a lawsuit.

NAACP Executive Director Benjamin F. Chavis Jr. has lost the support of board members representing Southern branches of the civil rights organization--a development that virtually assures he will be ousted when the board meets Saturday, sources said Monday.

The special session was called to discuss criticism of Chavis for secretly settling a sexual discrimination lawsuit against him with the organization’s money.

Although no actual head count has been taken, one NAACP director from the powerful Southern region observed that “there has been a lot of erosion” among Chavis’ supporters in the region, proof enough to convince him that the executive director cannot survive the board vote.

Board members from the Southern states tend to vote together and had been expected to support Chavis, who is from North Carolina and has been allied with board Chairman William F. Gibson of South Carolina. Gibson has also been hurt in the uproar over the issue. But the Southern board members are now likely to join members from other parts of the country, who have been more aggressive in their demands for Chavis’ resignation.

“It’s not a done deal that he’s going to lose this one,” one director said. “He could, in theory, still pull this out. But he would have to climb such a steep hill that I don’t think that’s a realistic possibility at this point.”

Another source close to the board and from the Southern region was more blunt: “He needs a Hail Mary pass, a grand-slam home run and a slam dunk to keep his seat.”

If Chavis--widely criticized from within and outside the National Assn. for the Advancement of Colored People--is ousted, it would come as the organization faces one of the most critical junctures in its 85-year history. The group is in financial turmoil with more than $3 million in debts.

In addition to the charges of sexual discrimination, Chavis has angered longtime members with his controversial attempt to revitalize the civil rights organization by redirecting it to attract younger members with overtures to such polarizing figures as Nation of Islam leader Louis Farrakhan, gang members and hard-core rap artists.

However, his departure, if it occurs, would stem directly from his committing $332,000 of the organization’s money to secretly settle a threatened sex discrimination and wrongful discharge suit by Mary E. Stansel, his former aide.

In the settlement--which he did not tell the board about--he agreed to pay Stansel two installments of $25,000 each, pay her an average $5,400 a month for six months and find her an $80,000-a-year job in the Washington area. He also promised to pay her an additional $250,000 if she did not obtain such a job.

When Chavis failed to make good on the $250,000 payment, Stansel sued for breach of contract, which is how the issue became public. Stansel has declined to comment on the matter and the details of the threatened suit are not known.

Some board members representing the Southern states said members in the region have had a hard time forgiving the secretive nature of the settlement. Others said they decided to call for Chavis’ removal after becoming alarmed by discussions within the NAACP that other women are expected to file similar charges against Chavis and the organization, sources said.

“This whole issue is not about repudiating the direction Ben is taking the organization, which many of us support,” said a source close to the board. “It’s about his judgment. He was not being straight with the people who supported him and that’s harder for some of us to accept than anything he’s alleged to have done. We never know what to expect next.”

What is less clear is Gibson’s fate. The NAACP chairman has been Chavis’ most visible and ardent supporter. Last month, as news reports revealed Chavis’ secret settlement with Stansel, Gibson rushed to stand by Chavis at a news conference and declared that “Dr. Chavis had complete executive authority to address the administrative complaint.”

According to the Associated Press, however, Gibson is backing away from his uncritical support of Chavis, saying he did not know the amount of the settlement at the time he expressed his support and that Chavis should not have had the authority to make such a settlement without the board’s knowledge.

“In hindsight, maybe that should be there,” Gibson said in an interview with the Associated Press. “We have authority over the executive director. We hire, employ and compensate him.”

Officials at the NAACP headquarters did not return calls Monday and neither Chavis nor Gibson could be reached for comment.

Some board members, especially those critical of Chavis and Gibson, interpreted Gibson’s AP interview as his attempt to distance himself from the rising tide of anger washing over Chavis.

Several NAACP members said Gibson controls at least 33 votes on the 64-member board. Gibson, a South Carolina dentist, wields considerable influence on the board because of his longtime civil rights activism and his political influence among Southern board members, they said.

“(Gibson) is trying to cut a deal with the board, especially those members in his region, to let Chavis go and to save his hide,” said Greg Evans, who, as president of the NAACP’s Washington-Oregon State Conference of Branches, was among the first to call on Chavis and Gibson to resign.

“Gibson is the ultimate NAACP politician and I don’t know whether that strategy will work or not because you only get rid of half the problem if the board only cuts Chavis loose.”

But one Gibson supporter, who has close ties to the board, predicted the chairman “will come out OK. All he’s tried to do is protect the NAACP’s process. He hasn’t been all that protective of Ben.”