Black Leaders Mixed on Chavis’ Ouster : Civil rights: Some are outraged over commitment of NAACP funds to settle sex discrimination suit; others credit him with bringing new life to organization. He files an action charging violation of group’s bylaws.

It was the spring of 1993, and Benjamin F. Chavis Jr.’s first official act after taking the reins of the NAACP was to visit Los Angeles--where the eyes of the nation were nervously directed, awaiting a verdict in the federal trial of four officers accused in the beating of Rodney G. King.

Chavis was on a mission to broaden the base of the 85-year-old organization, to make it more responsive to the needs of the nation’s have-nots. He did this in symbolic fashion by taking up residence in a housing project, encouraging pregnant teen-agers to stay in school and urging gang members to continue their truce.

That mission--which captured the attention of many and brought new enthusiasm in the organization--came to an end last weekend when the NAACP board ousted the executive director. The termination came amid a growing furor over his decision--without telling the NAACP board--to use up to $332,400 in NAACP funds to settle a former employee’s breach of contract suit that alleged sexual harassment.

Chavis filed suit in District of Columbia Superior Court on Monday, maintaining that his firing violated the national organization’s bylaws. He alleged that the board did not properly record its vote to remove him and did not grant him a proper hearing before his dismissal.

In Los Angeles, some still recalled the optimism of that trip last year and criticized the decision to cut short Chavis’ tenure.

Joseph Duff, the president of the Los Angeles chapter, was outraged by the decision by the national board, and he has urged the members of the Los Angeles chapter to respond by working to remove the national board.

“We are at a crossroads and the board went the wrong way,” Duff said. “They robbed the association of its best chance to be in the (civil rights) leadership in the ‘90s and beyond.”

Duff said the decision to remove Chavis went far deeper than mere concern over the executive director’s judgment in making an out-of-court settlement with former aide, Mary E. Stansel.

“It was more a rejection of his direction than it was of his judgment,” Duff said. “It was a rejection of Chavis’ outreach efforts in all areas, starting out with his decision to stay in the Los Angles projects, the efforts he made to bring Latinos into the organization and his outreach to so-called militant groups and leaders.”

Duff said he went to Baltimore in the hopes of changing the board’s mind but was blocked from participating in the debate because he does not belong to the 64-member national board.

The decison to remove Chavis was supported by a national board member who represents the Los Angeles branch. But on Sunday, members of the Los Angeles chapter overwhelmingly approved a resolution supporting Chavis.

“Our members were unhappy to say the least” at Chavis’ ouster, said Frank Berry, the branch executive for the chapter. “We had taken a position in support of his leadership, and we wanted to prevent this kind of fiasco from happening. People were sorry that the board decided to go that way.”

Although many were angry with the national board’s decision, few were surprised to see Chavis go.

“He should have used better judgment,” said Chilton Alphonse, who directs the Community Youth Sports and Arts Foundation, an anti-gang program. “I don’t think that was enough to fire him, but that was the avenue they chose to get rid of him. He gave them the opportunity, and his board took it.”

Alphonse said the organization was threatened by the changes Chavis was initiating over his 16-month tenure. Chavis should have been reprimanded instead, he argued.

“The NAACP is a very conservative organization that is not ready to change,” said Alphonse said. “Young people were really listening to what Ben Chavis had to say. They were joining the NAACP.”

But others said Monday that Chavis left the organization little choice.

“I’m a lifelong member of the NAACP and I certainly don’t think the resources of the organization should be spent to settle private litigations,” said Melanie Lomax, an attorney and former NAACP official.

Lomax said Chavis’ effort to quietly settle the lawsuit raised even more questions.

“I assume that the reason why he was not forthright and did not go through the proper channels was because the charge had some merit to it,” she added.

“I’m offended on a couple of different levels,” said Renee Campbell, a longtime NAACP member and president of the California Assn. of Black Lawyers. “It is the manner in which he handled the allegations that disturbs me.”

*

Many said the ouster was not just the result of the lawsuit, but involved a concern over the direction Chavis was taking the country’s oldest civil rights organization--including a move to reach out to Louis Farrakhan, the controversial leader of the Nation of Islam. Berry said the national board’s decision appeared to be influenced by Chavis’ increasing links with Farrakhan.

“Farrakhan represents a significant part of the African American community, and he deserves to sit at the table,” Berry said. “That doesn’t mean that he has taken over the NAACP.”

Chavis first gained national attention as an activist in the 1970s while protesting school segregation in North Carolina. Arrested as one of a group of activists called the “Wilmington 10,” Chavis was convicted of arson and conspiracy to commit assault and sentenced to 34 years in prison. He served four years before the convictions were overturned by a federal appeals court.

For many, Chavis’ message was a breath of fresh air in the stodgy National Assn. for the Advancement of Colored People. But some maintained that the direction he was taking the NAACP threatened corporate funding at a time when the organization is $3 million in debt.

The decision has hurt the NAACP on the street, where many looked to Chavis as a voice in the traditionally mainstream organization.

“It’s another example that shows that the NAACP is out of touch with the people,” said Fred Williams, a former gang member and community activist. “It was clear that the middle-class board members do not intend to serve the community.”

During his 1993 visit to Los Angeles, Chavis stopped at a small school in Los Angeles for pregnant teen-agers and left a lasting impression on the students and staff.

“He was a very concerned and caring person,” said Mary Reynolds, the former principal at Riley High School in South-Central Los Angeles. “He barely had a chance to do anything, and now he is gone.

Chavis told the children that he had been an NAACP member since he was a child. Most of the students had never heard of the NAACP.

It was a message they needed to hear, Reynolds said.