Leaders of a statewide effort to stamp out chronic homelessness will meet with Huntsman's chief of staff Thursday to argue for a state Office of Faith-based and Community Initiatives. The two- or three-person office would help all charities - religious and secular - compete for public funding and arrange partnerships with government agencies that provide social services.

The state's two previous governors have been hesitant. Huntsman, who has made public and private partnering a center point of his social policy, is reserving judgment until he has a chance to review the proposal. But when pressed, the governor said he likes the idea of "engaging members of the religious community who have not been engaged before."

He also favors tapping into the growing federal cache of faith-based grants for programs aiding children, the elderly, homeless, uninsured, disabled and others.

"If there is $1 billion that is available, we ought to get a piece of that," said Huntsman, identifying the Department of Community and Culture as the likely home for any initiative.

Utah's cultural landscape - the predominance of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints - has caused previous state leaders to shy from any perceived marriages of church and state.

But two men on Utah's homeless task force say that concern has been overstated, and it's about time Utah joined as many as 24 other states with faith-based offices.

State homeless task force director Lloyd Pendleton said "there is money out there" that Utah isn't pursuing for all manner of social welfare programs, including the 10-year plan to end chronic homelessness that he oversees.

On loan to the state from the LDS Church's welfare system, Pendleton said he would be willing to shepherd the initiative if "the governor sprinkles holy water on it."

Robert Bowles, a Park City filmmaker and member of the homeless task force, points out the LDS Church has traditionally shunned public money because it doesn't need it, nor the strings attached. Under federal law, religious organizations that receive government funds are forbidden to discriminate against clients on religious or other grounds. They can deliver programs containing religious messages, but states must also provide clients with secular alternatives.

"It would stun me if the LDS Church ever thought of getting into this," said Bowles.

He has helped other states launch faith-based offices and pitched the idea to former Utah Govs. Mike Leavitt and Olene Walker, who expressed only tentative interest.

Ralph Mabey, an attorney and president of an LDS Church unit in Bountiful, said Mormon involvement is more likely to happen at the ground level in amassing volunteers.

"In my stake, we're working with another church that runs a food pantry. We simply lend volunteers and support as they direct. It's a good partnership that doesn't come down to who might be in charge so much as how can we all get on the same page in lending our good will and resources," Mabey said.

Ironically, the bigger question might be whether there are enough non-LDS charities to make an initiative worthwhile.

"Utah is the home of the LDS Church, so our population is skewed that way," acknowledged Bowles. But he said, "our demographics are changing."

LDS Church membership rolls recently obtained and published by The Salt Lake Tribune show the percentage of church membership in Utah is slipping. Also, a 2003 survey of 186 faith-based charities, done by the low-income advocacy group Utah Issues, showed robust interest among groups such as the Episcopal Community Services, Lutheran Social Services and Jewish Family Services.

Catholic Community Services, Volunteers of America and the Salvation Army have more established programs that already compete for grant money and don't need help, according to the study.

But Utah Issues Director Leticia Medina says an initiative would level the playing field for all charities.

"Often when people need help, the first place they go is to their parish," which tends to be less bureaucratic and more cost-effective, Medina said.

The concept of extending public money to church groups originated under former President Clinton during the drafting of the 1996 welfare reform act. But under President Bush, who opened a White House Office of Faith-based and Community Initiatives, it has gained real momentum.

Most recently, the Bush administration has encouraged corporations and foundations - many of which have policies banning donations to religious groups - to give more money to church-run charities.

Nationally, Bush's "Charitable Choice" concept continues to draw fire from civil rights groups who say it's unconstitutional for the government to underwrite religions. Others fear a drain on already evaporating funding.

"Charitable Choice" also amended federal law to allow religious charities to discriminate in their hiring, such as requiring workers to subscribe to church tenets and teachings. Dani Eyer, director of Utah's chapter of the American Civil Liberties Union, objects:

"Civil rights laws should apply across the board to all recipients of government funds."

Brad Yarborough, director of one of the nation's longest-standing Faith-based and Community Initiatives in Oklahoma, countered that lawsuits challenging these programs as unconstitutional have mostly failed. Utah could set up an office with existing welfare money at no extra cost to taxpayers, he said.

"Churches have a divine mandate to help the poor, and state leaders have a political mandate," said Yarborough. "You'd have to be ignorant not to have these two sectors working together."

kstewart@sltrib.com