Sterling,

I appreciate your researching this and your well-studied analysis.

However, I have many of the same objections I had last time when the subject
of mandatory payments was broached.

As an organization we agreed to the principles of free will consecration.
Your motion is out of order until we have agreed as an organization to
repeal and abandon those principles. It will not fly for you to say that
your motion is consistent with those principles because people are free to
leave the organization. Those of us who are members joined an organization
in which it was explicitly stated that no membership fee would be required.
Even if this motion were to carry, members can not be removed for failing to
obey a rule that violates the founding principles of the organization.

The only proper way to go about what you suggest is to vote on abandoning
the principles of consecration, then vote on a motion such as the one you
propose, and if each pass to change the requirements for new members.
However, I would also oppose abandoning the principles of free will
consecration for the same reason that I voted for them in the first place:
I believe they are sound, Godly principles.

That does not mean that I am unsympathetic to the problem of underfunding.
I believe your expert is correct. We can not expect outside help until more
members contribute. But I don't think the answer is coercion, but rather to
more carefully consider whom we approve for membership in the future, ie.
choose those who believe strongly enough in what we are doing to contribute
financially. If the organization does not get free-will contribution from
members sufficient to sustain it, I would rather see us close our doors than
resort to strong-arm tactics to survive. I am willing to explore
alternatives such as the fundraising letter you propose.

Finally, let me say that I have a real problem with:

"Even those who are destitute financially shall not be exempt from this
requirement"

To expect members to borrow or accept charity from friends in order to
support our ministry, when they do not have an increase to tithe from and
may be having trouble putting food on their own table strikes me as cruel
and unduly burdensome. I think we should be cautious about violating other
principles of ours by snooping into the personal affairs of others. We
approved people for membership because we believed in them. If they are not
contributing, we ought to trust that they have good reasons.



----Original Message Follows----
From: "Sterling D. Allan, Facilitator" <sterling.d.allan@...>
Reply-To: rs_public@yahoogroups.com
To: "Remnant Saints Inter-Continental Congress egroup \(public\)"
<rs_public@yahoogroups.com>, "RSICC Special Notices egroup"
<rs_special@yahoogroups.com>
CC: "Remnant Saints Treasurer egroup" <rs_treasurer@yahoogroups.com>,
<fndrsr@...>, <growfunds@...>, <davidhindie@...>,
<jod@...>
Subject: [rs_public] IMPORTANT: Fundraising Campaign -- Need to Set our
House in Order First
Date: Thu, 21 Feb 2002 22:55:04 -0700

Subject: proposing required financial commitment for membership in RSICC

To: full RSICC membership

I spent some time on the phone today talking to several professional fund
raising consultants who deal exclusively with non-profit organizations. My
hope was to find one of them who would agree to help us land a source of
funding for our organization, after which we could then compensate him/her
according to a pre-agreed rate.

What I got was a major reality check. The following is a report of what I
learned.

There is a general code of ethics among professional fund raisers that they
will only work on a flat fee basis. Their low-end rates are in the ballpark
of $100,000 dollars a year. So clearly, we are not even close to being in
the league where something like this would be feasible. Professional
fund-raisers are one of the best-paid professions because of the benefits
they bring and the pressure they are under.

The reason they will not work on a percentage or on an "if-come" basis, is
because it introduces inappropriate pressures that can compromise integrity.

There are websites that the start-up organizations can go to, such as the
Foundation Center www.fdncenter.org , which list tools and methods for
finding sources of funding, providing instructions on how to apply for
grants, etc.

Typically, only after an organization has forged far enough on their own
will they be able to begin pulling in professional fundraising help.

Only one out of every one hundred proposals gets funding from the big
players, according to Juliet Gumbs, who charges $1200 for a day-long seminar
to help start-up organizations know where to begin.

She said there are four things these philanthropists are going to want to
know:
(1) Who are you? [we are setting forth a world constitution for the
protection of freedom and the fundamental rights of all mankind]
(2) Where are you going? [we anticipate that this will become the
predominant world government on this planet]
(3) How do you intend to get there? [(a) by the grace of God, come up with a
remarkable document, (b) rally support from around the planet, (c) implement
the constitution.]
(4) Who is your competition? [none from our spectrum, only the U.N. from the
opposite spectrum]

Before going for the big players, Family Foundations are a typical source of
significant financing. But they are going to want to see a well-defined
plan and track record before they fork out money for a cause.

The best place to start is with a direct mail campaign to individuals in our
own circle of influence. Each of us would pull together a list of contacts,
e.g. thirty names each, and then we would send a form letter from the
organization, but with the signature of the person who is the referrer, so
the recipient recognizes their name and has a reason to read the
correspondence.

According to Sandy Macnab, of Alexander (Sandy) Macnab & Co.
(www.alexandermacnab.com), even before we can get to that point, we have to
get to a point where 100% of our board members (RSICC members in our case)
are contributing financially to the organization. When I told him only four
of the ~30 members (official and quasi) have contributed anything, and the
total amount came to around $500 in four months, he said that we have major
board of director problems, and that if we expect to survive, then ALL the
fellow members of the board need to help with the financial burden of the
organization. (I incorrectly cited the donation amount, relying on hazy
memory. The actual amount so far is $390.00. The total raw expenses so far
have come to $640. H.J. Springer is preparing a report on this.)

He said, "How do you expect to go solicit funds from friends of your cause,
if all those who are involved in its leadership are not contributing?" That
is one of the first things that philanthropists will ask when approached for
funds.

He cited one instance he was involved with in which members of the board
secured a loan against their personal CDs and savings accounts.

He was really quite flabbergasted at our situation. Several times, he said,
"You have major board of director problems," specifically referring to the
lack of financial commitment, which needs to come from every last member of
the board. He said that I was in error for covering some of the expenses
out of my credit card. "You are playing the 'enabler' he said of me." "As
long as you pick up the slack, they're going to let you do it," he said.
"And no one is going to finance the paying off of your credit card. That is
seen as bad policy." "You can't do that," he adamantly warned. "If all the
members of your board won't help financially, your organization will not
survive." "There is something about putting your money where your mouth
is," he said.

He welcomed anyone to call him if they would like to hear these things from
his own mouth. He said they could use his toll free number: (800) 708-2060.

80% of all donations come from individuals, he said. That is the primary
target of his fundraising -- finding those who sympathize with the
non-profit organization and then going for outright gifts from them to the
organization. But we can't really go after that as an organization until
our board of directors (RSICC members) is set in order.

"It's not the amount that counts so much," he said. "Its the fact that they
are all sacrificing to help bring the organization forward." That core has
to be in place first.

C.Arthur James, the newest member of RSICC, who also has extensive
fund-raising experience, agreed that the lack of across-the-board financial
support from each guild member is problematic and needs to be addressed.

I have to admit that I was naive coming into this organization, to think
that the mere idea of "consecration" (not my own idea, of course) would be
sufficient to provide the needed funds to keep this organization afloat.
That may be the case down the road, but it definitely is not the case now.
People talk the talk, but keep their wallets locked shut. We need something
more pragmatic if we are to survive.

Before we can go approaching other individuals for possible funding of this
organization, we need to have a solid, demonstrated commitment from each of
the current members to help support the organization financially.

PRIMING THE PUMP

I would like to recommend a complete overhaul of the financial expectations
put on members of RSICC. No more can an individual be a member of RSICC and
not contribute financially. Even a small donation will suffice. If someone
is already committing all their money elsewhere, and they do not have any
left to contribute here, then they are probably not committed enough to what
we are doing to warrant membership in the guild. Financial commitment flows
with the focus of the heart. That is true of the righteous as well as of
the not-so-righteous. I do not expect that each and every member of RSICC
be 100% committed to RSICC, but I do expect that each and every member be
committed enough to put their money where their mouth is -- to make at least
some kind of financial contribution to the organization.

Once we have that in place, then we can in good conscience begin approaching
other friends of the cause, who might have deeper pockets. The pump will
have been primed, so to speak.

The issue of our not having a legal status decided yet (e.g. 501c3, etc.) is
a deterrence, but should not stop contributions from being made. They can
be directed c/o Greater Things or directly to Sterling Allan for now (who
has been incurring the brunt of the expenses), until we have agreed upon a
legal standing.
http://www.rsicc.org/Donations/


MOTION:

I propose the following ballot to be put forth to the entire body of RSICC.

====PROPOSED BALLOT====
(vote not active, we're seeking feedback prior to this being put to a vote)

Each member of RSICC shall commit to contribute financially to its support.
[ ] Yes
[ ] No
Comment:

The amount is up to each member, but should reflect a sacrifice on their
part, which is between them and God.
[ ] Yes
[ ] No
Comment:

Before proceeding with fundraising efforts outside of RSICC membership,
every member of RSICC will need to have demonstrated their financial
commitment by contributing at least some amount to the guild.
[ ] Yes
[ ] No
Comment:

A period of one month from the time this ballot results are reported shall
be given for members to submit a financial contribution if they have not
done so already.
[ ] Yes
[ ] No
Comment:

At the end of one month, any members of RSICC who have not contributed shall
be dropped from membership in RSICC.
[ ] Yes
[ ] No
Comment

While we are starting out, for at least the first year (ending Dec. 31,
2002), a monthly financial contribution of some amount, determined
individually, shall be required of each and every member of RSICC.
[ ] Yes
[ ] No
Comment:

Even those who are destitute financially shall not be exempt from this
requirement, for they can appeal to friends to help them come up with a
contribution to enable them to continue serving as a member of RSICC.
[ ] Yes
[ ] No
Comment:

Each members shall be allowed no more than three tardy months in the year,
ending Dec. 31, 2002.
[ ] Yes
[ ] No
Comment

Because these items above effect membership in RSICC, the following margin
shall be required for each item to pass.
[ ] at least 2/3 or more
[ ] at least 3/4 or more
[ ] at least 1/2 or more
Comment:

Monthly contributions shall arrive by
[ ] the 1st of the month
[ ] the 15th of the month
[ ] each member can choose their monthly deadline (harder for the treasurer
to keep track of issuing reminders and such)

====END OF PROPOSED BALLOT====

This requirement would not be over and above that which is currently
expected of members of rs_form 'Form of Government' Committee but would
replace it.

One final note. As I interacted with these various professional
fund-raisers, something that stuck out to me was their professionalism.
They all returned my calls, even when their answer was to be no. They were
all very gracious. They were all efficient in their explanations. I was
impressed. It is a worthy standard to seek.

We have a ways to go. But what do you expect when you're dealing with the
weak things of the earth, who will thrash the nations by the power of the
Spirit. Professionals might have their act down pretty well, but there is
nothing like a good, meek spirit to bring on the guidance of the Lord.

Thank, so much, to those of you who have been helping financially.

Sincerely,

Sterling D. Allan
http://rsicc.org




=========================

Most recent messages:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/rs_public/messages

REMNANT SAINTS INTER-CONTINENTAL CONGRESS
"For the government of God on Earth"

http://rsicc.org



Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/




_________________________________________________________________
Send and receive Hotmail on your mobile device: http://mobile.msn.com