LDS Church welfare, humanitarian efforts avg $40m/yr

[Mystery Meat]

How about this:

Please provide a source for the following:

- That Corporation of the President owns:

• Suburban Land Reserve
• Property Reserve
• City Creek Reserve

Let's start there. Thus far, you have not supported these claims.

[Guest]

6 hours ago, rockpond said:

I don't have one which is why I cited it as an assumption.  The $6B-$7B number seems to be the one that is most commonly assumed.  I was trying to put the figures into context but I welcome more accurate numbers if someone has them.

That is not the way to bandy about facts. 

[rockpond]

5 minutes ago, Pa Pa said:

That is not the way to bandy about facts. 

Since the church no longer published the figure, I used the most common assumption out there and identified it as an assumption.

[rockpond]

7 minutes ago, Mystery Meat said:

How about this:

Please provide a source for the following:

- That Corporation of the President owns:

• Suburban Land Reserve
• Property Reserve
• City Creek Reserve

Let's start there. Thus far, you have not supported these claims.

I provided my sources in the links.

Here are a few others, all from Deseret News...

http://www.deseretnews.com/article/700014610/Mormon-leaders-and-Salt-Lake-City-work-together-to-transform-land.html?pg=all

http://www.deseretnews.com/article/865597524/111-Main-Street-tower-has-new-developer.html?pg=all

http://www.deseretnews.com/article/865647162/Riverton-sees-550-acre-LDS-Church-property-plan-as-a-once-in-a-lifetime-development.html?pg=all

 

I cannot access ownership records without paying a fee, which I am not going to do for you and your baseless accusations.  Who does own the entities if not the church through either the Corporation of the President or DMC or the Corp of the Presiding Bishop?

 

[Guest]

Just now, rockpond said:

Since the church no longer published the figure, I used the most common assumption out there and identified it as an assumption.

What of the other assumptions, the cost weekly to keep the power, heat and A/C going. The cost of building Temples, Ward and Stake Buildings. We cannot assume that every member pays tithing (they don't), or pays even fast offering. Too many variables to use ficticious numbers as a means to criticize Church donations. 

[rockpond]

3 minutes ago, Pa Pa said:

What of the other assumptions, the cost weekly to keep the power, heat and A/C going. The cost of building Temples, Ward and Stake Buildings. We cannot assume that every member pays tithing (they don't), or pays even fast offering. Too many variables to use ficticious numbers as a means to criticize Church donations. 

I agree... there is a lot that the tithes and offerings are used to provide/support.  And the church stopped sharing that information with us some 60 years ago.

And I was not criticizing church donations.  I was sharing Elder Oaks statement about them along with some contextual information.

[Mystery Meat]

16 minutes ago, rockpond said:

I provided my sources in the links.

Here are a few others, all from Deseret News...

http://www.deseretnews.com/article/700014610/Mormon-leaders-and-Salt-Lake-City-work-together-to-transform-land.html?pg=all

http://www.deseretnews.com/article/865597524/111-Main-Street-tower-has-new-developer.html?pg=all

http://www.deseretnews.com/article/865647162/Riverton-sees-550-acre-LDS-Church-property-plan-as-a-once-in-a-lifetime-development.html?pg=all

 

I cannot access ownership records without paying a fee, which I am not going to do for you and your baseless accusations.  Who does own the entities if not the church through either the Corporation of the President or DMC or the Corp of the Presiding Bishop?

 

None of the links that you have provided in this post or the one above establish that Corporation of the President owns any of the entities referenced. You claimed that they did and then said your references support your statement. They do not. In this conversation details matter and you have not provided support to back up your assertions. So jump all over me all that you want for not backing up my claims, but you haven't either. 

[Calm]

2 hours ago, Jeanne said:

Thanks for the info.  My daughter lived in Florida for a while (Orlando) and while I was there..I looked all over for an LDS ward..they were hard to find.  Of course, I saw the beautiful Orlando temple that was relatively new at the time.  Ummm..they have agricultural land..not a bad idea..but a planned community ..at least until I know more..might be better served in areas that really need help????  Thanks Rockpond.

They need to develop in certain areas or the communities around them will preempt resources such as water rights in their developments.

[rockpond]

13 minutes ago, Mystery Meat said:

None of the links that you have provided in this post or the one above establish that Corporation of the President owns any of the entities referenced. You claimed that they did and then said your references support your statement. They do not. In this conversation details matter and you have not provided support to back up your assertions. So jump all over me all that you want for not backing up my claims, but you haven't either. 

The church owned newspaper refers to those entities as the development arm of the church.  Bishop Burton refers to "the Church" buying those properties (even though it is the Reserve entities).  What do you think that means?

[Calm]

http://blog.fairmormon.org/2015/08/13/church-development-in-florida/

"Why is the Ranch preparing to sell off some of its land? Why now? The Ranch has never before developed its Florida land. But if it doesn’t make a plan for intentional development, it will lose control over its own land bit by bit. Neighboring cities have been suing successfully for water rights, and a neighboring county is attempting to condemn a portion of the land for use as a landfill. Rather than losing a significant portion of the land’s value to such actions, the Ranch has chosen to be proactive and make a coherent plan for the land’s future."

[Jeanne]

3 minutes ago, Calm said:

They need to develop in certain areas or the communities around them will preempt resources such as water rights in their developments.

I see,,  thank you.

[Calm]

http://www.bloomberg.com/research/stocks/private/snapshot.asp?privcapId=84125311

"Property Reserve, Inc. offers real estate services including real estate leasing. Property Reserve, Inc. was formerly known as The Prudential Savings Bank, F.S.B. The company is based in Salt Lake City, Utah. Property Reserve, Inc. operates as a subsidiary of Church Of Jesus Christ Of Latter Day Saints."

[Mystery Meat]

10 minutes ago, rockpond said:

The church owned newspaper refers to those entities as the development arm of the church.  Bishop Burton refers to "the Church" buying those properties (even though it is the Reserve entities).  What do you think that means?

The Church (as far as the state is concerned) is composed of multiple entities. Not just Corporation of the President. Like I said, details matter.

[Mystery Meat]

6 minutes ago, Calm said:

http://www.bloomberg.com/research/stocks/private/snapshot.asp?privcapId=84125311

"Property Reserve, Inc. offers real estate services including real estate leasing. Property Reserve, Inc. was formerly known as The Prudential Savings Bank, F.S.B. The company is based in Salt Lake City, Utah. Property Reserve, Inc. operates as a subsidiary of Church Of Jesus Christ Of Latter Day Saints."

That still does not say that Property Reserve is owned (or controlled by) the Corporation of the President.

[Calm]

Just posted for info, not entering the debate part of it.

[rockpond]

4 minutes ago, Mystery Meat said:

That still does not say that Property Reserve is owned (or controlled by) the Corporation of the President.

The "Church" is composed of a number of entities.  I cited many of them in a previous post.  What is your argument here?  Who do you think owns Property Reserve, City Creek Reserve, and Suburban Land Reserve?  We've cited multiple reliable sources identifying them as owned by the Church.  If not the Corp of the Pres it's likely the Corp of the Presiding Bishop or Deseret Management (although the source I cited indicated that DMC owns the for-profit entities).

I honestly cannot figure out why you are arguing this issue... if you know that the Reserve entities are owned by some other entity, just tell us.  If you have no clue than how can you say we are wrong?

[Mystery Meat]

11 minutes ago, rockpond said:

The "Church" is composed of a number of entities.  I cited many of them in a previous post.  What is your argument here?  Who do you think owns Property Reserve, City Creek Reserve, and Suburban Land Reserve?  We've cited multiple reliable sources identifying them as owned by the Church.  If not the Corp of the Pres it's likely the Corp of the Presiding Bishop or Deseret Management (although the source I cited indicated that DMC owns the for-profit entities).

I honestly cannot figure out why you are arguing this issue... if you know that the Reserve entities are owned by some other entity, just tell us.  If you have no clue than how can you say we are wrong?

Your problem is when you read these articles and someone says the Church you automatically assume Corporation of the President. But, Corporation of the President is not the Church as it is used in those articles.

I am arguing the issue because it is important to be accurate. I am arguing because I do know which entity controls them (it is not Corporation of the President). I am arguing because I have seen countless times people post insider information about how Corporation of the President (the Church as they also call it) owns this and that and people who don't know fall for it and lose their testimonies. If those people had real insider information or knew what was actually going on, they wouldn't mess up such a simple point as not only getting it wrong as to who controls these entities (again no one can OWN a non-profit; that is an important distinction) but also calling the Corporation of the President "the Church." The fact that they can't get these simple details right tells me every time that they don't actually have the insider information they claim. Details matter. Being accurate matters. Especially when testimonies are on the line. Get it right or don't even try to explain the corporate structure of the Church.

Edited July 13, 2016 by Mystery Meat

[rockpond]

2 hours ago, Mystery Meat said:

Your problem is when you read these articles and someone says the Church you automatically assume Corporation of the President. But, Corporation of the President is not the Church as it is used in those articles.

I am arguing the issue because it is important to be accurate. I am arguing because I do know which entity controls them (it is not Corporation of the President). I am arguing because I have seen countless times people post insider information about how Corporation of the President (the Church as they also call it) owns this and that and people who don't know fall for it and lose their testimonies. If those people had real insider information or knew what was actually going on, they wouldn't mess up such a simple point as not only getting it wrong as to who controls these entities (again no one can OWN a non-profit; that is an important distinction) but also calling the Corporation of the President "the Church." The fact that they can't get these simple details right tells me every time that they don't actually have the insider information they claim. Details matter. Being accurate matters. Especially when testimonies are on the line. Get it right or don't even try to explain the corporate structure of the Church.

I claim no insider information.  Only the info I've shared here which mostly comes from media interviews with church leaders and FAIR articles.  Wikipedia articles as well. 

From a legal perspective, the church IS its legally registered entities.  I've tried to identify them.  And I've used "own" in the sense of managed/controlled.  Obviously the prophet doesn't own them in the sense the he's gonna pass them down to his heirs when he dies. 

I've made my best attempt at understanding the structure of the church.  If you know something I don't (and for which I'm earnestly seeing to understand) I am curious why you won't just correct me and share the answers.

I'm interested in why you think that testimonies are on the line.  And if they are, why you won't explain what I have wrong. 

Do you work for the church?  Are you under a confidentiality agreement?  LLC's and Corporations are generally a matter of public record so it seems unlikely that they would be a secret held by church hierarchy. 

[Johnnie Cake]

12 hours ago, rockpond said:

I don't have one which is why I cited it as an assumption.  The $6B-$7B number seems to be the one that is most commonly assumed.  I was trying to put the figures into context but I welcome more accurate numbers if someone has them.

NBC News estimated $7 billion tithing

[rodheadlee]

14 hours ago, rockpond said:

From yesterday's Deseret News:

If that number is correct and if we assume that the Church's annual income is around $6 billion, than the Church's welfare and humanitarian aid averages about 0.7% of its annual income.  Or, looking at it another way, it is averaging $2.67 per member in welfare and aid efforts.

Does this include the Bishop's Storehouse? An amazing amount of goods move through ours.

Edited July 14, 2016 by rodheadlee

[TheSkepticChristian]

19 hours ago, Mystery Meat said:

Source for the $6 billion figure?

There are 14,160 LDS congregations in the USA, so let's say each gives 200k of tithing every year (some wards give about one million).  So 200k X 14,160 is 2,832,000,000, so I say it is at least 3 Billion American tithing dollars. 

+ Fast Offerings = At least 3.5 Billion.  

+ Church-owned tax paying businesses = 3.5 Billion+ American dollars 

$40 million worldwide is a lot of money, but it is nothing compared to 3.5 Billion+ American dollars. I do hope our church gives donates money to medical and scientific research.  

http://www.pewforum.org/religious-landscape-study/income-distribution/

15 hours ago, Mystery Meat said:

Do not believe everything you read online from know nothings.

No 

Edited July 14, 2016 by TheSkepticChristian

[Gray]

16 hours ago, Mystery Meat said:

The Church (as far as the state is concerned) is composed of multiple entities. Not just Corporation of the President. Like I said, details matter.

CFR with specific supporting evidence that the Church is composed of multiple entities please

 

(just kidding, just a friendly jab)

[rockpond]

From Wikipedia:  "Tax-exempt corporations of the LDS Church include the Corporation of the Presiding Bishop of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, which was organized in 1916 under the laws of the state of Utah to acquire, hold, and dispose of real property"

So it sounds like the "Reserve" entities that I mentioned (that MM continues to tell me I am wrong about, without clarification) are most likely held by the Corporation of the Presiding Bishop (rather than the Corp of the President).  That makes sense given the Presiding Bishop's stewardship.

[Calm]

20 hours ago, rockpond said:

While they are non-profit, they are owned and controlled by the Corporation of the President....

https://www.501c3.org/who-really-owns-a-nonprofit/

Can't copy/paste from article.  Perhaps this is MM's point?  Ownership is the wrong term to use with nonprofits?

[rockpond]

6 minutes ago, Calm said:

https://www.501c3.org/who-really-owns-a-nonprofit/

Can't copy/paste from article.  Perhaps this is MM's point?  Ownership is the wrong term to use with nonprofits?

Great link, thanks.  Here is a relevant clip from that article:

Quote

 A nonprofit corporation has no owners whatsoever, only stakeholders.  A stakeholder is not an owner, but rather someone who has a stake in the successful operation of the organization.  Stakeholders could be members of the nonprofit, or even beneficiaries of the nonprofit’s activities.  One thing stakeholders have in common:  they have no legal ability to profit personally…hence, nonprofit.  A nonprofit corporation is formed to carry out a public purpose, whether that be religious, educational, charitable, scientific or whatever.  It is prohibited from acting in a manner that results in private inurement (profit) to individuals (for more information about inurement, please refer to our post about “Avoiding Conflicts of Interest).

How can that be?  Someone has to own it, right?  No, not really.  The nonprofit organization is not “owned” by the person or persons that started it.  It is a public organization that belongs to the public at-large.  The parties responsible to operate the organization for the stakeholders are the members of the board of directors.

I never meant to imply that church leaders were profiting from the church's non-profit entities -- I hope that I didn't give that impression.  When I said "own", I meant that the Corporations of the President/Presiding Bishop manage/control those entities.

But, it looks like "stakeholder" is the appropriate term.