I am still wondering who makes up this advisory board. I've heard a couple of names, but nohing that's been confirmed. Can anyone tell me how many people make up this board, who they are, and what their qualifications are for being on said board?



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 10/20/2010 01:11AM by Brokenhearted.

I was wondering also who makes up the advisory board. Is it a hand picked group of deacons and pastors? Is anybody on the forum on the advisory board? I listened to Jeff Barnes sermon from last Sunday on Transformed through Trials and thought it was one of his better sermons. But at the end of his sermon Jeff says " God says we are like a flock of sheep, and you know what happens, if you get on the outside of the flock the wolves start to look at you,we need to be getting into the middle of the pack."
Jeffs ex spiritual father false Apostle Mike did not know what to do if a wolf showed up, except to feed it dog food. It looks like Jeff is making progress. But if I where Jeff Barnes I would be concerned about the wolves from within the pack!

Qualities to be on the advisory board? Hmmmm, the ability to do what your told without question is probably qualification number 1. The ability to ignore doing the right thing in favor of doing the wrong thing to the point of doing something that is not exactly legal would probably be qualification number 2. The ability to continue to throw away their money in a large way would probably be the most important qualification however. It seems to me that since the indentities of these folks are not known they do not want others outside TPC to know for fear they might be called out in public.

S

Well, Jeff,
you had a chance to make things right...
but you failed the test of leadership...
...again.

Why are you so afraid to honor people's requests for refunds? Why?
Can you and your cult really afford to defend yourselves in a court of law?
Its still all about you and your little kingdom...
The tighter you hold on the more you lose.
Its really quite a shame.

Turning Point Church World Outreach Center
Pacific Northwest Bible College

Your leaders have failed you...
...and continue to bring disgrace upon you.

After our meeting with Jeff Barnes last week I ordered two books from Amazon.com, one of which was recommended to me by someone in the know about church finances. The other I found on my own. In Donor-Restricted Gifts Simplified by Dan Busby (Dan is a CPA and Vice-President of the Evangelical Council for Financial Accountability), "When a charity's finances are tight (A 501-C3 which TPC is even though it is a church is considered a charity) it s possibkle to deplete unrestricted net assets. At that point, charities may be tempted to borrow cash held for donor-restricted net assets (building stewardship fund) to cover expenses. (Which we know has occured more than just the recent funding of severance packages.) These borrowings are often referred to as an "intraorganizational" loan. Charities are legally required to spend restricted net assets to further the intent and purposes expressed by the donor. Therefore, loans from restricted net assets should be avoided... Intraorganizational loans are also tainted with the duality of interests."

I am not sure who the attorney was that gave Jeff and TPC leadership the advise that they could make this kind of loan from the stewardship fund to pay Mike, etc., severance packages and I really do not care. What I do know is that TPC did not spend ours or anyones donor-restricted funds to further the intent and purposs expressed by any of the Stewardship Campaign donors. I also found out last week that Stewardship money was used to purchase batteries for the sound equipment for the worship team on more than one Sunday morning. The batteries were used once and tossed. Got witnesses on both points. I know that our stewardship money was given to pay for the trophy shop and the little house on the corner. Oh, I also found out last weekend $700,000.00 of the Stewardship money was squandered and was not spent to further the intent and purposes expressed by the donor.

I will do some more research and post what I find out.

D of D

In reading Ministry and Money: A Practical Guide for Pastors By Philip D. Jamieson and Janet Jamieson, I ran across this passage that I found significant "When a donor makes a permanently restricted donation, the church is permanently constrained in its use of the gift...
Furthermore, donors can sue a church or other non-profit for spending their restricted contributions for a purpose other than what was intended."

In our case our gift was in an amount that would mean if we choose to sue TPC we will have to do so in small claims court. So our issue then becomes "Did TPC violate and state or federal laws when it used Building Stewardship donations for purposes other than what they were intended for?" Attorneys do not appear or represent a party in small claims court. So I will have to reasearch that issue and figure out the answer and then discuss what I found with my spouse whether or not we want to bring an action against TPC. But many gave in amounts that exceed the amount that would be permissable in small claims court. These folks need to visit with an attorney who has experience in non-profit charity law. Only an attorney can tell you if you have a cause of action and if it would be worth it for you to take action against TPC.

Based on my conversation with someone in the know, it was not my imagination that Mike (as well as Ron Olin) told TPC members that the church would pay cash for thre property it acquired. When this person confronted Mike about the fact that NONE of the money given for the Stewardship Campaign was being used in a for the purpose that the givers had intended it to be used. Mike's response was a twist on the truth try and justify his mis-use of restricted donations for whatever he wanted use it for while racking up debt to purchase property instead of cash. What this means is every Elder at TPC was complicite in the fleecing of the flock.

As I said, each person needs to decide if they want to pursue this matter and then find an attorney to discuss your unique set of issues with to make an informed decision on how to proceed.

D of D



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 10/25/2010 12:28AM by Daughter of Dorcas.

Has God deserted Heaven,
and left it up to you,
To judge if this or that is right,
And what each one should do?

I think he's still in business,
And knows when to weild the rod,
So when your'e judging others,
Just remember you're not-God

This is not a condemnation of anyone on this board or TPWOC, just a humble attempt at an apology and request for forgiveness to all affected by my participation ! Peace! God Bless!

Ostracizedone,

I understand your point. However, I also believe that God is a God of justice and right. It is my personal opinion that those who gave to TPC for the Stewardship
Campaign were defrauded by a senior pastor who was in the for profit God Business. To me the use of God for a for profit business to better one or maybe two families is wrong. All we were to Mike was a bunch of walking checkbooks and wallets sitting in seats to be extolled to give so that Mike could live in the lavish lifestyle his gifted speaking ability could make for him. I need not judge him or anyone else, yes that is for God and God alone to do. However, if I know that my friends and neighbors are being fleeced by someone whose sole purpose is to defraud them would not I be remiss if I said nothing. God gave me an above average brain and ability to research, discern, and draw conclusions as a means of helping others. If I failed to do that simply because Mike was a pastor, I would not have protected others from being badly used or directed them to the help they need tio make their own decisions. Quite frankly after our meeting with Jeff last week, my husband is convinced that TPC leadership is neither sorry or repentent. Both of us think Jeff and TPC leadership have failed to exonerate our dear sister in Christ publicly because they don't want to end up with egg on their face for making false acqusations. Again an ego thing.

I understand your point, I just don't agree that we should feel obligated to let TPC off the hook for defrauding people.

D of D

Quote
ostracizedone
Has God deserted Heaven,
and left it up to you,
To judge if this or that is right,
And what each one should do?

I think he's still in business,
And knows when to weild the rod,
So when your'e judging others,
Just remember you're not-God

This is not a condemnation of anyone on this board or TPWOC, just a humble attempt at an apology and request for forgiveness to all affected by my participation ! Peace! God Bless!

Quote
ostracizedone
Has God deserted Heaven,
and left it up to you,
To judge if this or that is right,
And what each one should do?

I think he's still in business,
And knows when to weild the rod,
So when your'e judging others,
Just remember you're not-God

This is not a condemnation of anyone on this board or TPWOC, just a humble attempt at an apology and request for forgiveness to all affected by my participation ! Peace! God Bless!

sometimes God uses men to expose evil, remember nathan and david, and the prophets, so that may be a cute poem but not necessarily scriptual, its funny how when one tells someone not to judge and their not God, it requires the same actions on the person saying that, judging and playing God , telling others not to judge is a trap, it makes you a judger

Are You Misappropriating Your Nonprofit’s Funds?
One of the things that you learn quickly when starting and operating a 501(c)(3) organization is that you have to handle money wisely. A nonprofit is no different than any other business in that you must make ends meet. Otherwise, your charity will cease to exist. The current economic difficulties make this task even more challenging as we all are stretching dollars until they are see-through.
But here’s a question you probably haven’t considered: In all of your efforts to keep the lights on, could it be that you are misappropriating funds without knowing it? Is it possible that you are even committing a crime? If you do not understand what the IRS requires regarding designated funds, you might be.
I cannot begin to tell you how many times we see this situation messed up. Most of the time, it is an innocent attempt by a board or executive director to just be good stewards of the money people have donated.
For example, suppose things are tight at the ole soup kitchen. There is not enough cash in the general operating fund to buy all the food that is needed for the upcoming Christmas season. There is, however, a pretty good chunk of cash sitting in the fund designated for building a new facility. And, in truth, the food shortage is a far more pressing need. It is unlikely a building project will be started for at least two years. Is it OK to divert some of the building fund money to the food fund?
Maybe…or maybe not.
Two Types of Designated Funds
Understanding that there are two types of designated funds (or donations), solicited and unsolicited, is the first step in getting this right. Let’s take a look at each:
Solicited designations. A solicitation means that your organization asked for donations for a particular cause. Maybe it was by letter, email, website, radio spot…it doesn’t really matter. What matters is that donations given in response to a direct solicitation are to be permanently dedicated to that purpose. In our soup kitchen example, the board cannot move that money around, no matter how dire the circumstances, if those funds are the result of a solicitation. Just last week, many of you may have read the story of the director of a large, national charity resigning after it was found he did just this very thing. Was it for a good reason? Yes. Was it illegal? Unfortunately, yes.
Unsolicited designations. These are donated funds that the donor designates without having been solicited by the charity. For example, Bob decides to donate $100 to the local soup kitchen, but on his own decides to “designate” that those funds be used for future expansion. In this situation, can the charity legally divert that money to its food fund? This may surprise you…but the answer is, “Yes!” To be fair, there are certainly times where it is politically expedient to honor an unsolicited designation, but the key point is that only the charity itself can tie strings to the donation. This news often comes as a welcome relief to charities that have struggled with how to deal with these situations.
One more point about solicited designations…there are ways to avoid this problem. First, provide a disclaimer with your solicitation that the organization reserves the right to move money as it sees fit. Or, that any funds received over and above the budget of the solicited purpose will be put into the general fund. In a situation where it’s too late for a disclaimer, you can go back to donors and ask permission to retask their donations. Keep in mind that they have the legal right to say no, though that is unlikely in most legitimate situations of need.
Handling the finances of a nonprofit is always a challenge. Knowing how to properly address designations is crucial to staying out of trouble with your donors…and the law.

Q What is a board member’s responsibility if s/he discovers that a misappropriation of funds has occurred in his/her organization? Could that board member and the other board members (all of whom were unaware of the misappropriation) be held accountable or would it only be the ones who carried out the transactions?
A All board members could be liable if they do not correct the situation. The best solution is a timely response by all. Have a specially called board meeting, discuss the problem openly, determine a path to fixing the problem, then fix it. Record everything in minutes. It is up to the board to determine if the misappropriation rises to the level of needing to go public with it. Keep in mind that secrecy, even if you fix the problem, can be perceived as worse than the infraction itself. Be very smart about this.

I love the line about secrecy.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 10/26/2010 08:33AM by wherefromhere.