Not-For-Profit Status
Marvin Levin
by A.L. that dues be reduced to just the amount needed for operations
and that the portion which goes toward Saints grants be made optional.
I'm very concerned that this might endanger our status as a not-for-
profit (NFP) organization.
Aside from changing the mission statement of the Saints, it also makes
us no longer subject to the rules of the Illinois NFP laws.
-- Marvin
thailand
current Board that is not interested in the Saints being a not-for-
profit organization because of the rules, regulations, filing
requirements, etc. that go along with that status.
The question is, what does the membership want? Will the members even
have a say in this decision? Do the members really understand what it
means to them, and to the organization, if we are, or are not, a not-
for-profit?
Susan Gray
Jim Venskus
including social/fraternal) and a "not for profit CHARITY" (very
specific, subject to the IRS and attorney general oversight, and which
we currently are identified by the IRS). We could be either, but as
Susan Gray asks, what does the membership see as their role and
contribution to the performing arts community?
I suspect that a compromise could also be explored -- is it possible
for the (non-deductible) dues portion equal to the anticpated
operating budget/membership number, and still collect the amount of
currently collected to fund grants and other donations as
'contributions' which makes them specifically donatied for that
purpose AND deductible? As a charity, a donation seems whole
appropriate. The Saints could actually raise moeny from grants and
public sources if we so desired to increase the amount going to the
grants, too. Of course, if people just want to see free shows, they
could belong to a social not for profit that acts as a 'scheduling
agent' but then, since you're guaranteed to see shows running up to
$100 or more, it's hard to see that as volunteering... sort of
bartered benefits, no? And that really doesn't help the performing
arts so much Iand does cost them seats), does it?
On Jan 18, 7:54 am, Marvin Levin <mar...@SPMail.biz> wrote:
Donna Oswald
didn't get a satisfactory answer & the discussion was cut short by
Andy & it was getting late so I didn't push it. However, I felt like
more needed to be said on the matter. I've made a separate posting on
this subject since it was so lengthy, which is now posted. Starting
from the 2nd paragraph (starting with "The Saints is & always was...")
I submitted the remainder of the posting to the entire board.
thailand
that the awarding of grants was not consistent with our charter. I
corrected him by stating that our Articles of Incorporation stated
specifically that we are a charitable organization. He, of course,
ignored that. He also doesn't seem to understand the difference
between Articles of Incorporation and By-Laws.
To continue the discussion about Andy's proposed changes in awarding
grants to performing arts groups to be achieved by a reduction in
membership dues, I would like to add the following, which I sent to
all members of the Board a few days ago.
To all Board members of The Saints:
At a time when we are all very aware of the fiscal crises that face
many performing arts groups, why are we considering discontinuing or
even reducing the funding of these groups? We are not the Illinois
Legislature. We have a charter that says we are a "charitable"
organization. That means we "give". Yes we are volunteers, and we do
give of our time, but we are so much more than that. We show our
support with "real" dollars, not just bodies that collect tickets.
As you consider making any changes to the way that we support the
performing arts community, I urge you to consider what the performing
arts community would think of such action. How would you explain this
to the groups that you are coordinators for, or interact with in other
ways? Are we willing to risk the reputation that we have within that
community for the sake of a $20/person reduction in membership dues?
Is not the value received for our current dues far in excess of the
amount of the dues? Would we not be viewed as not willing to put our
money where our mouth is? Are we really that petty to quibble over
$20?
Please give this serious consideration before you make rash decisions.
Thank you for your consideration.
Susan Gray
I also urge all members to consider these same questions and how they
would respond if asked about it when they are ushering. Most members
usher at multiple venues and are keenly aware of the impact our
volunteering can make to a small performing arts group. Of course if
one doesn't attend performances of the many performing arts
organizations we support, one would not understand just how grateful
those organizations are, and how important our financial support is.
I am very often asked about the Saints by people attending
performances when they find out that the Saints has provided financial
support. The responses and comments are always extremely positive and
gratifying. They make me proud to be a Saint.
It isn't just about ushering!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Susan Gray
> > > -- Marvin- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
Greek Vacation Rentals
ended up out of the country longer than I expected. However, I really
need to chime in on the dues change/status change of the Saints from
the perspective of a longtime member who in recent years has not been
ushering frequently (because we've been out of the country). While we
used to usher a lot, Basil and I are members of the Saints not only
for the "free" theater - as Susan said "it isn't just about
ushering !!!!!!": We're members to support the theater community in
the Chicago area, and we believe that the grant portion of the Saints'
work is an important element of our membership. We've also made
donations to auctions to raise additional money for grants. We could
have just as easily given the same value in cash to the theater (and
have it be a tax deduction, which our auction donations were not) but
chose to contribute via the Saints because as long time members we
wanted to support the Saints and the name the Saints have within the
Chicago theater community.
The impact our grants have on the organizations who benefit from them
is immeasurable, but my understanding is that Andy does not usher
(often, or at all?), so he would not know about this impact.
Carole Kezios
Honest Saint
hugh sent his message. so a few of you have seen this but most have
not.
i created an anonymous name, honest.saint, to use for just this
purpose ... see my message for why i needed to be anonymous. I'm now
planning to retire that name.
i sent the message in small batches to get around yahoo's spam
filtering ... to about 13 people at a time. unfortunatey i didn't
realize all the addresses would be visible ... so everyone who got a
message saw the addresses of a dozen other saints. I apologize for
this ... it was my error.
a couple of people have suspected i'm deborah granite ... i'm not ...
sorry, deborah
heres what i said ... i still believe in what i wrote
...................
i've stayed out of all the controversy so far, but the letter i just
got from andy pushed me over the edge. and while i hate to resort to
anonimity I'm forced to by the current confidentiality rules that
don't allow communication other than what specififically applies to my
duties.
even if andy is president he doesn't have the right to send to all
members over the objection of other board members
it's an insult to read andy talk about free will, democracy and
transparency when he runs the saints like a tyranical ruler and with
as little transparency as he is forced to provide
he's playing with numbers - he says 20.50 now goes to the grants
program and then jumps to the conclusion that it would be 27.50 next
year
he says there's 111,000 accumulated in the treasury but some of this
is already alloted to current grants
he says the grants and donation program would not be eliminated but
fails to point out the obvious that the money to support that program
will be significantly less
he described members as either those that believe we are primarily "a
charity" or "an organization of volunteer". it's not that black and
white. many believe we're both. we support the arts with our time
(ushering) and our money (grants).
Now here's my opinion
about dues: 45 dollars in exchange for all the ushering opportunities
and money saved not buying tickets is a bargain, no matter how the
dues are allocated. lowering the dues would gut the grants program of
needed funds.
about andys' letter: this hasn't been a concern of his until recently,
when the board elections are comming up. andy has never had to run for
the board. he made this an issue so he can campaign as the wonderful
person whose trying to save you money.
On Mar 4, 1:58 am, Greek Vacation Rentals