Merrimack New Hampshire KH Project denied credit by WT seeks $ from others

by bnybyt 30 Replies latest jw friends

  • whathappened

    Is this a publishing house posing as a religion or a real estate development corporation posing as a religion?

  • Satanus

    Publishing and delivery corp, diversifying into real estate, w flipping as its mo. Its delivery people are being transitioned into construction trades.


  • GLTirebiter

    Juan Viejo said (with my emphasis added):

    I last heard that the court had ruled against the city (or the city just dropped the case), and now the KH and assembly hall were going to be built on the property.

    So, the branch expects a congregation to subsidize an assembly hall as well as build their own hall? That explains the higher price, and also the three-times-bigger parking lot that another poster mentioned. If true, it seems to me that the local members are getting a very bad deal.

  • oppostate

    Funny thing is the 3 times as big parkinglot isn't for an assembly hall.

    It's for a KH in the middle of nowhere, with nothing close by but woods, for a congregation that already happily shares a building with another congregation 15 minutes away by interstate highway.

    Oh btw, said interstate highway has tolls in and out of Merrimack. It's the only town in the whole interstate that still has toll booths.

    Most of the growth in New Hampshire is in the more populous areas like Manchester and Nashua. Not in between cities in a rural township, the only attraction and big employer in Merrimack is "Anheiser-Busch's" smallest of its breweries.

  • cuckoo in the nest
    cuckoo in the nest

    It's not just a US phenomenon, but a UK one also. I'm in Suffolk, and they've jerrymandered the congregation boundaries so that they all focus on Ipswich, the largest town. Ipswich currently has two fairly new halls each supporting three congregations of about 90 publishers each. The former CO in his wisdom decreed Ipswich should have 7 congos, drawing in more from the surrounding area and necessitating the construction of a third hall because of great anticipated growth in numbers. (Currently they are still looking for a suitable, i.e. cheap, plot of land).

    So who is to pay for this CO's vanity project? All Ipswich congregations are to pool the balances of their respective bank accounts, with the HUGE shortfall to be met with a loan from "mother". We can all assume what terms and conditions will apply. When this was announced, almost before the COBE had finished speaking, slips of paper were passed out to all in attendance asking them to pledge a regular monthly contribution to the cause.

    There you have it, dubs in Suffolk are asked to buy the branch a new kingdom hall, just to satisfy the whims of the departing CO.

  • AndDontCallMeShirley
    So who is to pay for this CO's vanity project?


    I've seen this kind of thing more times than I can recall.

    Many of these projects seem to be nothing more than a CO or a COBE who wants to be remembered as the guy that 'made it all happen'. He gets some notoriety in JW World while the rank-and-file foot the bills.

  • cuckoo in the nest
    cuckoo in the nest

    Of course, the rank and file all embraced this as sure sign that Big J's celestial segway was on the move, speeding up the work. Never mind that perfectly serviceable halls nearby in places like Sudbury and Woodbridge have had their membership depleted to do this, halls which are far more convenient than having to travel into Ipswich. Oh no. The CO must surely have noticed the existing Ipswich congos had a few thousand pounds sitting in their bank accounts and thus devised this scenario as both self aggrandisement and a means for the branch to get their hands on the money.

    Truly we are blessed to associate with such deeply spiritual men as these.

  • blondie

    In order to maintain their non-profit status, congregations must do the following. Once again the rules about non-profit religious corporation *US does not allow them or their parent corporation to OWN the building. Until the parent corporation dissolves the local non-profit religious corporation (the congregation that holds the territory the building/land are on), they run it using 3 elders from that congregation as trustees. If the WTS dissolves that corporation, only then do they take over as the corporation (not owner).

    Exemption requirements: 501(c)(3) organizations

    To be tax-exempt under section 501(c)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code, an organization must be organized and operated exclusively for exempt purposes set forth in section 501(c)(3), and none of its earnings may inure to any private shareholder or individual. In addition, it may not be an action organization, i.e., it may not attempt to influence legislation as a substantial part of its activities and it may not participate in any campaign activity for or against political candidates.

    Organizations described in section 501(c)(3) are commonly referred to as charitable organizations. Organizations described in section 501(c)(3), other than testing for public safety organizations, are eligible to receive tax-deductible contributions in accordance with Code section 170.

    The organization must not be organized or operated for the benefit of private interests, and no part of a section 501(c)(3) organization's net earnings may inure to the benefit of any private shareholder or individual. If the organization engages in an excess benefit transaction with a person having substantial influence over the organization, an excise tax may be imposed on the person and any organization managers agreeing to the transaction.

    Section 501(c)(3) organizations are restricted in how much political and legislative (lobbying) activities they may conduct. For a detailed discussion, see Political and Lobbying Activities. For more information about lobbying activities by charities, see the article Lobbying Issues; for more information about political activities of charities, see the FY-2002 CPE topic Election Year Issues.

    Additional Information

  • oppostate

    Thanks Blondie,

    Basically, the KH buildings are a means of hiding money. When the WTS decides they want to, they can disband the congregation, send publishers to another KH and all the money from the sale of the building and land gets pocketed by the WTS. It's happened several times up here in New England. There's already two more projects I've heard of, like Greenfield Mass Congregation, and North Adams Mass. Congregation, where congregations have already bought land, btw North Adams just had a remodel worth beaucoup thousands of dollars for building repairs, parkinglot expansion and grounds revamping with heavyduty machinery.

  • blondie

    As long as jws contribute money to build a KH they think they control, they will continue. If they understood what is happening, they might not contribute. Also, the WTS tried to strong arm a congregation to contribute money from their savings to another congregation who showed a lack of foresight, the first congregation refused. Second congregation is now sharing a KH with 2 other congregations. jws just don't realize the are contributing/donating money to renovate or build these KHs. They are not an investment except in the initial personal tax write off that year. But in the US no congregation ever OWNS their building, it is a non-profit corporation and decisions are made by the elders/trustees of the congregation hold that building's territory. Of course, the WTS can try to exert pressure on these elders and have done so and some elders cooperate; others do not and the WTS tries to replace them with more cooperative men.

    In one congregation an elder said from the platform that if the congregation was not happy with the decisions, they could not donate!!!

    Vote with your pocketbook.......

Share this