Donation Transparency

[Billy]

so is anyone actually working on this? could someone at least give a status report? Like how the process is coming along if any help is needed who currently has control over the money and if any has been spent.

[Randles]

At tonights GA there was some discussion on this. I came here specifically to talk about it.

 

I respect everything that's been said so far, but I have a very different take on this.

 

There is no way for us to accept large donations from any group or person who represents anything other than themselves without somehow becoming beholden to them. Anonymous or not.

Our perceived weakness is our actual strength.

 

The media says we lack central leadership. They're right.

As soon as we form a group with a catchy name and a tax id #, we lose.

We lose because then we are playing the game that they have had rigged from the beginning. It's the game itself that we are trying to change. 

 

The only way the Fed can "shut us down" is if we step up to the plate.

How can they shut down a hundred people on the sidewalk?

 

The idea that was briefly discussed at tonights GA was this:

Personal donations worth $100 or more must be made anonymously. Politically connected donations will not be accepted.

[criscoluv]

I'm sorry, but I find the last post quite humorous and am truly beginning to wonder who exactly is showing up at these meetings and also why it has taken so long for this to be brought up in a meeting.

CASH donations can (not should) be kept anonymous if that is the will of the group, and only if the cash never actually hits a bank account, however, should anyone make a large cash donation and the IRS, or anyone else who can make it public prove it, then we lose credibility. Any bank transaction near $9,000 or multiple transactions within days that equal $9,000 are reported to the IRS. From there it goes to any number of places. Also, there are large departments in each bank that do internal investigations and they are very good at what they do.

ONLINE donations, which would normally be the bulk of donations to any organization such as this, are traceable and will be tracked and made public by our opposition.

CHECK donations- same rules apply as online and much more concrete.

WE PLAY THEIR GAME WHEN WE TRY TO HIDE IN THE DARK, not when we report what money is coming in.

Also, in order to accept check and online donations, the money must go through a bank and this bank requires papers that show the business or organization has a tax id number. They will accept 'doing business as', LLC, NFP, INC or whatever, as long as there is a TAX ID to accompany it. They also require personal information, such as who the officers of the business are and their titles and it is customary to have multiple people on said account.

You are fooling yourselves and others if you spread this idea that we can somehow keep our donors anonymous, unless they are all paid in cash.

Internally we need to know a few things, but since no one can be trusted we must accept that any internal information is public information. That being said, we need to know who Occupy Chicago is banking with, under what tax id number, who is listed as signer on the account and who is listed as officers. We do not need to broadcast this information, but it does need to be made available to anyone who seeks it within the group.

My biggest fear is that this becomes the Democrats answer to the Tea Party. While there are those that think that's not such a bad thing, I will never be willing to make such a great concession. The Tea Party is backed by corporate and private interest groups. They too were a grass roots effort, but they were highjacked. Will we be? Have we already been?

[Billy]

     I agree with Randles point by point. As for Criscoluv the number at which banks report is $5000 it was changed about a year or so ago. Other than that I can see your points.

 

     One thing that I have to say is you can't report anything to anyone in the group and think it's not going to get to the police. At any point we have several under cover agents within our midst. I outed one of them a few nights ago my self but it would be silly to think I could do so with all of them.

 

     When we say anonymous we have to be clear that anonymous has unlimited means. When you say anonymous the question comes up anonymous to who. Certainly any donation made by any traceable means the 3 letter agencies will know about. How ever there are many people that would like to donate that could loose their jobs if it was made public so anonymity to the general public is achievable. Also aside from cash there are bitcoins.

 

     I wholeheartedly agree that what the media says is our weakness is indeed our strength. I see many weak minded people ( I don't mean that as an insult everyone has their strong points and weak points strong willed mindset has just as many drawbacks as assets ) that lack the confidence to stand for what they believe in the face of humiliation. So when the MSM press start making fun of us for being leaderless and having no demands instead of saying " damn right and we are going to change the world " they kowtow to the old mindset and get worked into a frenzy to come up with the structure that the news media wants. The old structure wants us to have leaders, it wants us to have concrete demands, it wants us to have hierarchical structure because it knows how to deal with all of that. It fears this horizontal movement with no leaders and no specific demands because it knows not how to attack that.

 

     MoveOn.org is most certainly trying to tea party us as is the DNC. I don't watch the MSM and honestly haven't seen news since the occupation started but judging from youtube comments it seems the MSM is spreading around that MoveOn and the DNC already does control us. I agree that we need to be cognizant of this possibility but not fear it.

 

     I have a lot of thoughts and input on this topic but the point is that some of us need to come together and discuss this in my opinion. I've talked about forming a group or committee that would discuss the general direction of the group. No one wants to form that because they all feel that group would have too much power. I myself don't really see that as an issue seeing as how the group can not make policy but only submit proposals and how anyone can be in the group as it's numbers are not limited. If we do not have a group that looks at and monitors the big picture then who will be monitoring and making sure we are not subverted? If large well funded groups like moveon and the DNC have teams of people working on taking us over how can we hold that off if every one of us is trying to be diligent on our own?

 

     There is a lot to do here and we can get no where if every one of us has to do every aspect of this movement and every effort is being needlessly duplicated countless times. I agree that no group should be able to set policy or make decisions but I do think we need a group to collect opinions and form it into something coherent that can be voted on by the group.

 

     The exact same thing holds true with regards to money. I am seriously bothered by the fact that this thread has been going on for 3 days and I see no one saying who is in control of the money and who is working on the accountability. I've not even heard what committee or group this would fall under.

[m_x]

Look I realize you folks are trying to think about this from a business sense but: incorporating our movement looks awful.  This is a movement AGAINST that sort of business structure. 

 

I agree with the idea of keeping donations anonymous.  Yes, people will publicly disclose what they've done. Yes, people will be able to figure out who gave us money.  Even so, if we announce that we don't investigate donations and do not accept donations on the basis of an expected endorsement or outcome, I feel we keep ourselves in the clear. 

[criscoluv]

Billy,

You and I are on the same page, even if we disagree on a few particulars. The group you speak of needs to be formed with or without the consent of the group. The purpose of the group will not be to make decisions, but to discuss the hard topics that are at the meat of what we are trying to accomplish. The GA does not provide enough time or focus for what you and I propose, but I believe the GA is where this new group will present its ideas. Does that sound about right? We can form this group only if others want to join.  What do you say?

m_x,

I helped create Tujenge(.org) aka Building Together(.org). We are a non for profit that works entirely on donations and volunteered time. We are registered as a non profit corp. Are you saying "we" are against such organizations as this? I assume you are not and therefore suggest we organize as such a group. We are already organized with a tax id number or someone is accepting donations through their personal account. I'm still unclear which is the case.

I don't understand how anyone could point fingers at this establishment that allows private interests and corporate interests give money through back channels and can say how horrible it is and then say it's okay for the little guy (OC) to involve themselves in the same practices. We need to practice what we preach and if we are not interested in getting money out of the political process then we have already lost and are truly lost.

[Billy]

Criscoluv I think you and I have nearly the same viewpoint and differ only in minor details. If I have expressed anything other than that I apologize but my skill with words is probably one of my weakest points.

 

     You make an excellent point that I am blown away with the fact that I did not come up with it yet. There is nothing stopping any of us from forming a group. No one can stop us. Since any one can submit proposals and make announcements then I matters not if we vote to form an official committee or not. 

 

     Looking for official support or acceptance to do what I believe to be the "correct" or "good" thing to do, even though I don't like to use those words, is something I stand against and regularly correct others for doing and here I am doing it myself.

 

     I thank you for setting me strait and correcting me with what would normally be my advice to others. It's amazing how good a piece of humble pie can taste every once in a while.

[L1ttL3M0nSt3R@yahoo.com]

from what i learned last night, in order to set up an nfp, all we need is fifty dollars and three signatures from responsible people willing to take all liability for this organization. we are an organization, like it or not, and we need to start acting like it. after what i witnessed at the march yesterday (i.e. intentional arrests, police being assaulted, general unrest and disobedience, occupy chi members, myself included, left completely alone in the middle of several thousand angry people, etc.) i can't think of a single person who would be willing to take this on, at this time. we behaved like neanderthals, and that is how we are being seen and being viewed.

 

more important than an nfp status, at this point in the protests, is to start behaving like responsible adults. we need to protect each other with a buddy system, we need to have legal present at all times (they were nowhere to be found yesterday), and we need to stop doing things that are illegal. civil disobedience, in my opinion, is the fastest way law enforcement and the government is going to be able to shut us down. it needs to stop. now.

 

i received a connection from a lawyer last night, from a colleague, who would be willing to help us with accounting, book keeping, and transparency. for free. we would all know where the funding was, what it was being used for, and would be able to vote at g.a. and pass on those votes to this lawyer for allocation.

 

maybe when we return to the federal reserve side of the street, stop vandalizing artwork that people have dedicated time and effort into creating, and quit the immature "let's all get arrested" antics, maybe than a group of three will be willing to put their names on nfp status paperwork. i know i certainly wouldn't, at this juncture.

[Billy]

     I just thought of something I would like to add:

 

     We should just do this. If anyone else is more tech savy and wants to run with that aspect then do so. Otherwise what I'll plan on doing is talking to the tech committee members tonight to get some advice on the best way to do this. I know there are things like google groups and stuff like that which could help but I'm not at all familar with how they work and what would be the best way to incorporate it into our current structure so as to make it available to the most number of people.

 

     We would probably need a name. Any ideas on that?

[criscoluv]

Little Monster,

I am willing to take on whatever needs to be done with whatever time I have. If it's a matter of money and a signature, then there is no problem, but I did just notice on Facebook that Occupy Chicago is listed as a non-profit. Still don't know if it's legit, as in truly organized and on file as a non-profit with the state of Illinois, but that is a matter of public record and in a few days I should have those answers if they don't come forth internally.

I was unaware of the antics of which you speak, though I was not present yesterday. It is a shame that some of our brothers and sisters would act this way, but we can curb these actions though education.

Engaging in civil disobedience will eventually be one of the tools we may use as a group in order to be heard to be recognized and to gain favor, though it is too soon now and in an ideal world things will not be pushed that far. Also, as I said, it should be done as a group and this group needs to understand the dos and don'ts of non-violent disobedience that we all need to understand way before we get to that.

I find it disheartening that there are those amongst us that would deface art or property, but know that they are the minority.