Yesterday, Kristy Money posted the following on FB:
“Since I left the Open Stories Foundation in late 2016, a lot of people have asked me what happened. I have deliberated for months on what to say and how to say it—I have tried repeatedly to express my concerns privately to both John Dehlin and OSF to no avail. So even in the midst of painful morning sickness with baby #5 and cross-country family move fog, I feel it’s time to publicly call on Dr. Dehlin to release detailed OSF financials for 2016 and annually in perpetuity. Especially if he is going to continue to assert that OSF is on a shoestring budget and he is not unduly profiting from it financially (i.e. inurement). Here are the concerns I have based on my experience:”

She went on to explain some specific concerns (I didn’t want to include the entire post, because it’s long). Later she stated: “I have seen OSF’s work be a force for good in the lives of people I care about, like my dear husband. At the same time, especially in light of recent events (like John’s organizing of luxury retreats in the Bahamas and Australia) and his demand for loyalty and not answering for his behavior when approached privately, I regrettably must do this publicly. If Dr. Dehlin continues to criticize the church saying that it’s not financially transparent, a non-profit that acts like a for-profit, not helping those in need with excess funds that are instead put elsewhere (details unknown), etc., then it’s important that he hold his own non-profit institution to the same standard.”

I’ll admit that I’m only presenting one side of the story (the only side I know), but it’s interesting that Kate Kelley is very much on Kristy Money’s side in this matter.

John Dehlin may have very good explanations, but I think he owes it to his followers and contributors (which include me) to be transparent about OSF’s finances and address the questions about his ethics.

Indeed.

His actions beg the question.

It's his professional life, not volunteer time if he can afford lavish retreats from the proceeds of the not-for-profit. The lines have become blurred between what he espouses, and walking the walk.

Of course, CEO's of not-for-profits often make a killing from their donations, and it's done legally.

Basically though, the person questioning its standing can request a copy of its annual report from the state it registers with (Utah?) That would give the disclosure as to its resources, how much it took in - and percentages of what goes to the CEO/s vs. programs etc.

If true:

"and his demand for loyalty and not answering for his behavior when approached privately"

this alone is enough to lose confidence in the org.

read Eric Hoffer's book "The True Believer".

way back in the 1950s, he identified exactly what you're writing about. "Mass movements" as he describes them are competitive. Mormons try to bring ex-mos back to the church, and ex-mos try to persuade the faithful to leave the church. though the two movements are superficially opposed, they actually use the same strategies and tactics to appeal to those who feel they need external help to make their empty lives feel more meaningful.("A man is likely to mind his own business when it is worth minding. When it is not, he takes his mind off his own meaningless affairs by minding other people's business.")

and Kate Kelly is no exception. She went online to a well-known site where people panhandle online, asking people to buy her a new computer. She offered no proof of her financial status, income, expenses, etc. And people paid thousands of dollars to her. just like the faithful give money to the LDS Church despite their lack of transparency.

I was wondering when this would come up on RfM.

Here's my take:

1. OSF has a board of directors. There is oversight.
2. John Dehlin does draw what I would consider to be a modest salary for his full time (or near full time) work for OSF. His salary is more than I make as a school teacher, but less than most professionals. It does not cause me to raise an eyebrow in the slightest.
3. The OSF is supported by individuals who freely choose to make contributions. At any point in time, those individuals can choose to stop making contributions.
4. OSF has what any nonprofit would consider to be a shoestring budget. There is not a huge amount of money there.
5. John Dehlin has stated that he is not given additional compensation beyond his salary for retreats, the upcoming cruise, etc.
6. The OSF has filed for every year excepting 2016. The foundation has asked for an extension for 2016. This is not considered to be at all remarkable on the part of tax professionals. Corporations, nonprofits, and individuals often ask for extensions. Heck, I've done it in the past.
7. There is an argument on the part of Dr. Money regarding compensation for her podcasts. Apparently there is some compensation based on the number of downloads, but it is very modest. My opinion is that most podcasters on the internet do not get compensated. If Dr. Money does not like the compensation structure, she can either take it up with the board or pack up her marbles and go elsewhere.
8. Dr. Money also complained that she was not reimbursed (as agreed upon) for a flight to New York for a conference. John Dehlin replied that she took months to submit her receipts for reimbursement. Makes sense to me. Any organization would require as much.
9. Kate Kelly took up Dr. Money's cause in a rather strident manner. That is certainly her right, but her stridency failed to move me. I lost respect for Ms. Kelly when she solicited funds for a luxury laptop. That is certainly her right as well, but I don't have to respect her for it.


I admit that my understanding of the situation is incomplete. But that's my take based on my current knowledge. I would be interested to hear additional opinions. Normally I am all for women making noise, but in this case, I don't think they have much of an argument.



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 05/21/2017 12:43PM by summer.

The voice of reason has spoken. Seriously.

If I want to learn the truth about Mormon history and the Mormon church, do I log on to LDS.org or Mormon stories?

FWIW, John struggled for a lot of years. If he wants to live it up a little on the back end, it's his business. He earned it. Did today's apostles earn it? It would be funny, though, if he's becoming a cult.

Kate Kelly ripped into Dehlin yesterday or the day before. I didn't know that she, too, had had a falling-out with Dehlin. There is something about Dehlin getting all the money the rolls in, and giving a pittance to his contributors, and even less if they are female contributors. That's all I really took away from it. I don't know Kristy well at all, but with Dehlin and Kelly, you have strong egos against each other. Ego-wise, Kelly would beat him hands down.

When Kristy left the organization, Dehlin's wife, as I recall, took over her position, and now all the money from the podcasts stays in-house.

There was a thread here a couple of weeks about trading egotistical LDS church leaders for other ex-Mo egotistical leaders. Certainly, you don't want to trade one patriarchal society for another; I'm not sure what you would call the societies that make money off ex-Mormon camp followers.

I think Kelly is fun, but at the same time she is absolutely full of herself. She is more than just fond of selfies. Dehlin is also full of himself, for that matter, but not much fun. Kelly at least publicly challenges both the LDS church and the smug Utah government, and I greatly approve of that.

I tried to like Kate Kelly, but gave up on it . She is all about Kate and doesnt stick with anything for very long. I am so over her. I dont know enough about Money to have an opinion.

I personally can't stand Kristy Money, I know very little about her but everything I know about her seems to indicate that she loves to pimp her nonsense philosophies about therapy. I guess I don't even know if they're nonsense, but it seems whenever I see her name brought up it is in tandem with promoting some kind of book or philosophy or something that she has supposedly pioneered.

I got away from Mormonism In part so I didn't have people telling me how I should feel about certain things, and also to not have people attempting to Pander to me with nonsense.

If I completely missed the mark on this woman, someone let me know. A lot of this is based on particular experiences with posters in this forum who would bring up her name and her ideas about things arbitrarily. They (these posters) felt like they were shills for her.

Just for reference:

http://www.openstoriesfoundation.org/finances/

ificouldhietokolob Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Just for reference:
>
> http://www.openstoriesfoundation.org/finances/


Much more open about finances than the Morg is.
And... those Morgbots who "don't make a salary" are taking home much more. No comparison.

I hate to see this sort of gossip creating rifts and factions in the exmo community. I like what Summer had to say about it.

If Kristy has something to work out with John Dehlin, then she should work it out. There is something that seems distasteful about airing these grievances publicly in this community. It smacks of character assassination. I also have a problem with people criticizing Kate Kelly about the laptop thing. Those who wanted to contribute, did. So what.

That isn't to say that I think whatever went down at Mormon Stories was right or just. What I'm saying is that it's not my stuff, and that I wonder why someone wants to pull other people into it. When I hear criticism on this person's or that person's ego, it reminds me of people I've been associated with who get all bothered when someone they know gets a little notoriety, and they feel the need to cut them down to size. And it all reminds me of ward gossip. I'm done with that shit.

Neither one of these people are our 'leaders'. So why the attempt to put them on a pedestal or knock them down from it? They are just people, like us, but not anonymous. They've put themselves out there, at considerable cost to themselves and their families.

You and Summer make the most sense.

Way to much room for scandal & judgements when mos and exited mos take Mormon sacrifices sensibilities such as idealizing unpaid clergy from missions and Mormon bishops and such even member janitorial serving- unpaid work or impoverishing leaders and organizers as an ideal
Rather than typical business norms standard across the continent.

This meme or lds concepts impact on how one perceives or analyzes businesses self and others took years, years outside weekly church attendance & financial guidance to recognize or become aware of. Initially one was upset that others had a living wage for doing work...because one valued volunteered work sacrifice and justified or even idealized righteous poverty, or impoverishment for a cause as just, righteousness

There can't be a rift since we're not a uniform body of former Mormons.

ahh..yes... disagreements, criticism, gossip, scandal, jealosy in the exmo world. Wow. We've come a long way, baby! Not that it didn't occur in Mormonism but it was usually on "the down-low" and nobody would dare make a stink out loud about a top leader, for instance!

I know very little about these people discussed in this thread.
Just because nobody was paid on the ground floor of the LDS Church aka local Wards and Stakes, doesn't mean they can't make money as former Mormons off the religion. Seems fitting to me! It is not all about volunteerism!

I'm just happy to know there are people who are willing to spend their time dealing with leaving the LDS CHurch and it's history. People will gravitate to the kind of help that works best for them.

I suspect that in a few more years, there will be a lot more people getting more and more involved in the exit process.

Disclosure and financial transparency IS a big issue among ex-Mormons.

That information was withheld from us as Mormons. We know the church hides behind its ivory tower walls and doesn't expect to ever owe an accounting let alone a full accounting of its finances the members support it with.

Ex-Mormons asked to donate to ex-Mormon foundations and causes have a right to expect financial disclosure and transparency.

If it raises dissent and criticism because someone is possibly running a racket, then it should.

Think about it. Running a cult for profit and personal gain is precisely what motivated Joseph Smith to fleece and defrock his flock, and subsequent profits since.

I wouldn't donate to any charity or not-for-profit that lacks full disclosure as to how much it takes in and where exactly the money goes. That's based on common sense in the 21st century.



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 05/22/2017 06:54PM by Amyjo.

Does anyone know if Dr. Money has posted the same information she has accused John of concealing? I went to the website for her foundation and could not find any financial disclosure at all.

Her name says it all: "Dr. Money." LOL

Just wanting to interject a small thought. I and most people I work with have PhDs; we never refer to ourselves as Dr., that is something reserved professional for medical doctors. Usually Phds who feel the need to show their title are bottom of the barrel types. In my field people with PhDs from BYU are embarrassed to admit that is where it took them ten years to get a degree.

I have no problem with her using a title from an earned degree. It does seem somewhat disingenuous that she doesn't make the same information available that she accuses Dehlin of concealing. I'm sympathetic to the idea of people being late with their tax filings (not Donald Trump late, of course), so there are plenty of innocuous explanations. Let's see who gets their financial data out in public first!

Follow the data wherever it leads. People with nothing to hide, hide nothing. It sounds like the financial data is delayed. I would suggest that john provide a reasonable time line for financial data to arrive. Easy cure for a reasonable set of questions.


HH =)