Not your orthodox temple....
glw: In a perfect world, your steps to rebuilding make sense. But in modern China, things seldom happen so. Steps such as these suggest a mastermind. Shaolin's rebirth was based on what opportunities were presented.
Now certainly, the economic growth to an impoverished area resulting from a blockbuster movie is a real weird way to start, but then so is staring a a rock wall for nine years. Things didn't go as planned because there was no plan. When your hungry, the only plan is to get food, nothing more. And when the food came pouring in, many individuals got gluttonous. Mistakes were made. They probably still are being made. Lord, find me the realm of no error.
But as for your steps, Buddhist organizations have been called into Shaolin recently. Few martial artists look at the Buddhism - they usually get stuck out in one of the wushuguans - so this isn't normally something that is reported to our community. Both Fu Sheng Hui of China's Buddhist college, and Bin Huan, one of the most respected Buddhist masters in China today, have been heavily involved with rebuilding the Shaolin Sangha. As for step two, outside monks have been brought in all along. Many noted Shoalin monks were initially trained at different temples, most notably the abbot, Shi Yongxin, and our own American import, Shi Guolin.
What jams the whole process is the warrior monks. These tend to be the monks we follow since we are martial artists. By strict technicality, they are not monks since they do not take all the vows - they are martial disciples. But Shaolin has a special clause that allows them to keep these warrior monks and take the monk title. The warrior monks are fighters, plain and simple, and some only stay until they feel they've learned enough, then go on to be pro martial artists. There are about 50+ warrior monks. There are almost 200 fully indoctrinated monks. I've written little about the indoctrinated monks. Most of the monks I've written about are warrior monks. I have not seen anyone address the indoctrinated monks at all, other than me. Maybe I should write more on this aspect, but frankly I'm not sure it would really appeal to our readers. They aren't that interesting unless you're Buddhist.
kboggess: The concept of non-profit only really exists in Western tax laws. To my knowledge, anyone who contributes to the temple (and continues to contribute - the stones can be removed) might get a stone and nothing on those stones claims lineage. What a stone setter might say later is beyond Shaolin's control. It is a large sum and it is used for publicity on both ends. The contributor wants to gain merit for contributing. The recipient wants to acknowledge them because it needs such contributions to stay alive.
While I might echo your concern about stone setters making claims, I do respect their contribution. I tried to set a stone myself but could not afford it. Anyone who donates that much cash to a temple deserves some recognition.