Tilted Forum Project Discussion Community - View Single Post - More confederacy debate, and now it's right across the lawn

MoonDog · 01-08-2005, 08:21 PM

All discussions about secession rights, slavery, and the Confederacy aside, I have to wonder about being able to set aside the wishes of a donor.

I worked for 6 years as the PR person for a $40 million foundation. One of the things I learned early in that job was that donor intent was tantamount in any donation to a charitable institution. Educational institutions, while not strictly a 501(c)(3) not-for-profit, are widely considered as such. Also to be remembered is that a gift is made in perpetuity, unless otherwise spelled out in the donor agreement.

So, when a conflict arises concerning a donor's contribution to the organization, one must consult the gift language and attempt to adhere as closely as possible to it. Obviously, if it involved breaking a law, or was something that the organization couldn't do, then there was another path to take.

That was variance power. Our foundation board reserved the right to redirect the use of a donation, if at some time in the future, the donor's intent proved unattainable or was no longer able to be maintained. As you can see from this example, using the variance power is dicey, because you can often anger the donor, or their family/organization.

The extreme route here in New York state, if variance power isn't the right way to go, is to petition the Surrogate's Court for the permission to alter the donor's agreement concerning their contribution. But, even in that case, the NYS Attorney General will attempt to adhere as closely to the original gift language as possible.

So, if the procedures surrounding giving to a foundation can be applied to this situation, the courts would have to decide the following:

1) Does the gift language spell out how the gift is to be used? Does it clearly show the donor's intent?
2) Will the adherence to the donor's original intent result in a violation of the law?
3) If the court's agree that the donor's intent must be changed, what is the minimu that will satisfy?

I know nothing about the law...does naming a building Confederate Memorial Hall violate a civil rights law? If not, I'm not sure they should be able to change it. After reading the article, it sounds to me like the Daughters of the Confederacy made their intent quite clear regarding the building's name. That being said, Vanderbuilt ought to be able to change the name to something that stands a lesser chance of insulting a segment of their student population while still honoring those soldiers.

Southern Soldiers Memorial Hall?
Soldiers Memorial Hall?
CSA Memorial Hall?
CSA Veterans Memorial Hall?

Hell, all of those probably still piss someone off. I'm glad I'm not the judge in this one!

01-08-2005, 08:21 PM	#72 (permalink)
MoonDog Psycho Location: Buffalo, New York	All discussions about secession rights, slavery, and the Confederacy aside, I have to wonder about being able to set aside the wishes of a donor. I worked for 6 years as the PR person for a $40 million foundation. One of the things I learned early in that job was that donor intent was tantamount in any donation to a charitable institution. Educational institutions, while not strictly a 501(c)(3) not-for-profit, are widely considered as such. Also to be remembered is that a gift is made in perpetuity, unless otherwise spelled out in the donor agreement. So, when a conflict arises concerning a donor's contribution to the organization, one must consult the gift language and attempt to adhere as closely as possible to it. Obviously, if it involved breaking a law, or was something that the organization couldn't do, then there was another path to take. That was variance power. Our foundation board reserved the right to redirect the use of a donation, if at some time in the future, the donor's intent proved unattainable or was no longer able to be maintained. As you can see from this example, using the variance power is dicey, because you can often anger the donor, or their family/organization. The extreme route here in New York state, if variance power isn't the right way to go, is to petition the Surrogate's Court for the permission to alter the donor's agreement concerning their contribution. But, even in that case, the NYS Attorney General will attempt to adhere as closely to the original gift language as possible. So, if the procedures surrounding giving to a foundation can be applied to this situation, the courts would have to decide the following: 1) Does the gift language spell out how the gift is to be used? Does it clearly show the donor's intent? 2) Will the adherence to the donor's original intent result in a violation of the law? 3) If the court's agree that the donor's intent must be changed, what is the minimu that will satisfy? I know nothing about the law...does naming a building Confederate Memorial Hall violate a civil rights law? If not, I'm not sure they should be able to change it. After reading the article, it sounds to me like the Daughters of the Confederacy made their intent quite clear regarding the building's name. That being said, Vanderbuilt ought to be able to change the name to something that stands a lesser chance of insulting a segment of their student population while still honoring those soldiers. Southern Soldiers Memorial Hall? Soldiers Memorial Hall? CSA Memorial Hall? CSA Veterans Memorial Hall? Hell, all of those probably still piss someone off. I'm glad I'm not the judge in this one!