http://buffalopundit.wnymedia.net/archives/4137
I have noticed that often individuals are reluctant to contribute to a charity after they come to understand that the charity appears wealthy enough to operate out of a restored mansion. After all, generally speaking, wouldn’t more money reach the widows and orphans if a charity operated out of a steel building instead of an expensive mansion?
What many potential donors don’t understand is that some of these mansions have been contributed by those who simply wanted to protect the mansions from decline. Property taxes would otherwise eat up some of these treasures. Some of these arrangements include a contract clause that allows the contributor to reclaim the mansion at a later date and avoid paying property taxes until that time. Many of the charity owned mansions are really simply, in actual terms, on loan to the charity. Of course, an argument can be made that while 1/3 of the city property is tax exempt, we shouldn’t encourage more of it. A private company or individual could be occupying these mansions and contributing to our tax base. Perhaps the economy is strong enough so that we will begin to see more private ownership of the mansions again.
Â
Often, endowment provisions are also made for the maintenance and upkeep of the expensive properties so that these expenses do not come out of individual contributions.
Perhaps someone knowledgeable on the Literacy Volunteers (a very fine organization by all accounts) could explain their arrangement with the present owner of the mansion and the generous contribution by the restorer, Cash Cunningham, so that potential contributors may feel comfortable that their dollars are getting to the needy and not being wasted on fancy digs. This will help dispel the misperception that mansion based charities are wasting money, and with luck will result in higher contributions from the public.
Â
Â
Â