Editorial

On the same side

Monday, August 2, 2010

The public debate and opinions of Dick Trail and Mark Graff regarding the funding of Sen. Ben Nelson statues are interesting, stimulating, and intellectual. Like most opinions and judgments in the world today, they both appear to be right and wrong.

It's not an issue of whether the McCook Community Foundation is worthwhile, IT IS. It's not an issue of whether donors should remain anonymous when truly gifting for selfless charitable purposes, THEY SHOULD. It's not an issue of whether Sen. Ben Nelson is deserving of the recent accolades that the city fathers have bestowed upon him, it WILL BE DECIDED by the sands of time.

Of significance and at issue here seems to be the non-transparency of "political" donations disguised as charity which calls for further examination. For instance, if one wishes political favors and wants to fly under the radar for the reporting and limitations of political donations, then simply place that money in a community foundation for the purpose of such things as building a statue for that politician. As a former member of the press, an institution which has severely eroded with the explosion of rapid Internet news delivery and laziness of reporters, these are the kind of issues which cry out for in-depth journalistic investigation and presentation to the public. McCook Daily Gazette news staffers should take note.

A McCook Community Foundation advisor recently said that anything a small town accomplishes which is positive, such as creating the Nelson statues, is better than a community which does nothing. I would tend to agree with that and applaud the efforts of volunteers working to fulfill the wishes of statue donors who perhaps had other motivations than making McCook a better place to live and visit. That is the job of a community foundation -- to follow through and honor the wishes of generous supporters.

But in accomplishing that task, foundation leaders need to remember a certain amount of transparency is necessary to keep donors comfortable. For instance, I don't want my gifts to McCook ending up in statues, no matter how noble they may be in honoring the Boy Scouts, Mr. Nelson, or the majestic Bison which were so thoughtlessly and unmercifully slaughtered in promoting genocide of the American Indian.

Supposedly only $1,500 of local non-restricted money was used in building the Nelson statues. Nowhere was that reported, and only obtained after a personal inquiry to the community foundation treasurer. One reason given for lack of disclosure on the Nelson statue funding has been the desire to keep donors anonymous. Another reason might be the loss of IRS deductibility for those donors due to mandating the use of those funds. Utilization of gifts should be left to the sole discretion and wisdom of community foundation managers who are administering those funds. The tail isn't supposed to wag the dog.

It appears that the good intentions and efforts of those in McCook may have been tainted by our brethren in eastern Nebraska who have too many "donation" dollars seeking political favors in the form of building Nelson statues in our fine city. The McCook Community Foundation is still in its infancy and those involved to date, including Mark Graff, have done a fantastic job in using it to help the McCook area grow and remain healthy. Perhaps what is needed is a review of gifting guidelines. Donors shouldn't be allowed to gift with personal and selfish interests in mind and disguise it in the form of artwork and hide behind worthwhile organizations such as the Boy Scouts. Any gifts to McCook should be welcomed, but only with proper disclosure when appropriate.

As a McCook supporter, I for one will take a wait and see approach to gifting in the near future. In the meantime Dick Trail and others are right to question and help formulate policies and procedures of the McCook Community Foundation. After all, aren't we are all on the same side?

-- Strunk is past co-publisher of the McCook Gazette and namesake of his grandfather and Gazette founder, Harry D. Strunk.

Comments
View 2 comments
Note: The nature of the Internet makes it impractical for our staff to review every comment. Please note that those who post comments on this website may do so using a screen name, which may or may not reflect a website user's actual name. Readers should be careful not to assign comments to real people who may have names similar to screen names. Refrain from obscenity in your comments, and to keep discussions civil, don't say anything in a way your grandmother would be ashamed to read.
  • Harry, thank you for your words. Hopefully, this will quiet the waters of discontent, a tad, so all have the time to remember that we all have the same right to speak our heart, even if a shade off on absolute facts. Arley Steinhour

    -- Posted by Navyblue on Mon, Aug 2, 2010, at 6:25 PM
  • I am not absolutely certain what you two are saying here. Are you saying that the practice of donating for favors occurred here? Why do you lob these volleys out there implying wrong doing? Do you both know of something done that was wrong? Please enlighten us all. Dick, you have a habit of throwing out these accusations without doing any homework. When something like this bothers me so much that I feel compelled to write the paper with accusations, I would prefer to do the leg work and find the answer for myself. Lest I look trifling.

    -- Posted by hulapopper on Wed, Aug 4, 2010, at 9:36 PM
Respond to this story

Posting a comment requires free registration: