Some of you may be animal lovers (I am) although from the stories covered recently by the New York Times and The Associated Press, there may be a real shortage of dog lovers now that Leona Helmsley is gone.

A.S.P.C.A. and Others Want More Helmsley Money to Help Dogs - NYTimes.com

Associated Press: Animal Groups in Court Over Helmsley Fortune.

Most often, the charitable gifts folded into estate plans are the extension of support for things that mattered very much to the deceased in life. The late real estate mogul’s wife and hotelier Leona Helmsley, sometimes referred to in the media as The Queen of Mean, had a charitable trust so we can guess that philanthropy was a part of her life.

We soon learned after her death that what mattered to her most was her doggie Trouble, and others like him. She apparently cared most about dogs – unconditional love, a desire to please, usually cute and needy of someone to care for them, and above all trustworthy – hard to resist if I say so myself. :)

But it seems that the people she trusted to implement her last wishes are not great dog lovers and obviously cared about Leona even less.(No wonder she left her money to dogs!) While many of us may find her estate planning unconscionable (or not), those who were supposed to guide her in the process were either too dumb or too smart to argue with her about legalities and possible pitfalls arising from the way her plans were drawn up.

Still, this was a woman of wealth, capable of major change. Where is it written that the wellbeing of man's best friend (and apparently Leona's too) is not worthy of philanthropy. Her last wishes should be adhered to rather than sadly or vindictively disregarded by the living powers that be. It’s outrageous that her remaining wealth is being distributed in a way almost totally unrelated to her written instructions. If these were the people of responsibility in her life, no wonder she left her wealth to the dogs!  

So where’s the person who suggested this gift to Mrs. Helmsley? Where's the fundraiser who helped her with this planned gift? Leona’s may not be a perfect example since I can’t imagine anyone actually soliciting her for anything but if someone actually did talk to her about planned giving, why have they not spoken up sooner! The trustees, the judge, and even the Attorney General seem to be ignoring the deceased’s very expressed wishes, and no one is owning up to actually helping create this planned gift. It was left to three potential beneficiaries, each well regarded humane and animal rescue organizations to challenge what’s happening. Good that someone is doing it!

Think how you would feel knowing that you have the ability to create a legacy for a better world but it's pointless to even try to implement it because once you're gone it's a sure thing other people will do whatever they want with your legacy. 

I don't believe it's the job of the fundraiser to ensure donor intent is fulfilled but you have to be acting in good faith as a solicitor when you seek a gift.  It's up to the nonprofit board to make sure they adhere to the wishes of the deceased. And it's supposed to be the job of all the trustees, executors, attorneys in the Attorney General's office, etc. to ensure this is done properly.  The challenge to Leona's bequest is coming from "wannabe beneficiaries" because apparently the sound of Leona's last wishes can only be heard by dogs - and those who care for them, of course. 

What do you think?



P.S. You can subscribe to my e-newsletter, The Planned Giving Key^TM on my website www.breakthroughphilanthropy.com