House Status:
Senate Status:
Senate Status:
Minutes for SB133 - Committee on Federal and State Affairs
Short Title
Providing for the enforcement of donor-imposed restrictions on philanthropic gifts of endowment funds or property to charitable organizations.
Minutes Content for Fri, Mar 10, 2023
Mike Heim, Office of Revisor of Statutes, gave an overview of the bill. SB133 would create the Donor Intent Protection Act, and would give recourse to a donor when donor imposed restrictions are not met. If the recipient charitable organization violates the donor intent, the donor may file a complaint and receive recourse. Under the bill, the donor may not order the return of the donation. (Attachment 1)
The Chairman called for proponent testimony.
Oral Proponent Testimony
Megan Schmidt, Philanthropy Roundtable, spoke as a proponent of the bill. She stated the bill adds an extra level of protection for donor intent, and provides assurances that the foundation receiving the funds will act in the donor's vision. She described three instances where funds from large donor gifts had been misused, and lawsuits were necessary to attempt to rectify the situation. She then explained the remedies in the bill to donors if donor agreements are violated. (Attachment 2)
Joanne Florino, Philanthropy Roundtable, spoke as a proponent of the bill. She also spoke to the remedies available through the bill to donors. She stated the bill will encourage giving with the assurances provided in the legislation. See attachment 2 for the joint written testimony submitted with Megan Schmidt.
Proponent Written Only Testimony
Mark Hutton, private citizen, and endowment benefactor at Wichita State and Kansas State University (Attachment 3)
The Chairman opened for a period of questions and answers.
Seeing no more questions, the Chairman called for opponent testimony.
Opponent Oral Testimony
Greg Willems, President and CEO, Kansas State University Foundation, spoke as an opponent of the bill. He stated the Foundation has many concerns with the bill, including:
- the language is too broad
- there in no precision in definitions of certain terms, which would cause confusion
- the legislation is not necessary and likely would case frivolous litigation
- it doesn't represent nor acknowledge the Uniform Prudent Management of Institutional Funds Act already in Kansas statute
- it doesn't address which court would hear any cases brought (Attachment 4)
After a period of questions and answers, the Chairman closed the hearing on SB133.
