Conner Prairie Update
The Pal Item continues today with excellent coverage of the Conner Prairie dispute. The dispute that started between Earlham College and the appointed board of director for Conner Prairie, a living history museum in Carmel, Indiana, has progressed into a court fight between Earlhm and Indiana’s Attorney General, Steve Carter. Carter recently obtained an order from the trial court requiring Earlham to “turn over” 40 years of accounting records on its management of the musuem. Now Earlham has announced its intention to appeal this ruling:
Earlham College officials say they will appeal a judge’s ruling to turn over 40 years of financial records on Conner Prairie.
Lou Gerig, a spokesman for Earlham on the Conner Prairie issue, said Monday he didn’t know exactly when the appeal would be filed.
“We are going to appeal and hope we can move as quickly as possible to come to a decision,” Gerig said.
On Sept. 20, a Hamilton County judge ordered Earlham to provide a 40-year accounting of the original 58.65 acres and building conveyed to it by Eli Lilly in 1964. Judge William Hughes gave the college 60 days to provide the information to Indiana Attorney General Steve Carter.
But Gerig said the college has given Carter countless pages of information documenting its stewardship of what has become one of the largest tourist attractions in Indiana.
“We have already provided the attorney general audited financial statements, which is thousands of pages,” Gerig said.
He also said the judge gave no rationale for the decision.
Link.
The paper also ran a letter from Carter and one from Douglass Bennett, the president of the college:
Carter:
The attorney general’s office has no money involved but I do have a duty to perform. If a bank were to hold money in an account for the public and money in other accounts for itself and others, the public would have every right to an accounting of the money being held for the public. That is my duty, and one that I respectfully intend to perform.
Link.
Bennett:
The editorial says that “Earlham is trustee of a large cache of money and land” donated by Eli Lilly. I would like to offer some additional clarity on this. The public charitable trust consists only of land: 58 acres, the William Conner House and some outbuildings. Mr. Lilly also gave Earlham the surrounding 1,370 or so acres of land, not in trust and without any restrictions. Mr. Lilly later gave Earlham several stock gifts to benefit both the museum and other parts of Earlham. These stock gifts were restricted endowment gifts, however, not “trusts.” The attorney general incorrectly treats all the land and all the endowment money as a trust or trusts and is thereby attempting to subject them to the special laws and restrictions for trusts.
We believe the attorney general is simply wrong about most of the land and all three stock gifts. That is why we will pursue an appeal to Judge Hughes’ ruling. Not just Earlham but other colleges, museums and charities would also be adversely affected by a ruling that endowment gifts for specific purposes should legally be considered as “trusts.”
Link.
The article and Bennett’s letter note that efforts continue on both sides to resolve the issue by agreement.
