It is a major gifts officer's worst nightmare. Robert Burton wants his name off the University of Connecticut's Burton Family Football Complex and he wants back the $3 million he gave to put it on there. That's just for starters.

He also plans to end a $20,000 annual donation for a summer coaching clinic and $1 million donation to endow two scholarships, as well as relinquish his $50,000 luxury box at the stadium and discontinue purchasing an $8,000 advertisement in the football program.

In a letter to Athletic Director Jeff Hathaway, Burton spells out all of the gifts he plans on ceasing because of philosophical differences and Hathaway's management style. Copies of the five-page letter, which detail eight actions he and his family will take immediately, were sent to Gov. Dan Malloy, incoming UConn President Susan Herbst and board Chairman Lawrence McHugh.

“As soon as you find a new donor, I want you to return the $3 million I gave you for the Burton Family Football Complex, as well as additional funds” for pictures, other art and a new audio system in the weight room. “We plan to donate these funds to another university that supports our objectives and goals. After we get our money back, you can take our name of the complex,” he wrote.

The CEO of Greenwich, Conn.-based Burton Capital Management, LLC, Burton made clear that he was upset because he had not been privy to the hiring of a new head football coach and his input was not sought. “I told you that I wanted to be involved in the hiring process for the new coach. I also gave you my insight about who would be a good fit for the head coaching position, as well as who would not,” he wrote. “For someone who has given over $7,000,000 to the football program/university, I do not feel as though these requests were asking for too much.”

UConn turned to former Syracuse University head coach Paul Pasqualoni to run the program. Burton reportedly favored another candidate but in his letter was upset that the athletic director did not seek his input, or speak to his son, who played for Pasqualoni when he was head coach at Syracuse during the late 1990s. “To be clear, I was not looking for veto power of the next hire; I just wanted to be kept in the loop and add value and comments on any prospective candidates,” Burton wrote, something he said the previous athletic director did.

In the letter, Burton goes on to question Hathaway's credentials as a manager and athletic director while describing his background as a former college football player, his connections with athletic directors around the country and experience with assessing coaches and programs at other schools.

“With the shrinking budgets that all public universities are facing each year, I cannot believe that you would not listen to your top football donors on any subject, let alone the hiring of a new football coach,” Burton wrote. “What you people in higher education do not realize is that you are going to need more private money to survive.”

The UConn Division of Athletics issued a statement following media reports about Burton's letter that read, in part: “Many people, including Mr. Burton, shared their ideas about potential candidates with us. UConn's donors represent a vital aspect of the university and we respect and appreciate their thoughts and views on various issues.” The statement disputes Burton's assertions that his advice was not included in the hiring process.

McHugh and Interim President Philip Austin spoke with Burton in the days after the letter made the rounds of media reports. A UConn spokesman said McHugh described the conversation with Burton as positive. Burton did not return phone messages seeking comment.

“The general rule is, a gift is a gift,” said Bruce Hopkins, a partner with the Kansas City, Mo., law firm Polsinelli Shalton, and the author of many books on nonprofit law and management. “If it's truly a gift and university accepts it, he's lost control over the gift property and has no ongoing entitlement,” he said.

If the gift was subject to a gift agreement that stipulates how the money is to be used, and as part of that agreement Burton had to be consulted on a coach, that would constitute a contract and he would have a basis for his claim, Hopkins said.

“He really doesn't have a legal basis for demanding, or receiving the money back. It would be a breach of fiduciary duty of the board to give the money back, particularly under these circumstances because it's the university's asset now,” said Hopkins. “For them to just part with it, because he asked for it, is really not an active stewardship of the resources of the university.”

Hopkins said that he's “seeing more and more of this kind of thing, but a lot of it is just noise.”

It's possible that returning the gift, or receiving something in exchange, could change the tax deduction. “Having the ability to provide advice on the next football coach, I have no idea how to value that,” Hopkins said.

“If it's just advice, and not binding, it might be of incidental value and not affect the deduction at all,” he said. If a value could be placed on something as intangible as input or advice, Hopkins said it could make the university's substantiation letter to Burton inconsistent.

Hopkins said a better way might be for the university to seek the advice but not tie it to the gift, which would require more coordination between the athletic and development departments. Some of his association clients set up a sort of advisory committee of donors who make a gift in excess of a certain amount, which renders advice to the board on particular topics. “Since it's just advice, and not binding, it's probably not something that would cause the deduction to be reduced,” he said, adding that when a deduction is reduced, usually it's a situation where the benefit is more tangible, Hopkins said.

David Schlakman, an independent consultant and president of the Fairfield County chapter of Association of Fundraising Professionals (AFP) board of trustees, said he would be “flabbergasted” if the university explicitly said to a donor that they get a voice or a vote in hiring the football coach.

“Would they have been smart to include him in some way in the conversation about who they hire, even if they don't listen? Yeah, it probably would've been smarter but you never know… he said he was shut out of discussions. Then he says his opinions were ignored, and he didn't support the way the coach was selected. That's two very different things,” he said.

Trenton Wright, coordinator of institutional advancement at Middlesex Community College in Middletown, Conn., believes it's unlikely Burton could get his donations returned unless the naming agreement has some revocation clause he could invoke.

“Usually when a donor makes a donation, the foundation makes the final decision on any award. The donor does not select or have veto power,” he said. State regulations also have a degree of confidentiality when it comes to hiring personnel. If a candidate is being considered, information should not be shared with a third party who is not directly related to the search committee. “An offer of employment certainly does not have to be vetted through a large donor,” Wright said.

One fundraiser described Burton as “acting like a spoiled child who wants to get his way after he has made the gift,” adding that returning the donation would have “significant implications for philanthropy and the future of major gifts. To return a donor's gift is to say that the donor retains control of their gift in perpetuity, and could rescind it at any time,” the person said.

Wright suspects the issue of communication from the university had been “festering” with Burton for some time. “In this tough economic environment, we all should be communicating more often with our donors, via a frequency and method they prefer,” he said. “If Mr. Burton wanted a more direct role in university affairs, he should seek a position on the Board of Trustees. Even in that role, they do not micromanage the athletic department.” NPT

Share this story

Story tools