When we consider the name of a nonprofit is it possible that some names possibly require more scrutiny? For the Alabama Ethics Commission the answer is: absolutely!
Here's some of the opinion rendered by the Commission that better explains my intro. From the Yellow Hammer News:
A commission opinion stated that the activities of any non-profit organization named for a public official or public employee face a higher level of legal scrutiny than others.
The risk of corruption increases when the official or family member is compensated for service on the board. Likewise, when a nonprofit bears the name of a public official or employee, there is such a close connection with the public servant that fundraising for those nonprofits should be examined on a case by case basis.
“There’s nothing wrong with non-profits that bear the name of a public official or employee, but the fact that it does bear their name creates a direct connection between that public servant and the nonprofit organization and its mission,” said Albritton. “As you’ll note from the opinion itself, the Commission specifically said that it was not taking a position one way or the other on that very specific issue.”
The commission’s opinion outlined that public officials, employees and family members may serve on nonprofit boards and may participate in fundraising so long as it is not for personal gain, no official resources are used and no solicitations are made to lobbyists.
I have not gone state-by-state to review how widespread this position is but let's for a moment consider the reality that there are indeed quite a few nonprofits bearing the name of their founder or someone cared about by the founder. And, many of these nonprofits have founders or relatives in board positions. And, often times, as is true in many founder organizations, initial if not long term support has come at the bequest and been built on the relationship between the founder and those who provide financial support. And, finally, there have been too many instances I have noted that these founders have found ways, if not directly through a salary, to financially be supported by their nonprofit. But, there are certainly a greater number of nonprofits in the same position whose founders have financially gained nothing from their work and have even driven themselves into financial disaster from their dedication to the memorial they have created.
But the sacrificial choices individuals make in creating these memorial charities should not, in my opinion, reduce extra scrutiny by the public. And, were I I the jaded type, should instead perhaps, increase the scrutiny.