A major donor to UConn’s athletic department, citing “philosophical disagreements” with the university’s athletic director, is demanding that the program return $3-million in donations and has vowed to cease all future gifts to the Huskies, The Day reports.
The donor, Robert G. Burton, identified by the newspaper as a printing-industry executive, had given the university $3-million to construct a new football complex and attach his family’s name to it. In a letter sent last week to UConn’s athletic director, Jeff Hathaway, Burton said he disagreed with Hathaway’s management style and faulted him for not keeping Burton in the loop as the institution hired a new football coach—despite the donor’s requests that he do so. (The department has disputed Burton’s version of the story.)
“I was not looking for veto power,” Burton wrote in the letter to Hathaway, which was obtained by The Day. “Your lack of response on either of these requests tells me that you do not respect my point of view or value my opinion.”
Burton has a son who played football for UConn in the late 1990s, and has given more than $7-million over all to the Huskies’ football program, including the $3-million earmarked for the new facility. His revoked gift is sure to be felt: Donations to UConn athletics are down by about $9-million from five years ago, the newspaper reported.
24 Responses to Unhappy UConn Donor Wants His $3-Million Back
rtmyers - January 25, 2011 at 3:42 pm
Once again…a gift with “strings attached!!!”
drangie - January 25, 2011 at 4:01 pm
In which case, it was not a “gift” at all!
amcneece - January 25, 2011 at 4:17 pm
So, with all that money, why doesn’t he just buy his own football team?
rrowlett - January 25, 2011 at 4:27 pm
I guess if you be the boss you take your ball and go home. $3 million may not buy you a seat in the athletic administration, but it would endow 30 summer undergraduate research assistantships in perpetuity. It’s too bad many donors don’t get as excited about supporting future scientists, scholars, and leaders as they do providing athletics opportunities for a select few who are all too often more athlete than student.
t_rey - January 25, 2011 at 4:28 pm
Apparently someone needs to inform him what a “donation” means, practically, ethically, and legally. Besides, I thought UConn called “no backsies”
cksyme - January 25, 2011 at 4:37 pm
Most gifts have “strings attached,” whether it’s for athletics or science. Evidently, this guy thought his $3 million bought him a vote on all future football coach hires. Not sure we need those kind of donors anyway.
rmelton5 - January 25, 2011 at 4:42 pm
#3- Because buying your own football team doesn’t count as a charitable contribution for tax purposes.
_perplexed_ - January 25, 2011 at 4:46 pm
If Burton is an alum perhaps UConn should ask for their diploma back.
blue_state_academic - January 25, 2011 at 5:05 pm
“Burton said he disagreed with Hathaway’s management style and faulted him for not keeping Burton in the loop as the institution hired a new football coach—despite the donor’s requests that he do so.”
Walk away from this guy, UConn, and never look back.
tigerhawk - January 25, 2011 at 5:14 pm
I’m not sure $3 million would put a coat of paint on the stadium yet he wants input into the direction of the football program?! Perhaps he should watch an Austin Powers movie for perspective on what a million dollars is worth today.
11272784 - January 25, 2011 at 5:25 pm
UConn obviously screwed up by not having someone work with this donor and make sure that peace was maintained. He wasn’t entitled to a vote on the coach, but this clearly was badly mishandled by the school. Almost all gifts have strings attached, and major donors deserve extra time and attention to maintain positive relationships. UConn must have dropped the ball here.
skocpol - January 25, 2011 at 6:00 pm
The best thing to do is to drop football. Then they can remain undefeated year after year.
akprof - January 25, 2011 at 6:01 pm
Has this guy also given to academics at UCONN? Just wondering given an article in this morning e-mail Chronicle that suggested that individuals who give to both sports and academics give more in total than those who give to one or the other.
I agree – UCONN should walk away from this guy – though if it were up to me, I’d keep the $$. He’ll never be satisfied and a gift is a gift!
rossirwin - January 25, 2011 at 7:28 pm
I am amused at the postings contained herein, who probably have not been significant donors to a University. Over the years I have noted that many athletes have been the major donors to their alma mater. University Development Departments usually pay attention to those who have the money to donate. At least try to make them feel important, even if they have no vote. It is apparent that the AD and the Development Department blew it. If he gets his money back, that tax deduction is gone.
lslerner - January 25, 2011 at 9:49 pm
UConn, like all universities, can always use donations to improve its programs. But such improvements don’t include more and better jocks. That is best left to the professionals in those businesses.
Now, if he wanted to contribute to a new library or physics lab …
cwoodso1 - January 25, 2011 at 10:00 pm
After reading everyone’s comments, I completely agree that this guy does not understand the true meaning behind donating. On the other hand, the school certainly dropped the ball with their upkeep of their relationship with this man. If he is dishing out 3 million dollars than at least they should have discussed how he could be involved in selecting a new head coach.
It sounds as if he gave them this money with that request and they ignored it. If they had a problem with that request than they should have addressed it before taking the money.
nuttyprof1 - January 25, 2011 at 11:33 pm
He has contributed significant amounts of money to the business school. By his estimate his family has given $31 mil to UConn over the years. Since ha apparently gave $7mil to football, you do the math.
Look, I am not advocating for the guy, but any time you have a major donor (and without them we would be up a creek in most institutions), it’s silly to let things get to this point. Bad stewardship, probably. All donations have strings attached, if nothing else, access: access to your president, to sports teams, etc.
mconnolly - January 26, 2011 at 9:08 am
A six page letter? Right there is a hint of the problem.
pokerphd - January 26, 2011 at 10:25 am
Really? $31M over the years? Seems to be more than enough for an entrepreneur to acquire venture capital to go with his own and create a start-up for-profit IHE to compete with U of CT. Maybe Ego Tech?
amnirov - January 26, 2011 at 11:49 am
Any money donated to college athletics is basically stuffed down a rat hole. There shouldn’t be athletics on any college campus.
blesstayo - January 26, 2011 at 12:20 pm
This donor is unhappy because “money can’t buy you happiness!”
danaswanson - January 26, 2011 at 1:34 pm
A gift with strings is no gift. It’s a contract. If he didn’t get anything in writing, he needs to write it off as a bad investment and walk away.
22019391 - January 26, 2011 at 4:19 pm
He hasn’t given $31M to the University of Connecticut over the years. He estimates that’s his estimate of his family’s total contribution to all charities, including the football program. It’s probably just as well that he restricted his giving to the football program. Would he have wanted to name the dean of the business school if he had given them money?
davi2665 - January 27, 2011 at 10:08 am
All philanthropic gifts have significant strings attached. Anyone who thinks otherwise is at best naive. The foundation director who oversaw the initial gift should have explored the expectations of the donor, and had that component well in hand before it ended up in the press and in a public dispute.