A $125,000 donation towards the construction of the Nest that the AMS believes was intended for them has instead been credited to UBC Development.
The budget for the new Student Union Building was comprised of $81.8 million from students plus a $25 million contribution from UBC – the part which the donation was used to offset.
Lev Bukhman, founder and CEO of Studentcare, first offered his gift directly to the AMS in 2006-2007 when he agreed to be a launch donor for the project.
Tanner Bokor, AMS president from 2014-15, started working with UBC Development to realize Bukhman’s commitment. The university can process donations and issue tax receipts while the AMS cannot, according to Richard Fisher, communications officer for UBC Development. For the donor to receive a tax receipt, his gift must go through UBC.
When the donation came through, UBC Development processed the money towards UBC’s $25 million grant. The AMS has contested this, believing that the donation should instead be transferred to the AMS so that it can be credited towards the students’ contribution to the building.
“We’re going to keep looking into this and pushing on it because I don’t think [the donor] was aware that that was happening — that [the donation] was going to the university and not to the student society,” said Aaron Bailey, AMS president.
Indeed, Bukhman confirmed that he was not aware of how his donation would be processed. In his discussions with the AMS, he had understood that the gift would go to the student society.
“My understanding is that the university’s involvement was to facilitate that transaction as the entity that can receive the donation and process it,” said Bukhman. “But my understanding was that the funds would be going towards the students.”
The disagreement between the AMS and UBC Development arises from the formulation of Schedule “C” in the AMS Nest Lease Agreement, which outlines the procedures for fundraising and allocation of funds. The Fundraising Protocol, agreed upon in 2010 by the AMS and UBC, establishes that proceeds from UBC’s fundraising will offset the university’s $25 million commitment.
However, the AMS perceives an ambiguity in clause 10 of the agreement, which relates to funds raised by the AMS as a unit of UBC.
The agreement reads: “Any gift over $25,000 receipted by UBC and secured by the AMS that was not taken through the prospect coordination process will be credited against UBC’s $25 million commitment.”
Bailey’s reading of the statement is that if a donation was secured by the AMS and the prospect coordination process was followed, the donation ought to be transferred to the AMS so that it can be credited against the students’ contribution to the building.
Conversely, UBC Development’s interpretation of the same statement is that any gift, regardless of whether it follows the process, still offsets UBC’s $25 million.
“It’s a both/and, not an either/or,” wrote Fisher in an email. “This was perfectly clear to all involved at the time and this gift follows the protocol exactly with 100 per cent of the funds going to the Student Centre.” Although it may have been clear at the time, Bailey admitted that he came into his presidency with little information about the donation.
“It’s difficult when you sign agreements that last decades and your leadership switches over every single year,” Bailey acknowledged, contrasting the terms of AMS presidents with those of the UBC employees involved. “It’s pretty easy for [UBC] to say, ‘Actually I think when we signed that, this is what we meant.’”
Bokor said he did not know how the donor’s gift would be credited and did not discuss it with UBC Development. Instead, his conversations with UBC Development were focused on the amount of the donation and on naming protocols.
“We didn’t end up getting into a serious discussion about the location of the funding except for that meeting I was in where it was briefly mentioned,” he said, “But it was very open-ended at that time.”
Bokor believed that the location of the gift “wasn’t a done deal” and that it would be up to the next AMS executive to discuss it with UBC Development. UBC Development, on the other hand, was certain that the donation would not be going to the AMS as per their reading of the fundraising agreement.
The AMS has consulted UBC Legal and UBC Treasury and brought the issue forward at Oversight Committee meetings.
“Our argument was that the donor vetting process was not very clear and that it cannot be proven that we didn’t follow that process,” said Ava Nasiri, VP Administration and the AMS executive overseeing the Nest’s construction. She also believes the agreement indicates that the AMS should receive Bukhman’s donation.
“But there’s only so much fighting we can do … and it looks like we have been rather overpowered,” said Nasiri.
To Bailey, this situation could set a precedent for future donations. He will continue to contest UBC Development’s claim to Lev Bukhman’s donation.
Through seeking legal counsel, Bailey hopes to obtain a ruling in the favour of the AMS stating that this and future donations should be transferred to the society if the donor intends them to be.
“We want to be clear — if we’re going to go out and solicit donations or donations come to us, it doesn’t make sense for them not to support students if that’s the intention of the donor,” he said.