By
James Nicholson
St. Louisans are generous. So reports David Luckes, president
and CEO of the Greater Saint Louis Community Foundation. How
generous? On an annual basis, $2.5 billion dollars are donated
locally (70 percent of that money, by the way, stays in town).
Individual households donate an overwhelming 74 percent of that
total, corporate gifts and grants 18.2 percent and foundations
5.4 percent, with other forms of corporate giving making up
the total. In general, vis ã vis its population, St. Louis charitable
donations are 14 percent higher than the national average.
David
Luckes, president & CEO, the Greater Saint Louis
Community Foundation |
|
“St. Louis is an even more generous community in aggregate,”
observes Luckes. “Wealth and giving go hand in hand,” he states,
while observing that St. Louis is fortunate in that its wealth
translates “into putting dollars to work.”
Luckes notes a phenomenon he refers to as the “Democratization
of Charitable Giving.” “When speaking to an audience, I like
to ask them how many of them give to charity? About 99 percent
will raise their hands. I, then, ask them how many view themselves
as philanthropists?” There, of course, is that missing one percent
and, once the definition of philanthropist is parsed, Luckes
finds himself speaking to a room full of them. It’s an interesting
revelation for the people in the room. “Many of them think they
have to be a Danforth” (to be considered a philanthropist),
muses Luckes. “In essence, they simply need to be engaged beyond
their checkbook(s)”.
Contemporary charitable giving, it must be noted, can be both
more complex and more rewarding than simply writing a check
here and there. Donor advised funds (either planned in conjunction
with a specific charity or acquired commercially), allow the
donor (an individual or small business) to create what is, in
essence, a charitable “checking account” money is set aside
for charitable purposes and, when economics dictate, is used
for such contributions in return for a tax deduction. That creates
a situation Luckes refers to “as doing well and doing good at
the same time.” Personal gain triggers a charitable contribution,
which, in turn, leads to more personal gain, and everyone benefits.
A corporate parallel would be for a corporation to donate stock
to a public charity, which can “receive and hold stock with
no pre-agreement.” Should the owner then opt to sell that holding,
he or she will avoid capital gains tax and receive a charitable
contribution for the value of the stock, while the charity receives
the full value of the stock sold. Again, “doing well and doing
good at the same time” proves to be a bonus for all concerned.
“Wealth holders,” Luckes reports, “are (always) looking to such
tools as a way to get into more strategic applications of giving”
and immediately cites Warren Buffet as a prime example. “He
understands that wealth and the community are mutually involved.”
Having already provided a massive amount of money for each of
his children (who all, also, have their own foundations), his
massive contribution to Bill Gates’ Foundation is, in essence,
that of a savvy businessman investing in a charity as he would
in a business. As a result, he received masses of positive publicity,
avoids capital gains taxes, receives income tax deductions,
and reduces the size of his estate. In essence, he has made
certain that the charitable portion of his estate will evolve,
rather than becoming non-productive or, eventually, going to
the federal government.
Luckes easily equates income tax and charitable giving in an
historic perspective. “The United States is globally unique
in that one can trace back to the Federalist Papers (the concept
that it is) to the individual’s responsibility to be engaged
in the community. There is an obligation to do something to
reach out to those (in the community) in need.” He continues
by pointing out that, when the federal income tax was put in
place, the intent was to provide for defense, roads, schools,
et cetera. In other words, it followed the definition of charitable
giving—providing money so that society (as a whole) can benefit.
In contemporary terms, charitable giving both lessens one’s
tax bill, but also allows one to decide how one’s money will
be spent. “I can’t imagine a single person, conservative or
liberal, Democrat or Republican,” Luckes observes, “who would
not want to invest in the future of the community in a way that
matches one’s values.” “I encourage people to think about giving
in a ‘selfish’ way.” Luckes reasons. “The closer one’s decisions
resonate with personal and family values, the more likely one
is to be generous and to make a good investment that will succeed.”
In St. Louis, he finds that, due possibly to a long string of
multi-generational families solidly identified with the region,
and a number of savvy business leaders, there is a “civic will”
that something must be done to solve local problems, which “bodes
well” for the area. He paraphrases Claire Gaudiani’s “The Greater
Good,” which makes a strong argument “to look at a region’s
cultural and civic assets to see what contributes most to its
quality of life and supports local growth” and finds a shining
local example in Enterprise Rent-A-Car’s challenge grant, which
saved the Saint Louis Symphony. The highly publicized rationale
behind the grant was “that it was not to support music, but
to save a civic asset”.
Beyond Enterprise, he quickly lists “the Danforth Foundation,
Anheuser-Busch and Emerson Electric as civic strengths, and
local universities and hospitals, the Symphony, Botanical Garden,
Art Museum and the Zoo as civic assets.
Intriguingly, he also points out that two of St. Louis’ acknowledged
assets, the Missouri Botanical Garden/ Tower Grove Park and
Ranken Tech/Ranken-Jordan Foundation exist solely due to the
foresightedness and charitable civic donations of Henry Shaw
and David Ranken. Likewise, major local donations over the past
thirty years have made a national asset of Opera Theatre of
Saint Louis. “The economic engine,” he reasons, “is about the
creation of wealth and charitable donations are a part of that
equation. St. Louis is fortunate in the potential of its inhabitants
to give (to that portion of the equation) and to receive (true)
value on what they give.”
