About Leona Helmsley and Dog Charities
In April 2009, the Trust announced the first grants since Leona Helmsley's death, totaling $136 million; the vast majority went to health and medical research for humans, and $1 million went to dog-related charities. One or more dog-related charities undertook a publicity campaign, claiming that the Trustees had acted improperly and ignored Mrs. Helmsley's instructions—a claim widely reported in the media.
Did Leona Helmsley intend for this charitable trust to focus on the care and help of dogs, rather than people? Absolutely not. Have the trustees of this vast fortune acted improperly and ignored Mrs. Helmsley's instructions? Again, absolutely not.
These are the facts:
Mrs. Helmsley died on August 20, 2007. Her will left nearly her entire fortune to The Leona M. And Harry B. Helmsley Charitable Trust, which she had established in 1999. Until her death, Mrs. Helmsley was the sole trustee of the Trust.
Between 1999 and her death, Mrs. Helmsley signed a number of documents relating to the Trust, including several amendments and two so-called "mission statements." The totality of these documents clearly provided that the trustees – in the language of the document establishing the Trust – "may, in their sole discretion, distribute the net income and principal of the Trust Fund to and among such one or more Charitable Organizations and in such amounts or proportions as the Trustees, in their sole discretion, shall determine."
That is the language of the Trust itself – not a characterization. Moreover, numerous other provisions of the Trust documents fully supported our belief that Mrs. Helmsley had entrusted her successor trustees with – in the twice-stated language of the Trust itself – "sole discretion" to distribute the Trust's money to charities the trustees consider worthy.
Yet we chose instead to act not simply on our reading of the operative language, but with the full imprimatur of the law. There is a procedure under New York law that allows trustees to present weighty issues to the Surrogate's Court, and to seek that court's guidance – or what the statute calls the court's "advice and direction." We did precisely that, filing a petition in Surrogate's Court, asking that court to review and confirm our reading of the documents.
The petition disclosed and presented to the court every conceivably relevant document – the original Trust instrument, the amendments, the "mission statements," and others. The petition presented a detailed analysis of the documents, leading inescapably to the conclusion that the "sole discretion" granted by the Trust to the trustees should be honored. Before filing the petition, we served a copy on the Attorney General of New York State – the legal authority charged with assuring that charities function with integrity to their intended purposes.
Before the court ruled, the Attorney General submitted a written response to the petition, agreeing with us. The Surrogate's Court upheld our position in a decision rendered on February 23, 2009, unambiguously ruling: "[T]he court finds that the trustees may apply trust funds for such charitable purposes and in such amounts as they may, in their sole discretion, determine."
Until the court ruled, we made no grants. In the interim, because of the high probability that the court would rule that the Trust's language means what it says, we undertook extensive due diligence regarding a variety of charities, so that once the court ruled we could hit the ground running. And, indeed, we did. The Trust's grants to hospitals, medical research efforts, other healthcare facilities, and organizations providing food and shelter to people in dire need, and other grants, will substantially alleviate human suffering and create healthier and more fulfilling lives for millions of people across the globe. And the billions of dollars the Trust will continue to donate will multiply that impact enormously.
One final thought. Mrs. Helmsley was not known for reticence. Here, her actions spoke as clearly as the words of the Trust documents. In the eight years between the formation of the Trust and her death, Mrs. Helmsley contributed (as the sole trustee of this Trust and otherwise) over $55 million to charitable causes; of that amount, she made only one gift to a dog-related charity, for one thousand dollars.
Even more telling is this: The claim that the Trust was established for dog-related purposes relies on a document entitled "Mission Statement" signed by Mrs. Helmsley in 2004. Between her signing that document and her death – during which time she alone controlled the Trust – Mrs. Helmsley and the Trust gave over $29 million to charities; of that, the amount she and the Trust gave to dog-related charities was exactly zero.