Capitol Fax.com - Your Illinois News Radar

Skeptical lawmakers confront Lincoln foundation

Posted in:

Illinois

The Abe Lincoln in Springfield on Tuesday was definitely a fake.

The jury is still out on Abe’s beaver-fur stovepipe hat.

But the dwindling patience of state lawmakers was very real.

A Lincoln impersonator helped kick off the Illinois General Assembly’s fall veto session when he appeared before the House tourism committee along with officials of the Abraham Lincoln Presidential Library and Museum Foundation.

It was all part of an attempt to get state funds to help preserve artifacts connected to the 16th president and to remind state lawmakers that Lincoln’s legacy should extend beyond the controversial stovepipe hat.

“I commonly have carried my notes in my hat, but that appears to be a contentious issue right now so I shall forbear it,” the impersonator, Randy Duncan, said before reading his introductory statement.

* SJ-R…

Abraham Lincoln Presidential Library and Museum staffers who testified before the House Tourism Committee said it would be a “tragedy” if the loan isn’t repaid and the Lincoln memorabilia in the Taper collection had to be sold at auction.

Some skeptical lawmakers, however, said there needs to be greater oversight of the Abraham Lincoln Presidential Library Foundation and that the case still hasn’t been made for the state to pay off the remaining $9.2 million owed on the loan to acquire the collection.

“I think we still have questions on how the foundation is going to move forward in paying down the debt,” Rep. Tim Butler, R-Springfield, said after the hearing. “Certainly no plan was presented today.”

He said that “given the questions surrounding not just the history of the hat but the whole operations of the foundation,” it’s a “hard ask” of state government to provide the money to pay off the loan.

Although the loan isn’t due until October, time is of the essence. Foundation executive officer Carla Knorowski said a decision will have to be made by the end of December on whether to proceed with auctioning off additional parts of the collection. Some items not connected to Lincoln or which were duplicated have already been auctioned. She said that even those few items required a lead time of several months for the auction house.

* AP…

Gov. Bruce Rauner’s office says it supports a “vibrant” Abraham Lincoln Presidential Library and Museum but wants more information before committing state money toward $9 million owed on a collection of 1,500 Lincoln artifacts. […]

The foundation wants $5 million in tourism tax funds to encourage other contributors. Foundation CEO Carla Knorowski told a House committee Tuesday that Rauner’s office had committed the money last spring but backed off.

Rauner spokeswoman Elizabeth Tomev says the governor’s office asked for a detailed business plan and other debt-repayment information. She says, “We continue to work to gather relevant information.”

I dunno, maybe lawmakers could think about a loan? That way, nobody is rewarded for alleged bad behavior, but the entire collection is kept in-state.

posted by Rich Miller
Wednesday, Nov 14, 18 @ 9:33 am

Comments

Fake Lincoln at a hearing about a real controversy involving potential misuse of millions of dollars is one of the dumbest things I’ve seen. It’s right up there with Squeezy.

Comment by Leigh John-Ella Wednesday, Nov 14, 18 @ 9:36 am
= I dunno, maybe lawmakers could think about a loan? =

What happens when - not if - the collection is sold for so little that the Foundation defaults on the loan?

I would like to see some contrition from the Foundation board member who sold the Foundation this collection at the ridiculously inflated price. That’s some high-level dishonesty there.

Comment by cover Wednesday, Nov 14, 18 @ 9:38 am
before spending more money, sue for fraud to recover the funds spent on items of questionable provenance.

Comment by Molly Maguire Wednesday, Nov 14, 18 @ 9:41 am
Not sure bringing in a Lincoln impersonator was a wise call. The Foundation seems not to grasp the seriousness of the situation.

Why aren’t board members or the corporations they represent being asked to pick up the shortfall?

Why aren’t we telling Ms. Tapper she can have her hat back, and we’d like a refund?

Comment by Thomas Paine Wednesday, Nov 14, 18 @ 9:44 am
Yeah, I was disappointed with the direction this took. I thought the hearing was going to investigate how the Foundation was snookered into buying a $6.5m hat of questionable provenance, and that former State Historian Tom Schwartz would be subpoenaed to answer some tough questions. Instead it was just the foundation asking the legislators for money?

Comment by LakeCo Wednesday, Nov 14, 18 @ 9:47 am
Didn’t realize this hearing was just to ask for funding. I thought the Foundation was going to have to answer some tough questions about how they got snookered into buying a $6.5m hat with shaky provenance. I was hoping the former state historian, Tom Schwartz, would be subpoenaed.

Comment by LakeCo Wednesday, Nov 14, 18 @ 9:49 am
Aren’t we broke? I keep hearing that we don’t have any money.

Comment by Anon E Moose Wednesday, Nov 14, 18 @ 9:55 am
Who holds the loan and could force an auction?

If you’re asking taxpayers to bail you out, you could at least reveal who would be getting paid.

The foundation’s “annual report,” such as it is, has dozens of pages listing those who’ve kicked in a few bucks.

Absolutely nothing, however, on annual spending or a breakdown on assets and liabilities.

Not exactly transparent.

Comment by wordslinger Wednesday, Nov 14, 18 @ 9:57 am
Was Steven Colbert testifying in character unavailable?

https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2010/09/stephen-colbert-testifies-in-congress-in-character/63507/

Comment by Lucky Pierre Wednesday, Nov 14, 18 @ 9:57 am
I have no problem with the state finding a way to secure the collection. The hat aside, the overall collection is priceless.

But my God, the Foundation badly needs a leadership change. They are utterly clueless, and seem to be objectively bad at their jobs

Comment by ILPundit Wednesday, Nov 14, 18 @ 10:07 am
Before taxpayers agree to pay the bank, I would like to see just what the Foundation has done to (1) get the bank to take a haircut and (2) go after the folks that sold them the bogus goods.

And what bank is owed the money? I tried the google but couldn’t find it. I would think that would be a bad PR hit for any bank that forces the sale of the museum’s property.

Comment by Henry Francis Wednesday, Nov 14, 18 @ 10:15 am
Fourscore and six and a half million dollars later, our Foundation brought forth, in this state, an old stove pipe hat, conceived in beaver fur, and dedicated to the proposition that this might have been Lincoln’s. Now we are engaged in a great debate, testing whether this state, or any state so conceived, and so dedicated, can long endure the pain of being duped by unscrupulous historic artifact brokers.

Comment by 47th Ward Wednesday, Nov 14, 18 @ 10:19 am
47th Ward, that was pretty darned awesome. Also, I have some beer money for you from “A Guy.” If you’re in town today, look me up.

Comment by Rich Miller Wednesday, Nov 14, 18 @ 10:25 am
Thanks Rich, and thanks A Guy. Not in town this week, but will be back again soon and will gladly accept a free beer. Cheers.

Comment by 47th Ward Wednesday, Nov 14, 18 @ 10:36 am
The state should not bail out the mismanagement of a private foundation, period. According to the Illinois Times, there are even a few other items of questionable provenance, a clock and a fan, at least. Me thinks Louise Taper got one helluva deal.

Comment by Steve Rogers Wednesday, Nov 14, 18 @ 10:44 am
$9 million? Write the check and move on.

Comment by Southsider Wednesday, Nov 14, 18 @ 10:49 am
47th Ward @ 10:19 for the win.

Comment by Northsider Wednesday, Nov 14, 18 @ 10:54 am
Anyone educated on the history of all of this, even the staunches Republican, has to admit that we should have listened to Madigan all along as he questioned all of this.

Comment by I Miss Bentohs Wednesday, Nov 14, 18 @ 10:55 am
Do not pay for this hat and the mistakes for all involved in the procurement of same. Pass the hat around among those who agreed to pay for it and see what you come up with.

Comment by flea Wednesday, Nov 14, 18 @ 11:10 am
I see 2 possibilities going forward:

1) as Rich suggested,have the State loan the foundation the money … with the foundation members, both jointly and individually, responsible for paying off the loan over, say, 10 years

2) pay off the loan, take title to all the foundation’s assets (such as they are), and dissolve the foundation with a 10 year ban on all members holding any position associated with the museum and library.

Comment by RNUG Wednesday, Nov 14, 18 @ 11:11 am
Step 1: The questionable hat should go back to the questionable foundation board member who sold it for a questionable price.

After that, we can talk.

Comment by Pot calling kettle Wednesday, Nov 14, 18 @ 11:19 am
===Thanks Rich, and thanks A Guy.===
Always pay my debts 47. Hell, I’m a Republican! lol
Sling is owed as well. Quandary. I’m not allowed in Oak Park and he’s not allowed to leave…May have to get a straw long enough to span Roosevelt and Austin to pay this one off.

Fast forward to 100 years from now…The Obama impersonator bumming cigs from MJM….

Comment by A guy Wednesday, Nov 14, 18 @ 11:21 am
–I have no problem with the state finding a way to secure the collection. The hat aside, the overall collection is priceless.–

You’re not the least bit curious as to the identity of the entity/persons you’re so willing to shell out $9.2 million in taxpayer dollars to?

And how did you land on “priceless” for the collection?

Comment by wordslinger Wednesday, Nov 14, 18 @ 11:42 am
I am in complete agreement with RNUG on this one. Either option would be acceptable.

Q1: Is thee a Director’s and Oficers insurance policy covering the Board for fiscal liability? If not, why not?

Q2: Is there an institutional policy and procedures for establishing the provenance of items to be considered for acquisition?
While it can be difficult to establish this absolutely, there are many good examples of policies and procedures freely available. If this does not exist, it MUST be established before going forward on the question of the loan repayment.

Comment by Mr. Smith Wednesday, Nov 14, 18 @ 12:38 pm
word and 47th have got this, so let me just say — this deal was garbage and i want our money back.

Comment by Soccermom Wednesday, Nov 14, 18 @ 12:41 pm
probably dumb thought,….
Why not default on the loan and give them back their collateral? Its the hat right?
If its something else that the museum wants, make a bid?

Comment by Rutro Wednesday, Nov 14, 18 @ 1:10 pm
Shouldn’t the appraiser be held accountable and doesn’t his company have insurance in the event of fraud?

Comment by Anon Wednesday, Nov 14, 18 @ 1:46 pm
Wordslinger—In my opinion, the “priceless” value of the collection comes from the inclusion of 1,500 rare Lincoln documents that I feel should be in a research institution and museum.

Comment by ILPundit Wednesday, Nov 14, 18 @ 1:52 pm
Mr. Smith, D & O insurance is pretty rare in State Government.

word, from a Form 990 a few years old, I believeLake Forest Bank & Trust is the lender.

Comment by Arthur Andersen Wednesday, Nov 14, 18 @ 3:09 pm
AA, thanks. Odd loan for a North Shore community bank.

Comment by wordslinger Wednesday, Nov 14, 18 @ 3:28 pm
Didn’t I read that the hat was bought from a board member on the word of an appraiser? How about charging the woman and the appraiser with theft or fraud cause it sounds like she made a killing on a hat they can’t say for 100 % was Lincolns

Comment by Milkman Wednesday, Nov 14, 18 @ 11:04 pm
Have these fiduciary fools finagled themselves a passing fancy from the IRS?

Comment by Anonymous Wednesday, Nov 14, 18 @ 11:55 pm
11:55 pm was me

Comment by cc Wednesday, Nov 14, 18 @ 11:56 pm