> While only one Executive Director was charged with a (or several
)criminal > act(s). His successor was given a remarkable cash present by
the board. > To call local United Ways independent may be accurate but is
drawing a > mighty fine point.  They are controled to large extent by the
national > group. >

We clearly have here an example of how considerations other than ethics
and the law come into play.  United Way had a public relations disaster
which obviously is still having ramifications.  The situation involving
the immediate past executive director was perfectly legal, while the one
involving the previous director was found in court to be illegal, but in
many people's minds they are equivalent, at least to the extent that they
cast the organization in a bad light.

Although I'm hardly an expert on the relationship of local United Ways to
the national United Way, I would reiterate that the national body that
William Aramony headed was a trade organization.  It relates to local
agencies as AAM relates to museums -- at least, I think it does.


Andy Finch
[log in to unmask]
AAM Government Affairs