Son outlaw? Conflicts-of-interest and Carnegie Hall

Note the way the Carnegie Hall followed the disclose-and-abstain procedure to protect itself against accusations of nepotism.  Questions to think about: Do you think that the fact the Weills hadn't yet committed to donating to the project had any influence on the board's choice, regardless of whether or not Sandy Weill was in the room for the discussion and vote?  Is disclose and abstain an effective rule that eliminates the conflict or is it just window dressing? 

Klaus Jacobs, treasurer of Carnegie’s board and a member of its three-member building committee, also said that Mr. Weill played no role in the selection.Clive Gillinson, Carnegie Hall’s executive and artistic director, said the Carnegie board and state officials were told from the beginning about the relationship between Mr. Weill and Mr. Bibliowicz.

“We’ve been very, very clear all the way down the line,” he said. “You can’t actually disqualify someone because they’re somebody’s son-in-law.” Iu & Bibliowicz was chosen over another finalist, Mr. Gillinson said, because it made a superior presentation. There was no formal competition for the project. If the proposals by the two firms had been equal, he acknowledged, “we would have been sensible to give it to the other one.” He declined to name the other finalist.

The Empire State Development Corporation, which administers the state grant, did not know about the relationship when it approved the grant, said a spokesman, A. J. Carter. “The issue arose after Carnegie Hall looked at the conflict-of-interest language in our formal grant disbursement agreement,” he said.

Six months after Carnegie Hall won approval for the grant Mr. Gillinson sent a memorandum to the state development corporation, dated June 14, laying out the potential for a conflict of interest and describing the hall’s strict policies regarding the personal interests of trustees.

The memorandum said that Carnegie’s trustees had been informed of the potential conflict at a meeting in October 2006, when the board accepted the recommendation to hire Mr. Bibliowicz’s firm. The memorandum said that Mr. Weill excused himself from that meeting and another on May 8.

The development corporation replied to Mr. Gillinson on June 21 that the selection was “unquestionably” objective, according to a copy of that letter released by Carnegie Hall.

. . .

The Bibliowicz-Weill relationship was made clear in news articles about the firm’s work on Alvin Ailey’s $56 million home on 55th Street and Ninth Avenue, which opened in late 2004. The building is named the Joan Weill Center for Dance.

Ailey officials and board members said that Mrs. Weill suggested her son-in-law as someone to do design work as a volunteer, but that she played no role in his final selection. Members of the Ailey board’s real estate committee said they chose him because of the quality of his preliminary designs and because of the many hours of work he had donated.

Mr. Bibliowicz had had modest experience in designing performing-arts spaces before that commission. The Weills, who are major donors to cultural and other institutions in New York, gave $18.4 million for the Ailey building. Carnegie Hall said fund-raising had not begun for its renovation. Mr. Weill said that he would probably make a gift, but has not yet made a pledge. Sanford and Joan Weill have given $50 million to Carnegie Hall over the last several decades.