In 1960, Iola banker Thomas H. Bowlus left in his final will and testament directions for the creation of a fine arts center in downtown Iola. He intended his gift to benefit the wider citizenry, but especially the district’s schoolchildren. As a result of accepting Bowlus’s posthumous gift, the Iola school board has operated as trustee of the arts center for the last half-century.
In February of this year, however, USD 257 asked the court to re-examine the details of that relationship as they were inscribed in the will and to provide guidance regarding the district’s obligations to the center going forward. Does the will require classes to be held at the Bowlus? How much discretion does the board have in defining what constitutes a “fine arts” class? Given the USD 257 budget, is the district required to pay to use the Bowlus for classroom space if less expensive or more geographically convenient venues are available? Is there a situation in which the Bowlus could ever be forfeited to the Kansas University Endowment Association, as the language in the original will seems to suggest?
Judge Robert Fairchild, of Lawrence, ruled in the case. He delivered his decision last week.
TO THE district’s first question — “Must school classes be held in the Bowlus?” — the judge, citing inconclusive phrasing in the language of the will, was clear in his rendering. “[The] manner in which the trustee carries out these purposes is within the sole discretion of the trustee. Whether or not the Board of Education continues to hold classes in the cultural center is within its discretion.”
To all related questions — “To what extent does the Bowlus need to be used for classes?” “How much discretion does the trustee have in defining ‘fine arts’?” — Judge Fairchild refers the petitioner to the substance of his previous answer. Which is to say: Questions regarding the district’s use of the Bowlus center are left entirely up to the trustees.
The court, though, does lend its opinion on the matter. “The cultural center is an asset that many cities Iola’s size would love to have,” writes Fairchild. “It also appears that the cultural center has become somewhat of a burden to the school district. Due to its age it may need expensive repair and renovation. It may be more convenient to the school board to conduct classes in school facilities.”
USD 257 currently contributes $45,000 annually for use of the Bowlus Fine Arts Center. Prior to a 2015 decision by the county commission to give $100,000 per year to the fine arts center, the district’s contribution was roughly $145,000 (a figure equal, said Willis, to “one-third of [the district’s] capital outlay used to fix all buildings and transportation needs”).
As to whether the district is required to pay for use of the Bowlus, however, last week’s memorandum decision makes clear that it is not. Again: “[Whether the school district pays for its use of the cultural center is within the trustee’s discretion.”
AS FOR THE trustees themselves, February’s petition asked whether it is within the board of education’s right to resign as trustee of the Bowlus center and designate a new trustee.
“A trustee may always resign and apply to the court to appoint a new trustee in its place,” says Fairchild. “This would be the proper procedure to follow in such an event.”
Later in the decision, the judge suggests an alternative arrangement for securing the future of the Bowlus: Seeing as the board of education is not constrained by the terms of the will, “it appears to the court that one possible solution to the cultural center dilemma is for the city or a non-profit entity to negotiate with the school board to obtain title to the Bowlus and terminate the trust. This would terminate the school board’s obligation to maintain the cultural center and would provide for the center’s continued existence.”
FINALLY, in a matter of terminal importance, the board asked the court whether there was any situation at all in which the Bowlus could be forfeited to the KU Endowment Association.
The court answered in the negative.
According to Judge Fairchild, because the school district accepted the benefits of the trust within six months of Bowlus’s death — the deadline listed in the will — “the provisions of the trust exclude the alternative beneficiaries and the property may not be forfeited to anyone.”
IT WAS IN relation to this final point that USD 257 board president Dan Willis addressed the topic at Monday’s board meeting. “Repeatedly over the years, people have questioned what kinds of classes could and should be housed at the Bowlus and [whether] failure to have the right classes would put the Bowlus in jeopardy,” said Willis, reading from a prepared statement. “The Bowlus Investment Committee has wanted to change the way funds are managed in contrast to the will. With almost every suggestion for change at the Bowlus, there has been an underlying fear that any misstep would violate the will and risk the potential of losing the Bowlus to the KU Endowment. … We are extremely happy that the question about the Bowlus ever going to the KU Endowment Association has finally been answered….”
ACCORDING to Willis, the board was finally stimulated to request the court’s counsel by a host of looming concerns, including the uncertainty surrounding school finance, the imminence of a school bond election, the resignation next year of the Bowlus’s longtime director, Susan Raines, and the attendant requirement to hire her replacement. “Things have changed significantly in the last 50 years,” said Willis, “and they will continue to change, so how can we adapt to the benefit of all of us?”
The board retains its affection for the fine arts center, emphasized Willis, and it possesses a desire to see it succeed for the benefit of its patrons “for decades to come.”
“[As such,] no immediate plans are in place to change anything at the Bowlus. Over the next few years, we will review the answers from the court and work with [Raines], her successor, the Bowlus Commission, Friends of the Bowlus, and the community to shape a future for the Bowlus that will continue its success.”
RAINES, who attended Monday’s meeting, offered a response to the court’s decision via email the following day, pointing out that she and the Bowlus Commission, “in anticipation of the court decision, began last May investigating ways in which to expand the use of the Bowlus, while still staying true to Tom Bowlus’ direction that the building be used to provide cultural and educational opportunities perhaps not otherwise available to the citizens and students of the area.” The commission, continued Raines, is looking forward to working with the Bowlus trustees in an effort to ensure that the benefits the center currently offers the community and its young people will be the profit of future generations, too.
AN electronic copy of the court’s decision as well as the board’s response can be found by visiting the USD 257 website.
