Seeking a bit of real world inspiration for an upcoming garden project, Keith and I this last Sunday visited the Shin Zen Garden at Fresno’s Woodward Park. A lovely urban oasis within an oasis it was developed nearly 20 years ago, and as returning Fresno ex pats, this was our first visit. Certainly worth the effort to wander inside, it was nevertheless a bit rough around the edges. Of course, with anything the newness wears off, but here the maintenance wasn’t quite what it should have been, and our ‘Zen’ was marred by creeping neglect. On our way out, we saw the placard acknowledging donors, and Keith wondered aloud how many of them designated their funds be used not for construction, but endowed for maintaining in good order a lovely and lovingly designed garden.
One does wonder, and as we find ourselves getting older, we see very many other areas of the built environment, and not just locally, becoming decrepit at a faster rate than we are. Sad to see, and so unnecessary, if sufficient funds in the fundraising are endowed- but how infrequently this actually happens.
I suppose that the more grandiose the project the more it captures the imagination of prospective donors, whose own vanity extends no further than picturing a gallery, a foyer, a water feature, or even the wing of an entire building with their name emblazoned on the side or memorialized with a bronze plaque, but in that euphoria, the wing in a state of collapse or the water feature dry as a bone is not within their ken. Nor is it, typically, in the fund raisers’ spellbinding skill set- the construction of a grand edifice is a sexy inducement and prelude to reaching for the checkbook in the inner pocket. The mundane maintenance of the same is not- repainting the eventual peeling paint and graffiti outside and replacing worn out toilets inside are profoundly unsexy prospects.
Would that, in capital projects, the reach did not regularly exceed the grasp, and the eventual be ignored through underfunding or disregarding completely the necessity of endowed funds. For a number of years now, England’s National Trust has cottoned on to the fact that, regardless of historic importance, visitor numbers and paid admissions do not support the upkeep on the properties in its care, and nothing is now accepted without an appropriate level of endowment to support it. I believe the general rule of thumb for the National Trust, and most wise charities of a similar stripe, is that an endowment is required that exactly matches the monetary value of the asset given in gift.
Times change, and the vogue charity and building project will always occlude what’s gone on before. But that’s the point- those things that are worthwhile remain so and will, properly endowed, be maintained and enjoyed despite being pushed temporarily into the shadows.