Response from the Moffitt Center - Relay for Life
 

Thanks for your e-mail.



Moffitt Cancer Center has always been a major supporter of the American Cancer Society and its Relay for Life fundraiser in the Tampa Bay Area. We were not aware of the request made by the Villages until it was brought to our attention by the ACS. We would never ask an organization like the ACS to violate its bylaws. We will continue to offer our support to the ACS in putting on any Relay for Life event that takes place in Central Florida. Raising money for a charitable purpose is a good thing, and we all need to agree on the best ways to do that in advance. We are having conversations with the Villages on how best to proceed.



Best,

Michelle

Thanks 784caroline.

Lets hope the conversations with TV are 2 way.

Thanks for posting.
This appears to be a form letter.
See page 2 Lauren Ritchie's article which states:



"Moffitt officials in Tampa said Friday that they did not know such "fundraising" was being done in their name until cancer-society officials informed them recently.

"We would never ask an organization like the American Cancer Society to violate its bylaws," spokeswoman Michelle Foley stated in an e-mail. "We will continue to offer our support to the American Cancer Society in putting on any Relay for Life event that takes place in Central Florida."

Pressed about whether Moffitt approves of fundraising in its name that seems like white-gloved extortion, cancer-center officials did not directly answer. They did say, however, that they are "having conversations with The Villages" and pledged to "share" the conclusions soon."

If admins think quote is too long here is the link again.

http://www.orlandosentinel.com/news/....column?page=2

Sounds like a nice, political way to say nothing. Let's hope a more explicit response will be forthcoming.

Extent of Developer's financial interest in the new Moffitt location
 

Michelle--

Apparently the Developer will get a cut of the financial action by renting the new building to Moffitt and affiliated doctors. But what are the details? Is there even more to the story? Is the rent market based or is it somehow tied to the Developer's fund-raising activities? Is the Developer being compensated, directly or indirectly, in any other way, for its fund-raising activities? In light of the potential scandal that seems to be unfolding, perhaps you can get Moffitt to help clarify the facts by asking Moffitt this follow-up question:
Would you please disclose the details of all contracts, arrangements, or other understandings between Moffitt and any member of the Morse family, or any corporation, limited liability company, partnership, or other entity controlled by the Morse family or any member thereof? Please specifically include any contract, arrangement, or other understanding that could financially benefit any of the foregoing because of fund-raising efforts on behalf of Moffitt.

Advogado

Good questions. Suggest you write directly to Michelle at michelle.foley@moffitt.org

Follow-up question
 

OK. Will do so.

While I understand the interest in the details, I don't think it would be appropriate for Moffitt to disclose, to anyone who asks, the finer points of its lease agreement with the Morse family. The process of acquiring space to house the facility is completely separate from the process of funding the equipment for it. So far, Moffitt/CFHA is asking for donations to pay for the equipment they say they need, not to pay the rent.

I suspect most of the discomfort is due to the use of the word "donate" in the initial stories about the center. The more we learn, the more evident it is that "donate" does not reflect the actual relationship between Morse and CFHA/Moffitt. It is a purely business relationship with a developer funding construction of a property to generate income and a health care entity leasing it. I think people initially thought that since the developer was donating valuable land to the cause, that donations to fund the equipment were appropriate. Now we see that nothing is really being donated by the Morse's, people are not as comfortable donating for the equipment.

Don't donors have a right to know what's going on?
 

I'm afraid that I don't understand why you think that it would it not be "appropriate" for Moffitt to disclose the details of its relationship with the Developer. Why not? The controversy here swirls around the actions by the Developer in leading the fund-raising activities. Don't donors have a right to know the nature the Developer's financial interest in the project?

OK. Let's say you own a building and a company agrees to lease space in that building. And let's say the company leasing the space is a charity that solicits donations for its work. And donors ask for the explicit details about the relationship between the charity and you. Don't you think that violates your privacy as an owner?

Perhaps you agree with the charity's purpose and decide to help them with donations through activities on your own property. Does that give donors the right to all the information regarding your business relationship with the charity?

To be clear, I don't agree with the apparent tactics used to steer donations to the center such as happened with Relay for Life. But I don't see where that gives access to privileged, private business details.

Michelle is a PR person whose job is to keep the critics at bay. There needs to be a few letters written to:

Dr. William S. Dalton
President and CEO and Center Director
Moffitt Cancer Center
12902 Magnolia Drive
Tampa, FL, 33612

Suggest the letters be snail-mail, professional, and to the point. Mine is going in the mail tonight.

I am not the brightest bulb in the chandelier but I typed in M D Anderson Cancer Center and Affiliates and got some kind of statement of purpose that said that they have affiliates in order to further their business. At least that is what I got out of it.

M D Anderson is the top cancer center in the country, followed by Sloan Kettering and John Hopkins.

I am thinking that these kind of affiliations are found in all of them.

I feel kinda sorry for Michelle Foley.

You can explain only what you are told to explain by the people who pay you.

An interesting item on the editorial page of the Daily Sun by the founder of the Relay for Life.

It would appear to me from what I have read that someone is flat out making up things !

Yes - but who?? :shrug:

My curiosity/suspicion always goes ultra sensative
 

when a directly involved persona comes after weeks of swirling controversy on the subject of relay for life and it's ousting from TV.

Are we to believe they would stand pat all these weeks while the uncertainty swirled around? And now is it not uncanny that this mornings profession lays the problem at the feet of the American Cancer Society not wanting to commit to a local contribution. Now one would think an involved person, like the founder of relay for life would have known that and come forward at the outset of the the issue becoming public...through the American Cancer Society.

As usual, nothing from TV.

What some of us know, when there is a controversial issue that could affect some percent of a a given population, the "directly involved" usually go the extra mile to be sure the real circumstances are announced to stem misunderstanding. Hence the credibility, for me anyway, is suspect.

In this case they have chosen to let the misunderstanding fester ....until now! Smells too conveniently arranged...in the favor of TV, of course. Hmmmnnnnnn!!!

We will never know for sure.

btk