The story is generally correct EXCEPT- it should say “BLMGNF.” The group that bought the house and was cofounded by Patrisse Cullors is The “Black Lives Matter Global Network Foundation” which is not the same as the social rights movement “black lives matter.” This has been an issue which has caused much confusion for several years now when discussing the matter as many have conflated the sentiments and actions around grass roots non BLMGNF affiliated social rights with the BLMGNF- it doesn’t help that where you find BLM activists and supporters are often places the BLMGNF is also involved. The fact the movement is called “Black Lives Matter” and the global network foundation also uses the phrase in their name doesn’t help the confusion- but a handy helper for those feeling confused is this:
If you saw that Texas was raising minimum wage to $25 an hour how would you feel? Ok. But what if it was the chain dining establishment “Texas Roadhouse”? That could be a bit misleading in context no? Usually the context makes it clear and if not people specify. “Paris” most often means France but if there is reason to believe one might get confused between Paris Texas and Paris France it is generally specified for example. So yes- BLM and BLMGNF both have “black lives matter” in their name and both are often involved in issues concerning race and politics- but shortening the name or leaving out that we are talking about the foundation is misleading. It SHOULDN’T be since saying a civil rights movement bought something is like saying that rock and roll music ate a pizza- it’s nonsense- but because of the similarities and misuse of names many people conflate the foundation to the movement and so we do need to specify when we mean BLMGNF or BLM sadly.
From what I know of the situation, in this instance it seems super shady. That said- to your general statement that if anyone did something like this with donated not for profit funds it would be super shady… not really no. Many non profits have valid reasons for buying a particular space- even a high end home. It SEEMS shady- but there are many reasons. Raffling high end homes is a time tested source of profits for many NPO’s as is real estate investment or development. There are also other reasons- profile. A large portion of funds for many non profits and charities goes to getting recognition. High profile spaces offer high profile attention. As an example- we tend to think of “helping the needy” as giving out things people who can afford better wouldn't want or getting them low paying jobs in manual labor or something. But… what about a workshop or live in program for trying to elevate people above entry level jobs? And as to zip codes…
If you want to expose artists or performers or skilled professionals work to high end clients and businesses, would you be best off buying a warehouse in the “stabby” part of town- or a boutique on Rodeo drive? If you put those things where people with money live and shop and don’t make them drive across town to a place they feel unsafe-
There are valid arguments you might have better luck reaching those groups.
Zip code matters if you’re starting a program like one to help break generational poverty or inequity. Most “fancy” schools don’t offer such better curriculum than most other competent schools- they do offer networking. When your school pals are future CEO’s the opportunities you might get from your friends as you age and the culture you pick up tend to be more lucrative than when your buddies grow up to be middle managers. High end public schools depend on zip code.
If you want to get families who traditionally wouldn’t be represented in those areas into schools you need a property for them to use as a zip code.
So there CAN be lots of valid reasons and strategic purposes to use donations from an NPO to do something like this. What is critical is that there be a solid reasoning and accountability and that the action is the most prudent one for the organization to take to reach its goals. Hosting fundraisers? If you do enough events it becomes cheaper to buy than rent a nice venue and you do tend to get more money and richer patrons with nice fundraisers than at the airport Marriott.
So nothing inherently shady in buying a high dollar property with donations so long as there is a clear reason and that is the best value for the money in a clear path towards achieving the mission.
As for buying it from a friend for more than they paid…. Ehhhh… that’s a little… shaky. Any time deals are made between friends or family there is an ethics question of conflicts of interest or corruption. That said- it isn’t generally unethical for friends to do business- and often times it is MORE ethical with NPO’s and such because relying on relationships can provide opportunities or savings for the NPO. Many charities and NPO’s couldn’t function without relying on friendships and relationships for favorable treatment or help. More context is needed. Say for example that you bought a property for $1million and a year later the property was worth 2million. If you sold it to a friend you might sell it for $1.6 million. Based on what you bought it for and what you sold it for, it might seem your friend paid you $600k more than it was worth, but based on current value you saved your friend $400k.
So those are some examples where I have to disagree that anything like this is inherently shady in regards to the ethics of spending donated money. Unless money has been earmarked for specific uses, donations generally grant a wide discretion to the receiver to spend them in the way they find most prudent. A charity to “fight cancer” with a total worth of $100 million may decide that pursuing cures or new treatments or even operating clinics is outside their reach and instead use the funds for “awareness campaigns” to educated and warn people against things that increase risk- or they may instead lobby politicians or work politically to try and influence policies to make it easier or more efficient for others to develop, test, or deploy new ways to fight cancer. This is part of why it is important to do research before making donations. Where will your money actually go, do you think this organization has the same ideas on how to best solve a problem as you do? The same ethics or even
the same idea of what the problem even is? Who makes the decisions and what does their track record loom like? You’re trusting them to decide how to spend your money within the legal bounds allowed.
There are valid arguments you might have better luck reaching those groups.
Zip code matters if you’re starting a program like one to help break generational poverty or inequity. Most “fancy” schools don’t offer such better curriculum than most other competent schools- they do offer networking. When your school pals are future CEO’s the opportunities you might get from your friends as you age and the culture you pick up tend to be more lucrative than when your buddies grow up to be middle managers. High end public schools depend on zip code.
So there CAN be lots of valid reasons and strategic purposes to use donations from an NPO to do something like this. What is critical is that there be a solid reasoning and accountability and that the action is the most prudent one for the organization to take to reach its goals. Hosting fundraisers? If you do enough events it becomes cheaper to buy than rent a nice venue and you do tend to get more money and richer patrons with nice fundraisers than at the airport Marriott.
So nothing inherently shady in buying a high dollar property with donations so long as there is a clear reason and that is the best value for the money in a clear path towards achieving the mission.