A growing number of LGBTQ+ seniors in San Diego are expressing concerns over the management of a significant $19 million donation to the San Diego LGBT Community Center. This gift, coming from the estate of Maurice Thimot and M. Rust Rawnsley, was intended to support programs for gay seniors. Despite the Center’s commitment to use these funds for LGBTQ+ senior housing and related services, community members say they lack clarity on how the donation is being utilized.
The contribution, which was received in two installments—$10 million in 2022 and an additional $8.9 million expected in the fall of 2024—exceeds the Center’s annual budget. While the organization claims the funds will enhance services for seniors, critics argue that transparency regarding the allocation of this money is sorely lacking.
Concerns about governance and accountability emerged prominently during a recent meeting of the Center’s board of directors. Charles Kaminski, a longtime donor and client, emphasized the importance of transparency, stating, “These are not small procedural issues. They are governance choices. Transparency builds trust.”
In a letter addressed to the board and signed by over 50 community members, concerns about the handling of the donation were articulated. The letter asserts that the bequest appears to have been treated as general operating revenue rather than being allocated toward improving the lives of LGBTQ+ seniors.
Elaine Lewis, a former member of the Center’s previous senior advisory committee, indicated that the public’s frustration has been growing. “People have been feeling this way for a long time,” she stated, reflecting a broader sentiment among constituents.
The Center has responded to inquiries about the original intent of the donation but has not disclosed specific details. Spokesperson Gus Hernandez reiterated that the organization, its attorneys, and auditors have agreed that the funds will support senior housing and related services. However, he noted that the use of the donation is currently paused while awaiting final regulatory guidance.
This pause includes the $350,000 annual payments initially planned to support housing stability and related services for seniors over a ten-year period. These developments follow a period of uncertainty for the Center, which had previously announced potential layoffs due to concerns about federal funding.
As of now, the Center’s financial operations are under scrutiny, especially following the departure of its chief financial officer in May 2024. Hernandez stated that a consultant is assisting with financial strategy while the organization seeks to bolster its accounting leadership.
Despite these challenges, the Center reports a 70% increase in service visits by seniors over the past year. The programming includes meals, wellness activities, case management, and housing support, which are vital to the senior community.
Nevertheless, trust remains an issue for some community members. Discrepancies in the Center’s communications regarding the Thimot and Rawnsley donation have raised alarms. For instance, the Center previously indicated that restrictions on the gift limited its use for senior housing, while also suggesting that it would prioritize such services.
Volunteers and donors have begun to withdraw their support, reflecting a broader concern about the Center’s openness and responsiveness. Ted Callam, a community member, encapsulated this frustration, stating, “You’re all over the place. You say one thing, and then you say another thing.”
A new senior advisory committee, established after the previous one was disbanded, has faced criticism for its lack of public meetings. Community members have expressed discontent with the limited time allocated for public comments during board meetings, which they argue diminishes opportunities for engagement.
The Center’s recent actions, such as relocating memorial tiles honoring deceased community members away from the lobby, have also drawn ire. While the organization claims this move was intended to enhance accessibility, many feel it was disrespectful to the memories of those honored.
As the situation develops, community leaders, including Bob Leyh, a former staff member with San Diego Pride, have called for greater accountability. Leyh remarked on the importance of community organizations remembering their commitment to serve their constituents, stressing that both the San Diego LGBT Community Center and San Diego Pride must prioritize the needs of the communities they represent.
As discussions continue, the future of the donation and the Center’s commitment to transparency remain pivotal topics for the LGBTQ+ senior community in San Diego.
