Senate committee approves bill letting donors sue to enforce endowment terms

The Oklahoma Senate Committee on Retirement and Government Resources voted to pass Senate Bill 844, a measure that would allow donors and their legal representatives to sue to enforce written gift and endowment agreements when the attorney general does not take up a complaint.

Supporters said the bill fills a gap in common-law protections for donor intent; opponents warned it could spur litigation and conflict with an existing statutory framework. "This proposed legislation ensures a level of basic accountability for endowment gifts," Senate author Senator Gillespie said during committee discussion. "It also, in my opinion, increases transparency in the charitable sector."

The bill's sponsor told the committee that in many jurisdictions common law treats gifts differently than contracts, meaning donors sometimes lack a private cause of action and must rely on the attorney general. Amy Chose, representing the Philanthropy Roundtable, answered committee questions and said the bill provides an additional enforcement avenue for donors.

Committee members pressed the sponsor on several technical points, including how the measure would interact with the Uniform Prudent Management of Institutional Funds Act and existing attorney-general remedies. "Does this replace the Uniform Prudent Management of Institutional Funds Act?" Senator Boren asked, citing Title 60, section 300. The sponsor said he would confirm how the bill aligns with that statute and promised to tighten language.

Members also raised procedural and policy concerns. Senator Kurt asked about penalty language and the practical effect of a six-year discovery window written into the draft. Senator Bourne warned the change could turn long-standing gifts into enforceable, court-policed obligations, arguing heirs could become "endowment police" and subject nonprofits — including churches — to micromanagement. "...a hundred and 25 years down the road, after the donor died, an heir could come in and go to court," Bourne said.

The bill includes a provision stating nothing in the act will affect the attorney general's authority to enforce restrictions in endowment agreements. The sponsor said the intent is to provide donors a private remedy where, under current common-law practice, they may otherwise be unable to proceed if the attorney general declines to act.

After debate and amendment offers were discussed, the committee recorded a Due Pass recommendation and, on roll call, reported 5 ayes and 2 nays; the chair declared the bill to have passed out of committee.

Supporters said the measure protects donor intent and provides accountability; critics said it risks increasing litigation, creating long-term uncertainty for nonprofits and raising questions about statute of limitations and record retention. The sponsor pledged to work with committee members on language adjustments before the bill reaches the full Senate.