Chapter 8 - The Atrium Attack Changed the Governance Question
Before Evelyn tipped Anna’s wheelchair, the board problem involved disclosure and stewardship.
Afterward, it also involved:
conduct.
The foundation’s security footage captured the entire incident.
Evelyn tipping the wheelchair.
Anna falling.
Michael running in.
No ambiguity.
Anna had bruising along one shoulder and hip.
No fracture.
No head injury.
Her wheelchair required minor alignment repair.
Evelyn initially said:
“I lost my temper.”
Then:
“She was provoking me.”
Then her attorney advised her to stop giving explanations that sounded like justification.
Good advice.
The foundation board convened without Evelyn.
She was not automatically removed because Michael demanded it.
He did not have that authority.
Evelyn served as a director elected by the board.
Removal required the process specified in the bylaws.
Outside counsel reviewed:
the physical incident,
the Sterling negotiations,
the inaccurate historical materials,
and the failure to contact Anna concerning the Vale stewardship seat.
Then Michael had to answer questions too.
Had he used his position as David’s son to influence staff?
Sometimes.
Had he told foundation counsel to “fix this before my mother destroys the place”?
Yes.
Unhelpful.
Had Anna received documents through Michael that other directors did not yet have?
One archive packet.
Not confidential board material.
Still sloppy.
The board separated family fury from institutional decisions.
Exactly what David should have done more often.
Then Evelyn was placed on temporary leave from board and advancement duties pending investigation.
Not because she insulted:
the owner.
Anna was not owner.
Because a director physically attacked a collection steward and family member inside the foundation, while serious governance questions involving that steward were active.
May you like
That distinction mattered.
---
