Former Getty Chairman Returns Part of Book Fee

David Gardner, the former chairman of the board of J. Paul Getty Trust, has returned nearly $100,000 of the money he was paid to write a coffee-table book on the history of the arts institution after he left the board in 2004 but never produced.

The Getty asked Gardner to pay back the money after an internal investigation concluded that the book deal violated tax laws prohibiting excess compensation and self-dealing, Getty spokesman Ron Hartwig said Friday.

The announcement comes after The Times reported in June that former Getty Chief Executive Barry Munitz awarded Gardner the deal months after Gardner helped Munitz secure a new five-year employment contract opposed by some board members.

Plans for the book, which was to have commemorated the Getty’s 25th anniversary, were canceled in March, a month after Munitz resigned amid turmoil at the nonprofit foundation but not before Gardner had collected $178,000 over 19 months.

The $99,871 Gardner has returned includes interest on the excess compensation, more than $2,000 in “mistaken expenses” and about $900 in pension payments he qualified for by virtue of the book deal, Hartwig said.

Gardner will keep more than $78,000 he received for 19 months of work on the project, during which, he said, he completed an outline but did not conduct an interview or write a word. Hartwig would not comment on what work Gardner had done for that payment.

“This was a legitimate project,” he said. “I can’t vouch for how much work he did. We relied on the fact that he was in fact working on this project.”

Hartwig also refused to comment on whether the Getty had concluded the deal was a quid pro quo between Munitz and Gardner, something both men have denied.

After The Times raised questions about the deal last spring, John Biggs, then the trust’s chairman, said he had asked attorneys with Munger, Tolles & Olson to investigate whether the deal involved a quid pro quo. The investigation was part of a broader review of alleged mismanagement at the Getty.

In June, Getty officials told The Times that their investigators had found no evidence of a quid pro quo between Munitz and Gardner, a former president of the University of California.

During an internal review of the transaction, one person told investigators that the book deal was intended to reward Gardner for his help with Munitz’s contract, Biggs said. But he added that the statement “doesn’t hold any water” and that the investigation has turned up no credible evidence.

Several experts on the laws governing nonprofits have said that discussions of the book deal while Gardner was chairman created a potential conflict of interest, because each man stood to benefit personally from the official actions of the other.

In a statement released by the Getty on Friday, Gardner said he agreed to return the money because the book deal “had become a distraction” and he hoped to rest any claim he was overcompensated for the project.

By retrieving the money, the Getty hopes to resolve the legal violations before state and federal regulators act.

The Getty will report the payments to Gardner as self-dealing and excess compensation on an amendment to its latest tax filings to the Internal Revenue Service, which prohibits the use of tax-exempt resources for personal benefit.

“Gardner has made complete restitution and corrected any acts of self-dealing,” Hartwig said the Getty will tell the IRS in the filing.

The Getty will also report the agreement to the state attorney general’s office, which is investigating the deal as part of a yearlong investigation into the alleged misuse of Getty assets. A final report on the investigation is expected in the coming weeks.

It remains to be seen if the restitution will satisfy state and federal regulators.

“We plan to ask the Getty what it got” for the $78,000, said Tom Dresslar, a spokesman for Atty. Gen. Bill Lockyer.

The book deal was first discussed while Gardner was chairman of the Getty board and involved in contract negotiations for Munitz, then chief executive. Before he left the board, Gardner helped Munitz secure a five-year contract, despite opposition from some on the board who favored a one-year trial contract.

In September 2004, three months after Gardner retired from the board, Munitz agreed to pay him $300,000 over three years to write the commemorative history.

The assignment was later changed to have Gardner edit a collection of essays written by others -- at the same pay.

In early June, Gardner said he had no intention of returning the $178,000, saying he deserved the pay for research he had conducted during 19 months. More progress was not made because the Getty had failed to provide the support he needed, he said.

On Friday afternoon, Gardner did not return two calls for comment, and Munitz, reached through his attorney, would not comment.

According to the Getty statement, Gardner wrote in a recent letter to the Getty board that he deeply regretted the misunderstanding about the book deal and “the ensuing difficulties at the Getty these past two years,” which led to the canceling of the book project.

“The history of the Getty, its impact and contributions in Los Angeles and the world, is an important story that should be told,” Gardner wrote.