Filoli tweaks volunteer agreement: Agency provides opt-out for liability clause after controversy

More than half of the volunteers have already signed the agreement that releases Filoli from liability for injury or other damages while they work at the country estate.

But in Barrack’s letter, she writes: “After considerable discussion and input from our advisers, the Governing Board has approved the opportunity for volunteers to opt-out of the release clause by crossing out and initialing this clause when signing the agreement. Those who have already signed the agreement will be given the opportunity to re-sign, crossing out this clause if they desire.”

The letter was sent in response to the National Trust for Historic Preservation, which owns the gardens and house in Woodside that the Filoli Center operates, said Cynthia D’Agosta, Filoli’s executive director.

“The trust wanted to step back and revisit the issue,” D’Agosta said.

Nearly half of the estate’s 1,300 volunteers had yet to sign the agreement with many threatening to quit or already doing so.

D’Agosta took part of the blame for how the agreement was rolled out and how volunteers responded to it.

She said Filoli’s business model created 40 years ago does not function today and that the volunteer agreement is standard for California nonprofits.

“The agreement didn’t start with me. It’s been a three-year collaborative effort with the Governing Board, National Trust and volunteers,” said D’Agosta, who has worked at Filoli for two years.

She noted that many of the volunteers have been with the agency for 30 or 40 years and did not respond well to the new agreement.

The board met for the first time this year Wednesday to consider the agreement after which the letter was sent to volunteers saying they could opt-out of the clause, she said.

But the National Trust may end up adding the liability clause back into any future agreement, she said.

“We are all here for the same thing, to protect and preserve this place. We can’t operate without them. We treasure them,” D’Agosta said about the volunteers.

The agreement volunteers were asked to sign by March 1 contains a release of indemnification clause that prevents them for suing the agency for negligence, personal injury of wrongful death.

The agreement wasn’t put together, however, because Filoli has been sued or related to insurance rates, D’Agosta said.

Many volunteers don’t know why after working there for so many decades the agreement is being presented to them now.

“The fact remains that no such agreement has ever been in effect at Filoli and there has been nothing of any consequence presented as to why such an agreement is important at this time,” James C. De Voy wrote to D’Agosta in a letter on behalf of his wife Kiwi De Voy, who has worked as a flower arranger at Filoli for 22 years.

Another volunteer, Jean Dehmer, will not sign the agreement either even with the opt-out provision.

She has been a member of Filoli for 12 years and a nature education docent there for three years.

“I don’t feel comfortable signing it. I regret it. I love working there. I’m very sad I’m not going to be able to do this any longer. I’ve never been asked to sign any agreement that remotely resembles that,” Dehmer said.

In Barrack’s letter to the volunteers Thursday, she points to the climate at Filoli created by the volunteer agreement.

“Unfortunately, some of the interactions during the rollout of the volunteer agreement have been disruptive. It will take significant time and effort to work through the many issues created,” Barrack wrote in the letter.

bill@smdailyjournal.com

(650) 344-5200 ext. 102