Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
SMT224

Scout Executive Salaries...

Recommended Posts

"Were Councils forced to log their summer camps to pay for Roy's 1.5 million retirement package?"

 

 

You can't really be serious with this question?

 

Summer Camps are OWNED by the individual COUNCILS. What the COUNCIL does with THEIR camps is THEIR CHOICE. It is usually determined by a committee of VOLUNTEERS from the COUNCIL.

 

National can't "force" individual councils to do anything with their own land.

 

Mr Williams compensation package, and the rest of National's budget, comes from a variety of sources. The $10 annual National membership fee (which is the same as, or lower, that that of other similar youth organizations) is one source. National also charges each council an annual fee which is based on the amount of money that council spends on salaries. National also receives money from subscriptions to their publications, and sales from National Supply (ScoutStuff). National also funds itself thru corporate, and individual, contributions, grants, and earnings on investments.

 

Most of your FOS $ stays in your HOME COUNCIL. Those $, along with popcorn (or whatever product sale) $, United Way $, corporate contributions, bequests, investment earnings, & yes even logging profits, etc, all pay for ALL of your LOCAL HOME COUNCIL'S total expenses.

 

These expenses include rent/mortgage on all buildings and land, vehicles, salaries/benefits, electric, phone, internet, water, insurance, upkeep of land and buildings, any major improvements/repairs to land/buildings, office materials, program materials/equipment, training expenses, expenses involved in providing programing for the Scouts in their council, etc, etc.

 

Councils, at least those that are run decently, also should have enough monies put into a fund to allow them to pay their bills for a specific number of months, in case of an emergency.

 

If you don't donate thru FOS, if your unit does not sell popcorn (or whatever your council sells), if you do not designate where your United Way donation goes, if you get local business to donate to YOUR UNIT instead of to your council, then why are you surprised when your council has to get creative in order to make enough money to pay its bills?

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As far as I know, no part of FOS goes to National. Fees paid to National by local councils come from and are based on membership. FOS contributions go to council operating budget and facilities.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Also and someone can correct me if I am wrong, but also part of the money national collects from councils also goes towards training the professionals.

 

Now what I would like to know is how much is the compensation for the national CEOs of other non-profits like Girls Scouts, 4-H, Red Cross, etc. I know there is an easy way of doing this online looking at their tax records, they are public records and accessible, but i can't remember the website.

 

This looks like a hit piece on the BSA, and I'm sure opther non-profits will not be looked at.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That site is guidestar.org. You have to register to check out the Form 990s, but it's free. The only caveat is that it's a privately run site, so they don't always have the most recent forms and information.

 

You can also request a Form 990 directly from the nonprofit. They're required to provide them for the last three years, if memory serves. You can get older ones from the IRS directly, though it may take a while. Payment for copying and shipping costs is involved.

 

There is an interesting related article over at the American Institute of Philanthropy's Web site on nonprofit salaries: http://www.charitywatch.org/articles/salaries.html

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Was serious to ask where did the money come from? Of course! Why not ask? Did he deserve the big bucks? Maybe so, maybe not. I've not seen compelling evidence either way. And then, why not ask where money came from? And again, why not ask what was not done because of the millions BSA has provided so the CEO could live a very comfortable life style?

 

Maybe he totally deserved it, maybe the only way BSA can get quality leadership at the highest levels is to pay the big bucks so typical of today's top executives.

 

But maybe not.

 

I'm not sure why asking these questions has set you off so.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Anyone have any insight into why "regional director salaries" would have declined so dramatically - by $450,000 from 2005 to 2007? Was there a mass layoff, retirements, restructuring at the regional level? That just seems like an awfully big jump.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Restructuring at the regional level has been going on for a while now. Many tasks regional were doing was duplicating what the councils were already doing, and councils have absorbed these responsibilities as regional staff were being downsized.

 

Only a small percentage of FOS goes to National, and as someone has pointed out it is to provide training to the the councils professional staff. The rest is to support the councils camp, salaries, maintaining scout offices, etc., at least that was the way it used to be when I was a professional years ago.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

SMT224, what I am questioning is why you are being so deliberatly troll-like in your comments.

 

I SPECIFICALLY QUOTED the comment of yours I was referring to, and it was NOT the question of where the money comes from.

 

It was the wildly inappropriate suggestion that BSA National FORCED any individual council to log their camps.

 

 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Troll like? Me?! What do you mean by that?

 

I was, and continue to, pursue the issue in this forum, which I think is very appropriate.

 

Is it wrong to wonder if there's a linkage between the salary of the BSA CEO and the fiscal revenues of logging on BSA owned land? If such a linkage proves to have no merit, than it will die on it's own. If there is a connection, how ever distant, then perhaps the BSA needs to rethink how funds are allocated and utilized.

 

You have stated, with much capitalization, that you believe that is no connection what so ever. Ok, fine. But do not attack the those who would ask how Scouting money is used and where it came from. These are legitimate issues to raise.

 

I too am a volunteer and paid my dues to the National, Council, and District level over the years. As far as I'm concerned, Scouts are the best thing ever for boys. And girls for that matter. I pursue this issue not to attack BSA, but to find and deal with issues that may open us for attack.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

An ad hominem argument, also known as argumentum ad hominem (Latin: "argument to the man", "argument against the man") consists of replying to an argument or factual claim by attacking or appealing to a characteristic or belief of the source making the argument or claim, rather than by addressing the substance of the argument or producing evidence against the claim. The process of proving or disproving the claim is thereby subverted, and the argumentum ad hominem works to change the subject.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Earlier in regards to the BSA official response

http://scouting.org/filestore/pdf/QAHearstmemoedited1-27-09.pdf ,

I stated, "I did not like the spinning in this response, but most of all I am skeptical of the repeated statement (4x) that the BSA is the nation's largest youth organization. I believe both the Boys & Girls Club and 4-H are larger."

 

I notice today that scouting.org homepage first sentence now correctly states:

"The Boy Scouts of America is one of the nation's largest and most prominent values-based youth development organizations."

 

Thanks for the correction.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You all really don't know what you are talking about. You are falling into the same trap that many outsiders do when our constitutional issues are reported in the news. You need to understand how the compensation is reported as required by the IRS.

 

Did Roy Williams make $580,000 in his last year? Yes. That includes all of his bonus etc for the final year. I believe his typical salary was about $400,000 a year normally.

 

Did he make $1.5 Million? NO! That is the total value of his deferred compensation (retirement) if he lives to the average actuaral table age. Take $1.5 Million and divide by 15 years. Based on his orginal salary it doesn't sound so outrageous, does it. Remember that he has contributed much of that money himself over his career. It is still considered deferred compensation.

 

Now I am no fan of Roy Williams. Luckily we are back on the right track. But don't go after his salary. That's cheap.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Last time the IRS called BSA on carrying over too much cash - they offered a nice early retirement package to paid staff. No attempt to expand national camps - which have far more people trying for spots than are available. NO aid to local councils. The money flows UP in BSA - to National. The individual fees, profits from all Scouting merchandise and Council fees pay for National. What does National really do for you? Think about it. This from someone AT National who's a bit cynical about things. They noted that there's a culture within BSA that focuses on the ILLUSION of performance (no matter how achieved - maybe that's why there are recurring membership numbers scandals) for promotion but no real accountability for failure. After all BSA has lost membership for decades, their pact with the LDS and others has driven out other groups yet there's no accountability at all. Senior execs are VERY well paid for the non-profit world - it's a topic that has regularly come up in the non-profit world. BSA has been something of an embarassment - a sinecure for those at the upper levels (conceding that DE's and most are NOT all that wellpaid).

 

Our former SE is now gone - having alienated the volunteer base (to the extent that 200+ ACTIVE adults have quit with many others who stopped working at any level above their local unit. He showed 'growth' by creating a fifth district - though ALL numbers have declined. A promised audit of numbers never happened. Regional said 'all procedures were being followed'. No comment onmembership claims. We are down to two facilities - having sold off prime real estate to bulk up the trust funds. FOS contributions have tanked - and many will never contribute again. This SE did the same damage here he did in his previous council. His 'inner city' programs wer revealed for the fraud they were and real numbers were LOWER when he left than when he arrived. He was an arrogant and incompetent little Napoleon but has protectors - he's back in Southern Region when he should have been fired after FAILING in one Council much less two. Somehow 'volunteer relations' seems not to factor in to performance - even when you have a few hundred calling for your removal your performance in the eyes of BSA is fine. As for salary levels - he made TWICE what his Girl Scout equivalent did - while Boy Scouts had less than HALF the number of kids.

 

The new SE will be fighting an uphill battle trying to get back to where things were BEFORE this last SE.

 

Truth is that volunteers have little control over even their local Councils - as Chicago showed. BSA will do all it can to maintain control and dictate what IT wants. It's more than the limited choice any Council has in choosing an SE - handpicked resumes from National - ANY signs of real dissent and National threatens to yank the Council's charter (with all assets reverting to BSA National if that does occur). The paid 'pros' have run BSA for THEIR benefit for decades - in no other youth organization does so much money go to the compensation of those running it. Yet BSA has been failing for decades - getting smaller and smaller. Those in charge have NOT succeeded in slowing the decline and have in fact hastened it. Yet there is NO open debate in BSA over this or anyother issue. Merely questioning BSA policies gets your membership revoked.

 

Instead of denouncing any valid criticism as an 'attack' on BSA, there needs to be an open and honest discussion of how BSA is run. But that's not going to happen. Those in charge won't allow it. So BSA will continue its steady decline, beholden to groups like the LDS, alienating more and more people becoming more and more conservative and extreme. Because BSA defends to the death its monopoly on 'Scouting' in the US, ther ewill be no competitors and in another few deacdes all that will be left is an LDS youth program - funded by all of us because all Council Assets revert to BSA when a Council folds.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Last time the IRS called BSA on carrying over too much cash - they offered a nice early retirement package to paid staff. No attempt to expand national camps - which have far more people trying for spots than are available. NO aid to local councils. The money flows UP in BSA - to National. The individual fees, profits from all Scouting merchandise and Council fees pay for National. What does National really do for you? Think about it. This from someone AT National who's a bit cynical about things. They noted that there's a culture within BSA that focuses on the ILLUSION of performance (no matter how achieved - maybe that's why there are recurring membership numbers scandals) for promotion but no real accountability for failure. After all BSA has lost membership for decades, their pact with the LDS and others has driven out other groups yet there's no accountability at all. Senior execs are VERY well paid for the non-profit world - it's a topic that has regularly come up in the non-profit world. BSA has been something of an embarassment - a sinecure for those at the upper levels (conceding that DE's and most are NOT all that wellpaid).

 

Our former SE is now gone - having alienated the volunteer base (to the extent that 200+ ACTIVE adults have quit with many others who stopped working at any level above their local unit. He showed 'growth' by creating a fifth district - though ALL numbers have declined. A promised audit of numbers never happened. Regional said 'all procedures were being followed'. No comment onmembership claims. We are down to two facilities - having sold off prime real estate to bulk up the trust funds. FOS contributions have tanked - and many will never contribute again. This SE did the same damage here he did in his previous council. His 'inner city' programs wer revealed for the fraud they were and real numbers were LOWER when he left than when he arrived. He was an arrogant and incompetent little Napoleon but has protectors - he's back in Southern Region when he should have been fired after FAILING in one Council much less two. Somehow 'volunteer relations' seems not to factor in to performance - even when you have a few hundred calling for your removal your performance in the eyes of BSA is fine. As for salary levels - he made TWICE what his Girl Scout equivalent did - while Boy Scouts had less than HALF the number of kids.

 

The new SE will be fighting an uphill battle trying to get back to where things were BEFORE this last SE.

 

Truth is that volunteers have little control over even their local Councils - as Chicago showed. BSA will do all it can to maintain control and dictate what IT wants. It's more than the limited choice any Council has in choosing an SE - handpicked resumes from National - ANY signs of real dissent and National threatens to yank the Council's charter (with all assets reverting to BSA National if that does occur). The paid 'pros' have run BSA for THEIR benefit for decades - in no other youth organization does so much money go to the compensation of those running it. Yet BSA has been failing for decades - getting smaller and smaller. Those in charge have NOT succeeded in slowing the decline and have in fact hastened it. Yet there is NO open debate in BSA over this or anyother issue. Merely questioning BSA policies gets your membership revoked.

 

Instead of denouncing any valid criticism as an 'attack' on BSA, there needs to be an open and honest discussion of how BSA is run. But that's not going to happen. Those in charge won't allow it. So BSA will continue its steady decline, beholden to groups like the LDS, alienating more and more people becoming more and more conservative and extreme. Because BSA defends to the death its monopoly on 'Scouting' in the US, ther ewill be no competitors and in another few deacdes all that will be left is an LDS youth program - funded by all of us because all Council Assets revert to BSA when a Council folds.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...