OC Scouts leader’s pay rose while revenue fell

August 26th, 2008, 7:00 am · 78 Comments · posted by Teri Sforza, Register staff writer

The Boy Scouts of America Orange County Council saw revenues drop by nearly 24 percent between 2006 and 2007, according to its most recent tax returns.

At the same time:

The top manager’s compensation rose nearly 8 percent
The cost of management rose more than 61 percent
Expenses rose by nearly 11 percent

The local Scouts’ net assets, however, were up more than 15 percent. That includes:

$12.6 million in publicly-traded securities
and some $2.6 million in cash.

The local scouts also own real estate worth about $33.4 million.

GOOD NEWS/NOT-SO-GOOD NEWS

Nearly 70 percent of OC Scouts’ spending is on programs, the camping/character-building activities that form the core mission of scouting. That’s considered good. But, it’s down from more than 77 percent in the two prior years. (Generally, charity watchdogs want to see no less than 65 percent spent on programs; 85 percent is considered close to ideal).
About 21.5 percent was spent on management - up from 14.7 percent in the two prior years. (Generally, charity watchdogs like to see no more than 15 percent here.)
About 11.4 percent was spent on fundraising, up from 9.5 percent in the two prior years. (About right; charity watchdogs like to see no more than 10 percent here.)

Orange County has the ninth-largest Boy Scout Council in the nation, serving more than 65,000 young men and women with more than 14,000 volunteers, according to the council’s tax returns.

A recent story by fellow Watchdog Tony Saavedra told how the slow economy and lackluster fundraising pushed the local Scouts to cut $600,000 from this year’s budget, and eliminate 11 positions, just a few months after top management received merit pay raises.

Chief scouting exec Les Baron’s total compensation was $317,804.

The average compensation for nonprofit executives was about $150,000 last year, according to a recent study by nonprofit watchdog Charity Navigator.

More Watchdog:

Share this post:

Posted in: Charity checkup • Money • Nonprofits |

You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. Both comments and pings are currently closed.

Alan Says:
August 26th, 2008 at 7:13 am

The decrease in funding is a result of United Way pulling their financial support to organizations that benefit the Community.

OC Boy Scouts are in an adjustment period as they reduced overhead and increase program expenses.

12.6M in public companies is pretty low; however, with the current economy situation this can also be a major contributing factor in revenue growth from the dividends earned by these holdings. The last thing we want them to do is use the principal in funding.

With the newest camp, Outdoor Nature Center being added to their asset should help their overall holdings.

A 61% increase in management expense should be reviewed and I would like to see what was needed in this line. What were some of the items?

Alan Says:
August 26th, 2008 at 7:25 am

Also could you post the 2007 990K and the 2006 990K? I was also to download the 2006 and am unable to locate the 2007.

Thank you for letting us know that a 61% management expense was incurred in 2007. This might be from staffing and management of the Outdoor Nature Center which is a joint project for various Community Organizations funded by the Boy Scouts.

Look forward to seeing the 2007.

Alan Says:
August 26th, 2008 at 9:12 am

Ok I need to post a correction.

The author of these blogs corrected my understanding, by way of email, that the 990 for 2006 is actually for FY 2007 not the calendar year of 2006 as referenced on the tax return.

I learn something everyday. Wish they would of told me that at the Grankmaking Conference. Again I am sorry for the misunderstanding.

It will be interesting to see the 2007 calendar year 990 return to see how they did for FY 2008.

Richie Says:
August 26th, 2008 at 10:12 am

Thats why they wanted to take over the soccer arenas. So they can exploit the latino kids.

Johnb Says:
August 26th, 2008 at 10:21 am

Management cost was up 61% at a time when revenues were down. Staff was cut, but upper management took an 8% pay increase. It’s sounding more and more like the Boy Scouts have an over loaded upper management.
If they really cared about the Scouts, upper management would be taking cuts in pay to save some programs, but I guess that’s not their job.

Alan Says:
August 26th, 2008 at 10:58 am

Actually the decrease in revenue did not take one dime out of their programs. See the update from Lara Fisher and comments on my personal review of their 990s.

The increase is a line increase and could also include additional staffing as I did notice program management on the salary appeared to have an additional 100K added and likely the manager for the new Outdoor Nature Center. Now running a center like that for 100K is dedication.

Believe it not I have not even volunteered out there to help in the building of that new facility. I really need to find that time and quickly as that will be such a personal reward.

KymSue Says:
August 26th, 2008 at 12:50 pm

All I know is that the perception of the “volunteers” that are working this program because they believe in the benefits is that the management is out of touch.
I know as a full time employee I don’t expect any increase, no matter how small, when revenue is really suffering. The fact that the Board of Directors continues to blindly support Les Baron is crazy to me.
During hard financial times, when parents can’t afford to send their boys to these expensive Council weekend programs, it would make more sense to offer more program at less cost to parents and forget about giving pay increases to staff.
Employees understand, especially those working at a non-profit, when times are tough increases don’t happen. I am sure Les would understand when given his salary is at the high end of a “non-profit” executive.
I, along with all the parents I speak to in my Pack and Troop, will once again be withholding our contribution this year and every year until the Board starts making better financial decisions. In the mean time I suggest that the parents/volunteers that are as unhappy as I am give their “FOS” contribution directly to the Unit they are working so hard for.

Christina Says:
August 26th, 2008 at 1:09 pm

Yeah, expenses rose, such as the salaries of the top execs.

Alan Says:
August 26th, 2008 at 1:22 pm

KymSue,
Scholarships are available to help cover the $30-35 expense to attend a weekend program.

I do agree that employees should not expect increase or even a paycheck, in relation the the current State Budget. Arnold should of froze all spending as he has no budget for spending.

I cannot believe we are even discussing $300K for an executive salary. If earnings are a problem for you then I would suggest more education and putting things you learn into practice.

So you will withhold funding for a program you are involved in. That is interesting.

Christina,
So adding $100K management which is included in the overall compensation for the Outdoor Nature Center was bad?

KymSue Says:
August 26th, 2008 at 3:27 pm

Alan,
We’re discussing an automatic merit increase in light of hard financial times, decreased revenues, lay offs, districts being lost, and questionable financial management.

I pay Council for my program with uniforms, camp fees, registration to volunteer, etc.
I pay for my sons program in the Unit with transportation costs, copying fees, postage, supplies, food, equipment, etc.

I, along with many other free volunteers, choose to withhold our FOS contributions because of the actions by the Council and Board of Directors.

I can give those funds directly to the Units that we work long and hard for with “NO PAY” and then we can ensure those funds are being used 100% for the boys.

We all make choices in life and we’re held accountable, well most of us are.

I believe in the values of the Scouting program. I am married to an Eagle Scout and expect both of my sons to reach that goal. I work hard on the Pack and Troop level. I do all that for free because I support the program, ideals, values, and beliefs that Scouting fosters.

I just like many other volunteers do not believe in the actions of our OC Council in giving inceases at a time when most parents can’t afford the re-charter fees, the fundraising pressures, the outing expenses, the cost of new uniforms, the expense of supplies, camp fees, etc. and like most of us in the working world won’t get merit increases from our companies when the revenue vs. cost of doing business doesn’t add up.

Bucky Says:
August 26th, 2008 at 4:06 pm

Its all about trust. The public, especially the Troops and Packs, asks questions, and the Scouting executives hide behind the outspoken apologists, or what Lenin called the “useful idiots”.

These executives are a pretty pugnacious bunch, and seem capable of fighting their own battles. Let them. I’m sure that such a well paid bunch would most certainly have all the communication skills necessary to iron out any misunderstandings we may have about the Council.

dude Says:
August 26th, 2008 at 6:48 pm

Lets see, heres Alan again…..the first three responses he is talking to himself. I would hate to go to a party with you Alan, do you ever listen or just constantly talk?

Game over, you are at your word limit.

Alan Says:
August 26th, 2008 at 7:05 pm

Why would they waste their time over a mere 3% salary increase and additional management resource for a new resource site for the Community?

That is the reason for annual 990s that clearly show these numbers. I would be upset seeing them waste valuable time defending something that are available to the public and do not show major issues other then a lack of suitable investment holding assets and revenue growth decline.

Johnb Says:
August 26th, 2008 at 7:10 pm

Alan there’s no way around the fact that the Boy Scouts management expenses increased by 61%, 11 of the staff were laid off and the whole time management took an 8% pay increase. This from a non-profit organization. Would it had hurt them to give up the pay increase for once?

Bucky Says:
August 26th, 2008 at 7:39 pm

Waste their valuable time? What is it that you think these guys do all day? You throw this CEO thing around, when they aren’t CEO’s. They don’t make CEO decisions. They are a franchise. They can’t make CEO decisions. They can’t decide the direction of the product, market themselves differently, sell or buy back stock, or change the corporate vision. Either way, they should make more adept corporate spokespeople.

You like to make apples-to-apples comparisons with other NFP’s and corporations, but we are talking about the Boy Scouts here. They are the “we’re better than you” people. They pretend to live by very, very high standards. Defending them by shoving other corrupt organizations in our face or saying “Well, he’s doing it too” doesn’t wash.

Alan Says:
August 26th, 2008 at 10:42 pm

Between 2000 and 2006 Boy Scouts of America has more then doubled their revenue growth.

Between 2003 and 2006 the Boy Scouts sold over $4M in assets. This includes camp assets in the amount of $1.4M following back to back years in 2002 & 2003 of less then half the normal public contributions. Since then asset sales are under control with less then 200K gain from security sales in 2006.

Les Baron replaced Kent Gibbs as the Scout Executive in 2004 at a savings of $100,000 in compensation in 2004! Since 2004 under Les Baron management program revenues continue to increase over a $1M annually as Scouts pay their share for program sponsered events - and yes scholarships are available for those who cannot afford the $30-35 weekend fees for camp. I strongly urge the Community to support fundraising efforts as a portion of the revenue (30% average) remain with the Pack to help their neighborhood based families attend the Scouting programs at a reduced cost.

Under Les Baron management public support nearly doubled since 2003 following back to back years where revenue from public contributions was flat.

Now I personally think Les Baron is worth the same if not more salary then Kent Gibbs was paid for his outstanding efforts to clean up the balance sheet and promote Scouting to the Community.

The fact remains that 2006 was an adjustment year as public contributions went from nearly $12M to $7M due in part to an economic slowdown and discontinue of support for Community Organizations that support leadership in our Youth by the United Way.

If you want to look at the numbers yourself, download them from GuideStar.

strongsidejedi Says:
August 26th, 2008 at 10:50 pm

OK I’ll wade into this fact filled discussion.

Let’s compare the BSA executive salary to the salaries of another “kid” oriented OC organization… Children’s Hospital of Orange County.

CHOC is a major advertiser in OC Register and their community papers too.

So, they won’t post these things without having a phone call from their PR team.

The top paid executives at CHOC consume $4,369,374 in tax payer funds. The top paid independent contractors consume another $28,180,343 in tax payer funds.

Highest paid executives (consuming $4,369,374.00 in 2005)
(Page 9 of 32 appears to list Kim Cripe and Kerri Ruppert salary as zero. This unusual statement is also reflected in a statement on the Board of Directors. However, if you look at the tax return for Children’s Healthcare of California (a related organization), you will find the pertinent information. It appears that Ms. Ruppert chooses to post her salary related to CHOC on the CHC return. It is also interesting that the Children’s Healthcare of California return lists that Kim Cripe spends 2 hours per week working on the non-profit.

$1,101,159 - Kim Cripe - Chief Executive Officer - $846,394 in compensation, $215,965 in benefits, and $38,800 in expense accounts

$679,794 - Kerri Ruppert - Chief Financial Officer - $517,989 in compensation, $136,561 in benefits, and $25,244 in expense accounts

$630,424 - Maria Minon - Ex-officio Director - $441,664 in compensation, $168,489 in benefits, $20,271 expense account

$400,223 - Mark Headland - VP & Chief Info Officer - $311,194 in compensation, $79,342 in benefits, $9,687 expense account

$387,372 - Dana Bledsoe - VP Patient Services - $292,566 in compensation, $79,415 in benefits, $15,391 expense account

$384,629 - Margaret Conk - VP Business Development - $277,699 in compensation, $87,209 in benefits, $19,721 expense account

$280,331 - Theresa E. Gianfortune - VP Human Resources - $220,109 in compensation, $70,254 in benefits, $9,968 expense account

$271,990 - David R. Schinderle - VP Finance - $196,870 in compensation, $61,107 in benefits, $14,013 expense account

$233,452 - Steve O’Kane - Ex-officio director - $213,000 in compensation, 0 in benefits, $20,452 in expense account

Bucky Says:
August 26th, 2008 at 11:18 pm

Sounds like Les Baron was a better Scout Exec than Kent Gibbs and that Kent Gibbs was overpaid. That is, unless Kent Gibbs spent his tenure trying to fix someone else’s mess.

strongsidejedi Says:
August 26th, 2008 at 11:26 pm

Sounds more like Les Baron and Kent Gibbs didn’t pay enough for ad space in the Register… Did Freedom get a dander up because they had good stewardship over DONATED dollars?

I guess that’s the difference between CHOC and Boys/Girls Clubs paying Freedom Communications for ad space versus BSA just going it alone.

But, I guess the CHOC 2005 return says it all:
$1,300,143 - DGWB Advertising - 217 N. Main Street, Suite 200, Santa Ana, CA, 92701
(THAT IS 1.3 MILLION DOLLARS… Anyone at Freedom want to comment on how much of that goes in the pocket of the REGISTER and clouds this discussion?)

Alan Says:
August 26th, 2008 at 11:42 pm

Bucky,
You might have a point. I only went back to the 2004 990 and obtained the information on historical stability and revenue and did see that in October of 2004 is when Les Baron took over as the Scout Executive.

You might have a point that Kent Gibbs might of been cleaning up another mess from prior senior management even before him. In that case the level of improvement continues.

Having back to back flat public contributions mid-year numbers that showed 2004 was not changing would make any Board of Directors concerned and seeking a replacement. I just wish Les Baron had reviewed a prior 990 and got a little better salary contract before signing on as the new Scout Executive. Hopefully he can turn this year around and maybe get a little bonus. Might even be a good incentive for performance.

I am really awaiting the review their current filing to see if and how they recover on paper from 2006. However, we did have a booming economy in 2005 so the adjustment might not be an easy one as we are just starting to see an economic recovery beginning here in Orange County.

It is likely that Les Baron will be doing a lot of defending at the next annual meeting. However, I do believe the Board of Directors will see the adjustment, which was still $2M revenue growth from 2004 as an adjustment period in the economy.

Thank you for your insight on Kent Gibbs possible role. I do not know the internal operations of the organization and are looking at this solely based on 990s.

Scout Supporter Says:
August 27th, 2008 at 9:40 am

The $317k is not the SALARY but the total compensation including all benefits including health benefits(which has been rising at 20% a year). Be careful not to compare salary to total compensation Typically, the load to a company for an employee is around 40%….

KymSue Says:
August 27th, 2008 at 10:07 am

Alan,
Please stop talking about scholarships for $30-$35.
Parents are certainly paying more than that for each outing.
We’d be lucky to send our kids on a one night over night for $35.
BUT you do have a point and I hope Council is listening.
I’m recommending to all my parents to ask for Scholarships.
What is the critieria?
Can we be approved on the basis that we work hard but haven’t received any cost of living increase or increase in years that is regardless of the cost of inflation?
How can we afford to live on our salaries without increases and pay for all the expenses involved with Scouting?

KymSue Says:
August 27th, 2008 at 10:10 am

Council please know when you call my house for the hundreth time and ask about my FOS contribution….
I’ll make sure and let you know I haven’t recieved an increase from my employer how can we be expected to survive without one.
If Council has enough money to give increases when Districts are being lost and people are laid off then they certainly don’t need my little $500 FOS contribution. They’re doing fine.

Bucky Says:
August 27th, 2008 at 10:17 am

Alan,

I am not a fan of using financial accounting reporting for managerial accounting at all. People get credit, or blame, for numbers that they had no part of. The numbers also don’t reflect the objectives at the time, or the legacy left behind. In the private sector, revenue can double because construction on doubling retail space just completed. Sales reps can make big promises and leave scorched earth. I’m not saying any of this happened here, but I never look at financial accounting when doing performance reviews. We can go crazy describing the elephant to each other all day.

As far as NFP’s, I’ve seen old people just kick the bucket and leave a ton of money because of that one happy summer back in the day. Lucky NFP boss.

Bucky Says:
August 27th, 2008 at 10:25 am

KymSue,

From my understanding, the performance of the Scout execs is graded in part on the FOS fundraising, as well as the popcorn sales. So, your contribution will probably result in a raise for the exec at the Council. Look at it from a sales point of view. You were obviously more than happy to give money in the past. Your change of mind is an obvious failure on the part of the exec trying to get you to give again. What did this person do wrong that changed your mind? There is a disconnect.

Bucky Says:
August 27th, 2008 at 1:10 pm

Have you ever been at a board meeting, Allan?

Johnb Says:
August 27th, 2008 at 2:27 pm

Alan, do you think it’s right for upper management to take an 8% pay raise at this time of declining revenue and rising expenses? Do you think they, the upper management could get by in thier lives with half the salary they make now? Could they get by on $200,000 a year? Would it hurt for them to make that offer, since they want others to sacrifice more?

Alan Says:
August 27th, 2008 at 2:49 pm

Bucky,
I have never found a need to question any of their oversight or actions. With nearly seventy (70) members on their Board of Directors I think they can do a much better combined job in oversight then anyone on these blogs.

For the record here are the People that serve on the Board of Directors:

Alan Airth
Anthony Saucedo
Bill Bunker
Bob Paul
Charlie Vogelheim
Chip Fedalen
Chris Percy
Curtis Reese
Daniel Whelan PhD
Dave Hirz
David Allen
David Blankenhorn
David Braun
David Janes
David O Team
David Prizio Jr
David Robinson
Dennis Hardin
Ed Gotschall
Ed Laird
Frank Rubino, MD
Gary Allen
Helen Stainer, EdD
Henry Stiepel
Howard Dutra
James Baird
Jay Freedman
Jeremy Yamaguchi
Jerry Whitmore
Jim deBoom
Jim Pisz
John Acosta
John Dalton
John Hagestad
John Lerch
John Middleton
John Schuetz
John Stoner
John Sturgess
Jon Tenney
Joseph Davis
Kermit Marsh
Kevin McKenzie
Mark Engstrom
Michael Harrison
Mike Kartsonis
Nadine Wilck
Nathan Rosenberg
Nick Franklin
Nick Van Hoogmoed
Pat Velasquez
Paul Haas
Peter Hitch
Ralph Clock
Ralph Linzmeier
Robert Anderson Schoepe
Robert Burton
Robert J Neal
Robert Kelly
Saundra Jacobs
Scott Allen
Steve Bradley
Steve Kahn
Timothy Kay
Tom Graffio
Victoria Gray
W Bob Dickie
Wayne Stelmar
William Baker

Now would you say, honestly, that these Members are not more concerned about the operations of the Orange County Council of the Boy Scouts of America then any single reader on this site?

Oh look a major name is on this list – Mr. Schoepe. I think I know a few families that will be spending time out in Lost Valley this weekend.

I want to personally thank every one of these members for their hard and mostly “volunteer” work serving on the Board. Also I want to thank them all as major financial contributors to the Youth in our Community.

johnb,
Alan, do you think it’s right for upper management to take an 8% pay raise at this time of declining revenue and rising expenses?
Yes, as revenue drop is only a result of economic conditions and further the revenue growth is still higher then two years ago.

Do you think they, the upper management could get by in thier lives with half the salary they make now?
I am not one to judge their lifestyles and as mentioned by Bucky either nobody can tell anyone else how to live in a Society we mutually share and benefit from at the expense of others.

Could they get by on $200,000 a year?
Personally, our family could not survive on $200,000 a year. We are not sure if these people are single income earning or any other financial conditions they face, including retirement planning in order to avoid becoming a burden on our system when they get older.

Would it hurt for them to make that offer, since they want others to sacrifice more?
Working 60 hour weeks (stated on 990s) and family time I do not know how they balance their lives. However, they are actively in the Community and at various Events helping out.

Johnb Says:
August 27th, 2008 at 3:30 pm

Alan, according to the article 11 people were laid off, during a time of declining revenues. So to cut cost, they cut staff. 11 people were now out of a job, no income, while those at the top increased their incomes by 8%….while being in the top 1.5% of wage earners. These people could not skip the pay increase so others could keep thier jobs within the organization? Talk about not wanting to sacrifice!
The people at the top of any organization should set the example.

Alan Says:
August 27th, 2008 at 3:45 pm

I don’t judge others life style, but do judge their actions.

That is exactly what you did by saying they can life with less. Further, increase in revenue growth based on prior years, excluding the economic downturn is great work.

11 People are out of a job because economic conditions have prevented People for supporting non-profit organizations. Now that they cut staff others in the organization have to work twice as hard with the SAME pay. Oh, sorry they had a cost of living increase to support their family and pay for gas to get to work. I guess that is wrong.

Bucky Says:
August 27th, 2008 at 4:05 pm

Did the same staff appreciate an increase in pay, or is the boss getting the pay increase? Don’t throw the staff in there with the boss. They are not all compensated as well and do not enjoy the same perks.

Johnb Says:
August 27th, 2008 at 4:12 pm

Alan, you said: “11 People are out of a job because economic conditions have prevented People for supporting non-profit organizations.”

But it didn’t stop the top people from taking an 8% pay increase. How did that happen?

Alan Says:
August 27th, 2008 at 4:13 pm

Actually you should review the 990s and educate yourself instead of expecting someone to do that for you.

Please reply back on your findings and be sure to compare them over a little longer period then 3 years.

And are we bringing lifestyle back into the conversation and judging how people manage their own personal affairs?

Alan Says:
August 27th, 2008 at 4:15 pm

Johnb Says:
But it didn’t stop the top people from taking an 8% pay increase. How did that happen?

Again an uninformed comment. Please break this down so we can understand how much of this 8% is related to health care benefits or reimbursed expenses so we can have an honest comparison to discuss.

Alan Says:
August 27th, 2008 at 4:31 pm

The question is still open:

Please break this down so we can understand how much of this 8% is related to health care benefits or reimbursed expenses so we can have an honest comparison to discuss.

Johnb Says:
August 27th, 2008 at 4:40 pm

Alan please justify an 8% pay increase while laying off 11 people? It does not matter if part of it is for health care benefits. How can you justify any pay increase when you’re making over $500,000 and I just lost all my income.
What you’re telling the people who were laid off is “too bad, find another job, I’m not giving up anything, even if it would mean saving your job. The volunteer help can help others, I’m not, I’m too important.” It’s the “let them eat cake” attitude.

Bucky Says:
August 27th, 2008 at 4:44 pm

I just wondered if you were on the board, or fighting as a disinterested third party. That’s all. The 990’s don’t say everything, though you want them to.

My case all along is that people asked a simple question, and we get a surrogate (or someone pretending to be a surrogate) giving us an oversimplified answer. I totally agree with you on a few points. Selling capital for revenue is not a good sign. Build a portfolio and let the money work for you.

You obviously know a lot about the council, and my guess (I apologize if I’m incorrect) is that you are privvy to information that could give a better answer than showing us tax forms. Are you a tax accountant or something, because you provide a very limited piece of the story.

Alan Says:
August 27th, 2008 at 4:52 pm

Johnb Says:
Alan please justify an 8% pay increase while laying off 11 people?

(argumentum ad hominem - sorry Bucky motivated me to use terminology) Please present your actual argument to support the fact that all 8% was salary. And who is making $500K in this discussion?

Nonetheless, I totally understand now where your complete argument comes from and that is your personal loss of revenue.

I am sorry for this fact; however, in economic times employers (yes the bosses) have to make a choice to keep health benefits or employees (only one example).

I can understand your personal struggle right now and these economic times will change.

Bucky Says:
I just wondered if you were on the board, or fighting as a disinterested third party

I am not on the Board nor anyway paid for by the Boy Scouts. I do represent non-profit grantmaking organization that gives money to the Community and none of which goes to Scouting Organizations as it is not within the Foundation Mission.

All the information is available in the 990s if you take time to read them or understand managerial accounting.

Johnb Says:
August 27th, 2008 at 5:05 pm

Alan: “personal loss of revenue.”? LOL, now that is really funny. I almost fell out of my chair reading that…too funny. You can’t answer the simple question, so you go after me personally. LOL. Too funny.
Can you please justify taking an 8% increase in compansation (any companstion), when making over $500,000 and laying off 11 people, who now have NO income?

Johnb Says:
August 27th, 2008 at 5:33 pm

Alan you said: ” I do represent non-profit grantmaking organization that gives money to the Community”
Now I understand where you’re coming from. You don’t want to “bite the hand that feeds you”. You have to back top management of the Boy Scouts, groups like them are your pay check. Am I right? huh? huh?

Johnb Says:
August 27th, 2008 at 5:35 pm

Alan, I say that with a smile, not in a mean way. You are honest. I’m enjoying the conversation.

Bucky Says:
August 27th, 2008 at 5:39 pm

Thanks.

A 990 doesn’t tell the whole picture as to why there were increases in revenue or why sales went up. There are always factors that affect outcome that have nothing to do with performance. What has piqued my interest is that you seem very well educated, and in the know, but haven’t given us a little help to see beyond the numbers reported on the tax form.

I think that some are a little bit upset that the head of our favorite feel good charity is making a lot of money. We want to believe that he is a good Scout and is doing it because he is a good person. That is why many give money to the Scouts. We want to believe in the hype. If he is really just a well paid executive, then maybe we shouldn’t believe in saints. He shouldn’t take a vow of poverty, but maybe he isn’t what we made him out to be.

strongsidejedi Says:
August 27th, 2008 at 10:47 pm

Bucky,
I’ve reviewed your comments on this and other threads.
I’ve also noticed that you refuse to answer the questions for a clearer definition on the arguments you make.

You’ve already lost the debate.

So, your ad hominem attacks and ignorance of comparitive data on CHOC and Boys and Girls Club in Garden Grove is frankly growing idiotic.

Johnb Says:
August 27th, 2008 at 11:05 pm

strongsidejedi should be ignored since he or she can’t seem to stay on topic. The topic is the BSA, not any other group.

Bucky Says:
August 27th, 2008 at 11:27 pm

Why are the moderators not deleting his comments? I wish this blog had the “ignore this guy” feature.

Ironically, he’s getting in the way of Alan’s spirited defense.

Synchronizing ignore function….3…2..1. Strongsidejedi is ignored.

KymSue Says:
August 28th, 2008 at 9:50 am

I don’t like negative Scout stories and belief in the Scout program.
I don’t like the double sided agenda I hear that NO ONE is addressing
On one hand the OCBSA is large and successful, so good job and everyone gets an increase
BUT if it’s large and successful why did people loose their jobs and districts close.

It’s very simple and you are dancing around the simple truth.
If the OC Council was doing soooo great as you like to report in support of the pay raises
THEN WHY??? did 11 people have to loose their jobs and the Ahwanhee district get disbanded??
IF they’re doing such a good job, then those things shouldn’t have happened.
And if all of this happened because of “economic climate”
THEN the organization has no business giving out increases.
If those increase meant people could have kept their jobs.
It’s not the time for increases PERIOD !!!!!

And for the record I was at the Annual Board Meeting, and the monthly Roundtables for the Pack and Troop, and the weekly meetings on Wednesday and Monday for the Pack and Troop, and the Committee meetings for the Troop and the Pack, and the outings for the Troop and Pack…… So you’ll have to excuse me if I don’t have the time after my full time job (that didn’t give increases during decreased revenue) to pour over the tax records of the OCBSA. I only point out my contributionis and time and resources because you attack those points as if I need to be more involved. I pay for program and supplies because I believe in the program and I am not looking for sympathy but again you act as if I’m a whiner complaining over a $35 camp fee (try $35 Scout, $15 adult times 2, and $15 sibling, gas, food, etc.). AGAIN I’m not complaining I just want to stop the wah-way approach that you have over $35 when the reality is that it’s at least $100 for an overnight event.)

I have never received a scholarship or funds from OCBSA or BSA. I pay out of pocket for all my expenses as do all the parents I am involved with. WE as a Troop assist campers with scholarships and equipment from our own pockets and our Troop fundraisers. I along with may other parents withheld our FOS contributionis to ensure that the funds do assist low income families with program costs and that the fees aren’t going to “increases” or martinis for Executives.

Like it or not those are the perceptions that many of the volunteers in the field are feeling and the biggest problem is that that OCBSA contintues to go along as if no of this matters, and ignore the feelings of the parents and volunteers. Because I promise you my feelings are the same as all the other parents and volunteers I speak to. Let’s see the FOS numbers over the past 3 years. Post those numbers and see the decline. That is how the Board should rate Les and if he deserves an increase. Because withholding our FOS is the only way we know how to show our disapproval, and the FOS is primarily the parents of the Scouts and if we’re withholding our pledges because we don’t have faith in the leadership then that should mean something. But instead the Board seems to continue to keep their head in the sand.

Bucky Says:
August 28th, 2008 at 11:38 am

Johnb,

Mr. Dwyer seems like an all around good guy. I read the whole article last night. It says a lot about compensation.

I don’t know if cutting your FOS money from your units is going to get anyone’s attention. The Mormon’s have to give a lot to the program. Then there’s the big fundraising dinners and the occasional rich guy who died nostalgic of the old days. I don’t know how the service clubs fit into this, but some have pretty tight relationships with the Councils.

Alan is right about some of the blogs. Organizations do need to build asset portfolios. How much is too much? I don’t know. The OCR tends to scratch the surface on issues, then throw out their own self made straw men to sacrifice to the gods.

Alan Says:
August 28th, 2008 at 12:19 pm

johnb,
OK since you are so focused on Cradle of Liberty Council let us present the facts.

Les Baron and William Dwyer received roughly $260K in compensation not “pay”.

Mr. Dwyer’s actual reported compensation rose by 8.5%< and that is without considering reimbursed expenses!

So let us think also that if Mr. Dwyer took no “actualy” pay increase and his overall compensation rose 8.5% that he too experienced compensation (or as you continue to reference “pay regardless of how it looks on paper”) increases just like everyone else in organizations would mean that Les Baron must of gave money back since his increase was less then Mr. Dwyer.

When coping that article be sure to mention that Mr. Dwyer’s compensation rose by 11.6% and Les Baron’s compensation rose by only 3.6%.

Again more smear campaigning to present figures without understanding what they “actually” represent.

Bucky,
I guess Mr. Baron is a more all around good guy. I think it is time to stop reading articles and look at the facts.

Alan Says:
August 28th, 2008 at 12:21 pm

OK since you are so focused on Cradle of Liberty Council let us present the facts.

Mr. Dwyer’s actual reported compensation rose by 8.5% and that is without considering reimbursed expenses!

Bucky Says:
August 28th, 2008 at 12:39 pm

You didn’t bring Baron up, you brought Dwyer down. Now, I don’t know who to believe in. Its like they are all slick obfuscators telling half truths in their own selfish best interests while the faithful neglect to ask the hard questions.

Maybe this is a bit more systemic than it originally appeared.

Bucky Says:
August 28th, 2008 at 1:35 pm

The holdings issue may be their weakest point. Organizations do a need a strong portfolio. The question is, why aren’t they dipping into these resources to keep those 11 people on staff? If there is not enough money to keep people on staff, and keep the rest of the bottom line, then why does the Scout Exec still get a raise?

A NFP’s bottom line just shows financial health, but it is a Not-For-Profit, which means it isn’t making money for shareholders. Its getting money to provide services.

While the elite tend to talk (because they have a voice) about all the good the organization is doing, those actually in the organization are not happy with the what the level of service they are getting while not being heard.

Johnb Says:
August 28th, 2008 at 2:08 pm

Alan, you said “Mr. Dwyer’s compensation rose by 11.6%”. Where did you get that information?
My question would still be, since Mr. Dwyer did not accept any compensation for 4 years, why can’t the current leadership follow his example?

Johnb Says:
August 28th, 2008 at 4:29 pm

Alan you said “I am not going to use an 8%, 11% or even a 3% “compensation increase against them as these are NOT pay increases as stated by another Council Executive.”
At the salaries they are paid, why do they need any increase in compensation? Any funds taken from the organization, to increase their own compenstion, could have been better used to keep staff and help other programs.
The arugement about needing to pay them more to keep them from going to for profit businesses, I find suspect. How many top leaders of non-profits are leaving for “for profit businesses”. And even if they left, there’s always someone to replace them. It’s not like they’re a Steve Jobs(founded Apple) or Bill Gates and Paul Allen (founded Microsoft).

Alan Says:
August 28th, 2008 at 4:36 pm

Again for the countless time - increase in compensation on the 990 is not an increase in wages.

Leaders of non-profits usually stay for the cause. However, the turnover rate of non-profit staff is two years.

Johnb Says:
August 28th, 2008 at 4:40 pm

Alan, I did not say it was an increase in wages this time. Are you trying to say there were no funds taken to increase their compenation? Where did the money come from or go to for their compensation?

Johnb Says:
August 28th, 2008 at 5:01 pm

Alan, I never said the BSA wasn’t transparent, but then by law they have to be. It’s not like they do it out of the kindness of their heart.
I do question the increase in comenpsation at a time when others were looseing their jobs at the BSA.
Can you answer my quesions? Where did the money for the 8% increase in compensation come from? Would the money have been better spent saving someone’s job or on a program?

Alan Says:
August 28th, 2008 at 5:01 pm

Johnb Says:
Are you trying to say there were no funds taken to increase their compenation?
No.

Where did the money come from or go to for their compensation?
That is the question that is not answered in the 990s. I can only assume the majority is health benefits.

Bucky Says:
An executive negotiates a total compensation package.

No question there. However, those benefits that are negotiated do have cost increases throughout the years.

johnb,
I will print and read the article on the way home on the train. Thanks for the link.

Bucky Says:
August 28th, 2008 at 5:08 pm

Or sometimes, they find that they are not working for a cause at all and that the organization does not even believe in the values behind closed doors that it proclaims on the street corners. It must be something to see the perks and compensation that the boss has while trying to make an impact on the world. It must mean something to go out and raise funds to get that boss that raise.

I didn’t know it before, but Les Baron does have the stink of a membership scandal on his hands. I want to read more about that.

KymSue Says:
August 29th, 2008 at 11:26 am

Alan you seem to get a better picture/understanding of the points I’m trying to make.
I am tired of this group vs. that group, this report vs. that report…
The bottom line is that the volunteers that work this program do not have faith in the leadership.
I do not trust the leadership to manage my contributions, so I choose to make those monitary donations directly to the units where I can see ensure the money is all spent on program, Scouts, and supplies.

I only took over the Pack responsabilities when our previous leadership left. I will step away from the Pack in June 09 and I am working hard to ensure a smooth transition, unlike our painful experience. I think most of the volunteers spread themselves too thin. I have no problem letting go and delegating. The hard part is getting the parents who are reluctant involved. It takes finese, but we’re getting there. With the added Scout committments I have to pull away from church functions, PTA, etc. I can’t be everything at the same time, nor do I want to. God, Family, Church, School, Scouts…. those are our family’s priorities.

Again, we believe in the program or we wouldn’t sacrifice so much to make it successful for our boys. The experience with the boys and seeing their successes and failures is what make it all worth wild. We, the volunteers, just need more from our Council. Stop making things harder for us. Get some programs established to help leaders take over. How about a visit from the “paid” people when volunteers step up and take over leadership? Wow what a concept. I am sure the belief is that the old leadership takes the new leadership in hand and walks them through, but the reality is that they burned out and gone before the new team comes aboard. There are just so many more areas that need improvement to help those peope that sacrifice so much of themselves for free. Maybe if the volunteers were better supported we wouldn’t have such a hard time getting other parents involved.

The long and short is that the OCBSA doesn’t have the support of the masses or the trust. FOCUS on that, forget the numbers and reports.

Bucky Says:
August 29th, 2008 at 3:55 pm

I apologize for a belated reply.

Alan:
>
Now would you say, honestly, that these Members are not more concerned about the operations of the Orange County Council of the Boy Scouts of America then any single reader on this site?
>

Being on the board doesn’t make one more committed. The Councils and Districts are often plagued with dead weight that do no more than ‘Wear The Uniform’ as we call it. Some get an ego trip, some get a little good resume PR. Many are on the board because someone more connected and powerful leaned on them. Choosing the arm twister is just as important as choosing the board member.

Some are die hard Scouts who want what we want.

Alan Says:
August 29th, 2008 at 6:44 pm

Bucky Says:
Being on the board doesn’t make one more committed.

I agree and yet most of them are paid NOTHING and donate millions of dollars to the organization.

Bucky Says:
August 29th, 2008 at 7:53 pm

Except for the professional Scouts, none of them are paid. I would say that some of them are hard working, some have been leaned on, some are the leaners, some just add prestige to the board, some are running for office, and some are just wearing the uniform. Many vote the way they are told and don’t ask too many questions.

The same goes for the donations. They donate. Some more than others, and some because they are leaned on. Like I said before, you never go in asking for money alone.

I’m not beating up on them, and can’t speak for this board. I’ve just seen a lot of dead wood and people just wearing the uniform.

Bob Builder Says:
September 2nd, 2008 at 9:27 pm

Alan is about as stupid as it gets. Bet he will try to have the last word. Post your photo Alan, bet you look like LES BARON with a wig and mustache.

strongsidejedi Says:
September 3rd, 2008 at 10:46 pm

Alan,
You’ve put up as much info as could possibly be needed by anyone.

BSA is cleaner than the local hospitals are.

Contact the bloggers

Sound off! in our latest poll

Follow this blog:

Recent Posts

More from OC Watchdog reports

Total Buzz: Orange County political blog

Categories

Recent Comments

Archives

OC Scouts leader’s pay rose while revenue fell

August 26th, 2008, 7:00 am · 78 Comments · posted by Teri Sforza, Register staff writer

78 Responses to “OC Scouts leader’s pay rose while revenue fell”