[pct-l] ED compensation

[Tortoise]

At least part of the answer to your question on staff growth is on page 36 
of 2010 Form 990. paraphasing
7 full-time and 2 seasonal to coordinate with government agencies on needed 
trail work and oversee projects in the field. These are two-year positions.

So presumably, if the funding goes away, so do the employees.

Tortoise

<>  Because truth matters.<>

All content is copyrighted. Reproduction or use elsewhere is is expressly prohibited without the express permission of the author. Use within the PCT-list is permitted.


On 2011.11.28 14:11, Timothy Nye wrote:
> I think my point is that the issue of executive compensation is really just
> a tree that obscures the forest of the professionalization of the PCTA
> as the Association  transitions away from being a primarily volunteer
> organization.
>
> The biggest downside of this change from my perspective is the potential
> creation of a structural deficit given the supplemental funding the
> Association has received from the stimulus.  A structural deficit is
> what resulted here in California when the state received a windfall of
> temporary increased income during the technology boom.  The state used this
> income to fund permanent ongoing financial programs.  When the boom ended
> the financial commitments remained.  As a result, there is now a disconnect
> in California between what is spent and what is received that has yet to be
> resolved.
>
> The original posting that started these threads showed the PCTA's spending
> on overhead as a percentage of income was quite good.  However, it's
> unclear to me that this chart includes the temporary stimulus funding
> received by the PCTA over the last couple of years.  Those funds have been
> used to fund in turn at least five two year positions that the PCTA
> describes as being temporary; at the same time the Association has been
> adding other positions such as outreach, etc so that the amount of overhead
> is clearly increasing separate and apart from the executive director's
> compensation.  The question is whether those positions are in fact truly
> temporary, or whether other funding sources or existing funding will be
> used to continue them.
>
> As noted, Liz's background is in fund raising.  She is likable.  OK, at any
> rate I like her, and clearly a number of other members of this list do as
> well.  In a fund raiser, likability is an important and positive attribute
> and therefore opinions supporting her on that basis shouldn't be
> discounted.  Her salary as reported is really appropriate for the
> Sacramento area and her level of responsibility.  We should bear in mind
> that the PCTA also goes to DC once a year and interacts with various
> governmental entities.   Presenting well is important in a political
> environment.
>
> The real issue for me is this: Does the increase in overhead through the
> increase in personnel costs, including office expenses, benefits and salary
> mean that the Associations future baseline expense year over year has been
> increased; possibly to such an extent that less funding is left for the
> trail itself and that residual funding is only available after the
> increased administrative expenses have been met?  If so, any decrease in
> funding in the future is going to be disproportionately borne by those
> funds left over for trail maintenance and improvements.  This is the larger
> issue as far as I'm concerned; that is, whether the PCTA will maintain
> control over it's funding priorities so that the percentage of it's income
> that is devoted to it's staffing doesn't begin  to offset the amount of the
> funding available for the trail itself.
>
> Are these changes ones that are in effect a fait accompli?
>
> If funding becomes principally driven by large donors what effect, if any,
> will that have?  If funding becomes dependent on government grants will the
> independence of the PCTA be compromised?
>
> As a member driven organization I believe that these are all valid
> questions for the membership as a whole.  At the very least, the discussion
> is informative not only for members of the list, but also the PCTA.
>
> Just few more thoughts.
>
> Gourmet
> _______________________________________________
> Pct-L mailing list
> Pct-L at backcountry.net
> To unsubcribe, or change options visit:
> http://mailman.backcountry.net/mailman/listinfo/pct-l
>
> List Archives:
> http://mailman.backcountry.net/pipermail/pct-l/
> All content is copyrighted by the respective authors.
> Reproduction is is prohibited without express permission.
>