BigRobSA said:

---

techno-ag said:

---

flown-the-coop said:

---

Not sure if it's a scandal, but it's a poor look and would appear the board is either in on it, incompetent or both.

That's a c suite level salaries for a medium size business.

It's excessive, but I agree it's not a scandal or theft. Just dumbarsery.

---

Nah it's just a HCOL area. Look at the $23 million/year they have to pay for janitorial and security. You know that's New York unions right there.

---

3 Mexicans from Home Depot and a 5 gallon of Fabuloso.....done

---

bmks270 said:

---

techno-ag said:

---

From an earlier story in the Post:

Quote:

---

Of its $93 million revenue, the high-profile foundation took in only $10.3 million in private donations. Most of the cash, $69 million, came from the sale of tickets, tours, memberships and souvenirs.

The bulk of the nonprofit's $4.5 million in government funding came from the National Park Service, plus $500,000 from New York State taxpayers, and between $110,000 and $350,000 from New York City.

While salaries and budget deficits grow, ticket prices skyrocketed 50% from the $24 adult museum-entry fee in 2015 to $36 today. There's no cost to visit the famed outdoor memorial.

The organization's $112 million in expenses for 2024 included a $34 million payroll, $13 million for janitor services, and $10 million for private security. It paid another $7 million in rent to the Port Authority, which owns the World Trade Center site, including the land beneath the museum and memorial.

---

https://nypost.com/2025/08/23/us-news/exec-salaries-skyrocket-while-cash-strapped-9-11-museum-continues-to-bleed-red-slap-in-the-face/

---

112 million in expenses and 93 million revenues does seem like it would have some high salaries for the executive leadership.

---

Maybe the Port Authority could consider relinquishing their $7 million cut.

techno-ag said:

---

bmks270 said:

---

techno-ag said:

---

From an earlier story in the Post:

Quote:

---

Of its $93 million revenue, the high-profile foundation took in only $10.3 million in private donations. Most of the cash, $69 million, came from the sale of tickets, tours, memberships and souvenirs.

The bulk of the nonprofit's $4.5 million in government funding came from the National Park Service, plus $500,000 from New York State taxpayers, and between $110,000 and $350,000 from New York City.

While salaries and budget deficits grow, ticket prices skyrocketed 50% from the $24 adult museum-entry fee in 2015 to $36 today. There's no cost to visit the famed outdoor memorial.

The organization's $112 million in expenses for 2024 included a $34 million payroll, $13 million for janitor services, and $10 million for private security. It paid another $7 million in rent to the Port Authority, which owns the World Trade Center site, including the land beneath the museum and memorial.

---

https://nypost.com/2025/08/23/us-news/exec-salaries-skyrocket-while-cash-strapped-9-11-museum-continues-to-bleed-red-slap-in-the-face/

---

112 million in expenses and 93 million revenues does seem like it would have some high salaries for the executive leadership.

---

Maybe the Port Authority could consider relinquishing their $7 million cut.

---

"Women and minorities impacted the most!!!"

63% raise in two years!

I received about 3.8% (after a few years w/ no raises)... no where near keeping up w/ inflation. .

At $150,000 per position, 23 million for janitorial and security, equates to 150+ FTE's for janitorial and security.

They are way overpaid for a risk free job.

The National Museum of the Marine Corps is a first rate privately funded museum and the retired Major General that runs is for the historical foundation doesn't earn anywhere near what the executives at the 9-11 Museum are being paid.

techno-ag said:

---

Leaders are paid what they're worth, usually. I suppose you could get somebody to run the thing for free as a volunteer. But they still wouldn't be happy with the results.

---

Leaders at non-profits get paid based on their ability to raise money. Everyone else gets paid based on market wages.

Money laundering. Nothing else

TAMUallen said:

---

Money laundering. Nothing else

---

Well, yeah, you don't want your kid getting a coke-laden $five-er from the "Toot" Fairy, do you!?

lb3 said:

---

techno-ag said:

---

Leaders are paid what they're worth, usually. I suppose you could get somebody to run the thing for free as a volunteer. But they still wouldn't be happy with the results.

---

Leaders at non-profits get paid based on their ability to raise money. Everyone else gets paid based on market wages.

---

People at non-profits need to learn the ****ing purpose of non profits.

Pay me more so I can bring in my big donor friends who will donate more so you can pay me more so I can fundraise more.

At what point does the non profits have to benefit someone to keep their tax exempt status?

flown-the-coop said:

---

lb3 said:

---

techno-ag said:

---

Leaders are paid what they're worth, usually. I suppose you could get somebody to run the thing for free as a volunteer. But they still wouldn't be happy with the results.

---

Leaders at non-profits get paid based on their ability to raise money. Everyone else gets paid based on market wages.

---

People at non-profits need to learn the ****ing purpose of non profits.

Pay me more so I can bring in my big donor friends who will donate more so you can pay me more so I can fundraise more.

At what point does the non profits have to benefit someone to keep their tax exempt status?

---

I've been involved in the crime victim space for several years and there are a number of good non-profits that do remarkable work but are constrained by funding because they're basically just one or two volunteers. But once a non-profit hires their first full time employee their mission changes and making payroll each month becomes the new mission.

It is disgusting what they and other so called "leaders" of foundations make which is almost twice what Trump gets paid even though he is not drawing a salary.

Just think, Joe and Hussein drawing that same salary. Bill and W too (not sure if there's is adjusted). Hell, Carter until like a week or so ago.

flown-the-coop said:

---

Not sure if it's a scandal, but it's a poor look and would appear the board is either in on it, incompetent or both.

That's a c suite level salaries for a medium size business.

It's excessive, but I agree it's not a scandal or theft. Just dumbarsery.

---

They collected $5.5MM in government cash. It's excess by its nature makes it theft.

Let's be clear I am in now way defending them. I think it's disgusting. And I think people should take any board position they take seriously. Too many are seeking some LinkedIn badge or resume stamp and do bare minimum.

flown-the-coop said:

---

Let's be clear I am in now way defending them.

---

Now you are?

techno-ag said:

---

Hank the Grifter said:

---

It's a museum. Those salaries are obscene.

---

Unpopular opinion here, but I disagree. A world class museum needs people who know what they're doing to run it, not a bunch of amateurs making beer money.

---

if they knew what they were doing, they would be turning a profit - not in the red. Why does operating a non profit mean you should draw a salary not commensurate with the money intake - IMO, the title "non profit" demands that.

87IE said:

---

Quote:

---

Leaders are paid what they're worth, usually. I suppose you could get somebody to run the thing for free as a volunteer. But they still wouldn't be happy with the results.

---

I would agree if it were a for profit company. Non-profits that are operating in the red paying those salaries stick out.

I'll readily admit I don't have a dog in this hunt since I don't give any money to them.

---

Who is making up the cash shortfall?

I worked for an affluent suburb of Dallas back in the day, and was in an executive position. Managers did "salary surveys" often and surveyed similar cities then went to the city council and said "we need to pay more than them to keep our talent". Then those other cities did the same thing. Fortunately, most people ran for city council on not raising taxes, since that resonated well with most citizens, and kept a check on salaries spiraling out of control.

There are plenty of stories of this getting out of control and school boards and cities letting management run amok, but I would guess that is just some bureaucrat selling the obscene raises rather than using the salary surveys.

buzzardb267 said:

---

I worked for an affluent suburb of Dallas back in the day, and was in an executive position. Managers did "salary surveys" often and surveyed similar cities then went to the city council and said "we need to pay more than them to keep our talent". Then those other cities did the same thing. Fortunately, most people ran for city council on not raising taxes, since that resonated well with most citizens, and kept a check on salaries spiraling out of control.

There are plenty of stories of this getting out of control and school boards and cities letting management run amok, but I would guess that is just some bureaucrat selling the obscene raises rather than using the salary surveys.

---

Having served on local government I still don't get the concept of operating on a NON-balanced budget. It was in our charter and always abided by.

Jack Squat 83 said:

---

buzzardb267 said:

---

I worked for an affluent suburb of Dallas back in the day, and was in an executive position. Managers did "salary surveys" often and surveyed similar cities then went to the city council and said "we need to pay more than them to keep our talent". Then those other cities did the same thing. Fortunately, most people ran for city council on not raising taxes, since that resonated well with most citizens, and kept a check on salaries spiraling out of control.

There are plenty of stories of this getting out of control and school boards and cities letting management run amok, but I would guess that is just some bureaucrat selling the obscene raises rather than using the salary surveys.

---

Having served on local government I still don't get the concept of operating on a NON-balanced budget. It was in our charter and always abided by.

---

I would imagine that the smaller the level of govt, the more competent the leadership and the least amount of ability to run a deficit.

BigRobSA said:

---

flown-the-coop said:

---

Let's be clear I am in now way defending them.

---

Now you are?

---

It's obvious I either meant no way or know way and just splat the baby.

Lance Uppercut said:

---

techno-ag said:

---

Lance Uppercut said:

---

Seems like a situation where you could cut all of those salaries in half (or more) and find someone to do the job well.

---

Maybe. But don't forget salaries and cost of living are different in New York.

---

That salary is equivalent to making 358k a year in Dallas, or 511k if they moved over a borough and commuted.

Edit: I could be wrong. Apparently museum directors make a lot of money.

---

Huge, high profile, non-profit orgs pay the executive big salaries because a significant part of the job is schmoozing rich people and corporations to donate even more money. Basically, it is like being on commission.

Wherever there is a CEO, there are unethical, immoral, deceit and fraud problems.

Watch out for the Trifecta of Evil.

techno-ag said:

---

• World class museums pay top dollar for executive leadership that knows what they're doing.

• Leaders are paid what they're worth, usually.

---

Lots of assumptions and suppositions made in the statements above.

infinity ag said:

---

techno-ag said:

---

• World class museums pay top dollar for executive leadership that knows what they're doing.

• Leaders are paid what they're worth, usually.

---

Lots of assumptions and suppositions made in the statements above.

---

techno-ag said:

---

Hank the Grifter said:

---

It's a museum. Those salaries are obscene.

---

Unpopular opinion here, but I disagree. A world class museum needs people who know what they're doing to run it, not a bunch of amateurs making beer money.

---

If the museum is in the red, it's not being run correctly. They deserve a pay cut, or a replacement.

rwtxag83 said:

---

techno-ag said:

---

Hank the Grifter said:

---

It's a museum. Those salaries are obscene.

---

Unpopular opinion here, but I disagree. A world class museum needs people who know what they're doing to run it, not a bunch of amateurs making beer money.

---

If the museum is in the red, it's not being run correctly. They deserve a pay cut, or a replacement.

---

Eh. Many to most museums run in the red I'll wager. They're not exactly money making machines.

Not all museums are created equal. The demands on this one are much lower as the exhibits are set. Shouldn't take huge salaries just to ensure it's operating correctly and being maintained, along with some fundraising (and a monkey could fundraise in NYC with 9/11 as your cause)

Maybe they should hire someone from the Oklahoma City Bombing Memorial or the Houston Museum of Natural History. Both seem to operate in the black and the Houston museum has free admissions on Thursdays.

techno-ag said:

---

Hank the Grifter said:

---

It's a museum. Those salaries are obscene.

---

Unpopular opinion here, but I disagree. A world class museum needs people who know what they're doing to run it, not a bunch of amateurs making beer money.

---

Anyone who's been to the 9/11 museum knows it's world class. It's by far one of the best, if not the best museum/memorial I've ever visited. Better than some of the Smithsonian museums in DC and a few I went to in London.

It's about getting into the social circle jerk of boards, executives, foundations, trusts, charities, etc at the top levels where they all glad hand each other regarding compensation so they can all remain in the same social Cori led with peers, friends, and associates and afford to attend the same social events and go to the same places, etc. they have to mutually preserve their collective sense of value and worthiness so they make sure that the compensation is generous for each other if and when they have the authority or opportunity to do so, because that is how it has been for themselves when they were brought into that social circle.

They each have to find or assemble some organizations to run that has responsibility over a large pool of money but only moderate accountability for how it is used, and non profits are perfect for that. They can then set themselves up with executive level compensation without having the level of accountability to stockholders if they can "socially or politically impress" the board of trustees or whoever is doing the hiring.

I will say it probably does take some skill and talent to get onesself into such an opportunity. Maybe not at management but definitely at making social connections and networking.

techno-ag said:

---

Quote:

---

"Our executive compensation lags well behind that of peer institutions," Elizabeth Hillman said in an email sent to the foundation's trustees on Monday, adding that "recent compensation studies have supported adjustments across the organization."
…
Last week, The Post revealed salaries at the non-profit have ballooned, even as it continues to run in the red and ignore the wishes of some families of first responders murdered on 9/11.

Hillman pocketed $856,216 in total compensation in 2024, according to IRS filings, a 63% raise in just two years.

The next four highest-paid executives made $486,298, $458,652, $444,999 and $432,958 in 2024.

---

https://nypost.com/2025/08/30/us-news/ceo-of-9-11-memorial-amp-museum-defends-bloated-salaries-amid-growing-outrage/

I dunno. Is this bad? World class museums pay top dollar for executive leadership that knows what they're doing. It kind of reminds me how upset some parents get when they find out the principal at their children's school makes a six-figure salary.

Leaders are paid what they're worth, usually. I suppose you could get somebody to run the thing for free as a volunteer. But they still wouldn't be happy with the results.

---

This is disgusting. The Board of Directors likely has some fiduciary responsibility to make sure that institution is financially viable. The salaries are WAY out of line with typical compensation at a non-profit organization. It would be interesting to look at their operating statement (or 990-T) to see how much of their annual expenses are tied up in payroll. I served on a non-profit foundation for 12 years, total assets of over $125MM and our CEO earned $185,000 per year in salary, total comp was probably $235k. Now, that wasn't in NYC but there ARE reports available that show what executive compensation at similar sized non-profits range. These people are just milking the organization. But, a lot of responsibility lies with the BoD due to the fact that they are the ultimate decision-making authority on executive compensation.

https://www.guidestar.org/profile/61-1745872

I see from the Guidestar report that the BoD are Trustees, so they DO have fiduciary responsibilities. Admiral McRaven got himself in a financial pickle while he was at UT. I see De Niro also serves on the Board. If the Post really wants to dig in, they need to go to the Trustees to inquire about their decision-making regarding executive comp.