L. Brooks Attacks DIA Again, This Time Over Pay Raises

**nain rouge** · October-09-14, 10:00 AM

L. Brooks compares DIA to Marie Antoinette. I have to say, it doesn't help that the DIA's director looks like a smug, slimy toad.

http://www.detroitnews.com/story/new...lage/16954085/

**dtowncitylover** · October-09-14, 10:04 AM

Meh, I'd rather pay for DIA wages over L Brooks' wage any day. I don't find that picture of him to be that smug, just a simple work shot.

**Király** · October-11-14, 11:32 PM

If Detroit is going to continue to maintain its incredible art museum, it will need to compensate its director at a rate competitive to what other comparable art museums in the USA are paying. These guys don't work in the local economy, they work in the national [[and international really) art world. Local economic considerations have little bearing in this world.

If Detroit is going to offer compensation to its DIA director that is a fraction of what other museums are paying, it won't be long before nobody qualified will take the job, and the DIA is done.

**smogboy** · October-13-14, 03:50 AM

Originally Posted by Király

If Detroit is going to continue to maintain its incredible art museum, it will need to compensate its director at a rate competitive to what other comparable art museums in the USA are paying. These guys don't work in the local economy, they work in the national [[and international really) art world. Local economic considerations have little bearing in this world.

If Detroit is going to offer compensation to its DIA director that is a fraction of what other museums are paying, it won't be long before nobody qualified will take the job, and the DIA is done.

I've been to most of those museums listed in the article and IMO I dare say that the DIA is better than all of those other museums on the list with the exception of New York City's Metropolitan. I'd say we're on par with Chicago & Boston's art museums with variety and breadth of work.

**Johnnny5** · October-13-14, 09:02 AM

Originally Posted by Király

If Detroit is going to continue to maintain its incredible art museum, it will need to compensate its director at a rate competitive to what other comparable art museums in the USA are paying. These guys don't work in the local economy, they work in the national [[and international really) art world. Local economic considerations have little bearing in this world.

If Detroit is going to offer compensation to its DIA director that is a fraction of what other museums are paying, it won't be long before nobody qualified will take the job, and the DIA is done.

Those mentioned in the article have both been at the DIA for more than a decade. Apparently their salary levels prior to the DIA receiving public funds were sufficient to keep them from going elsewhere. Seems a bit convenient to argue that the DIA risked losing them now due to their pay being non competitive.

**softailrider** · October-09-14, 10:09 AM

Originally Posted by nain rouge

http://www.detroitnews.com/story/new...lage/16954085/

L. Brooks compares DIA to Marie Antoinette. I have to say, it doesn't help that the DIA's director looks like a smug, slimy toad.

I think LBP is right on this matter. The timing sure isn't good right now.

**Scottathew** · October-09-14, 10:10 AM

L Brooks didn't attack the DIA, he criticized how much the top officials there make and recent raised that they got.

Looks like our tax millage really helped set up much more than an endowment for the DIA.

**Bham1982** · October-09-14, 10:16 AM

L Brooks is 100% correct.

It's outrageous for museum leadership to mislead taxpayers that financial support is needed for the museum collection and endowment, and then have them turn around and fatten their [[already very fat) paychecks.

Did the zoo do the same? Let me guess, the zoo director just had his/her salary doubled?

**DetroitPlanner** · October-09-14, 10:22 AM

When was the last time Brooks attacked the DIA??

A half million a year? Doesn't he realize he is a semi-public employee?

If you ask me, they are all way overpaid. Comparing one overpaid fat cat to another is just a way to justify huge increases in salaries.

**jackie5275** · October-09-14, 10:48 AM

Originally Posted by DetroitPlanner

When was the last time Brooks attacked the DIA??

A half million a year? Doesn't he realize he is a semi-public employee?

If you ask me, they are all way overpaid. Comparing one overpaid fat cat to another is just a way to justify huge increases in salaries.

Agreed, plus his employer gave him a loan to buy a luxury home. What's the chance of anyone like us getting that? Plus, the timing for this looks bad. Even though we know these execs aren't paid from the City or the DIA itself, most people will just look at the headline and assume otherwise. With the bankruptcy and all the "let's shield the DIA from creditors" furor & frenzy this leaves a negative impression with the general public.

**Cincinnati_Kid** · October-09-14, 01:10 PM

Originally Posted by DetroitPlanner

When was the last time Brooks attacked the DIA??

A half million a year? Doesn't he realize he is a semi-public employee?

If you ask me, they are all way overpaid. Comparing one overpaid fat cat to another is just a way to justify huge increases in salaries.

Nail on the head here. They all are overpaid, it's ridiculous. And what do they actually do to warrant such a salary?? Not much I bet. It's a shame those pension cuts are probably being used to give these people raises.

**Bham1982** · October-09-14, 10:34 AM

Nice gig for Graham Beal. I know the salaries of some very high profile surgeons in Metro Detroit and they don't make close to his salary+bonus, but, hey, they're only saving lives, not working at a supposedly struggling non-profit arts organization.

"Sorry Hon, we can't pay for your cancer prescriptions this month, Graham Beal needs a few new bowties."

**jackie5275** · October-09-14, 10:54 AM

Originally Posted by Bham1982

Nice gig for Graham Beal. I know the salaries of some very high profile surgeons in Metro Detroit and they don't make close to his salary+bonus, but, hey, they're only saving lives, not working at a supposedly struggling non-profit arts organization.

Not just surgeons, but he makes more than the POTUS and just about all other government leaders on down.

**Wesley Mouch** · October-09-14, 10:57 AM

Brooks is speaking truth to power. He's criticizing the 1% here. Should be cause for celebration.

**nain rouge** · October-09-14, 10:35 AM

DetroitPlanner: Brooks has criticized the DIA over compensation before [[http://www.wxyz.com/news/dia-sparkin...m-with-bonuses), and was critical when a story floated about reinstating entrance fees [[http://www.macombdaily.com/arts-and-...as-rescue-plan). But I'm sure you'll find another hole in what I just wrote.

**Scottathew** · October-09-14, 10:38 AM

Originally Posted by nain rouge

DetroitPlanner: Brooks has criticized the DIA over compensation before [[http://www.wxyz.com/news/dia-sparkin...m-with-bonuses), and was critical when a story floated about reinstating entrance fees [[http://www.macombdaily.com/arts-and-...as-rescue-plan). But I'm sure you'll find another hole in what I just wrote.

Your thread title and posts seem to concentrate your criticism on L. Brooks. Are you saying that you feel the salaries for these top DIA officials are justified and the L. Brooks is being unfair?

**poobert** · October-09-14, 10:49 AM

Of course you guys are going to start screaming about perscriptions and other sensational nonsense. Did you even read the second part of the article?

Take a look at Charity Navigator. The DIA is a four-start rated charity and Graham Beal makes less than 2% of the annual budget. Nearly 80% of the budget goes to programs and services.
http://www.charitynavigator.org/inde...ary&orgid=3619

The Detroit Historical Society's CEO makes over 5% of its annual budget and it is a three-star charity.

Remember how that fuckhead Rochelle Riley was whining about saving the Charles H. Wright? It's a one-star rated charity with only about half of the money donated to it going to actual programs and services. Its CEO makes a higher percentage of the annual budget than the DIA's.
http://www.charitynavigator.org/inde...ary&orgid=6980

I am no way affiliated with the DIA. You know, the voters actually got to assent to this, and seem to be in favor of a world-class Museum. That is what we have. There is even data to back all this up. You think somebody is going to run it for $14.00 per hour?

**noise** · October-09-14, 10:53 AM

Originally Posted by poobert

Of course you guys are going to start screaming about perscriptions and other sensational nonsense. Did you even read the second part of the article?

Take a look at Charity Navigator. The DIA is a four-start rated charity and Graham Beal makes less than 2% of the annual budget. Nearly 80% of the budget goes to programs and services.
http://www.charitynavigator.org/inde...ary&orgid=3619

The Detroit Historical Society's CEO makes over 5% of its annual budget and it is a three-star charity.

Remember how that fuckhead Rochelle Riley was whining about saving the Charles H. Wright? It's a one-star rated charity with only about half of the money donated to it going to actual programs and services. Its CEO makes a higher percentage of the annual budget than the DIA's.
http://www.charitynavigator.org/inde...ary&orgid=6980

I am no way affiliated with the DIA. You know, the voters actually got to assent to this, and seem to be in favor of a world-class Museum. That is what we have. There is even data to back all this up. You think somebody is going to run it for $14.00 per hour?

Stop it. We don't want context or reality for our rants. We just know he makes more than we do.

**Bham1982** · October-09-14, 11:06 AM

Originally Posted by poobert

I am no way affiliated with the DIA. You know, the voters actually got to assent to this, and seem to be in favor of a world-class Museum. That is what we have. There is even data to back all this up. You think somebody is going to run it for $14.00 per hour?

Sorry, but no, the voters were never asked to have their taxes raised to make DIA leadership even wealthier. The claim was that they were saving the museum, and the funds would go to the endowment. The claim was that this was a bankrupt museum in a bankrupt city, and that extraordinary measures were needed for survival.

What "data" are you referring to? Most museums aren't funded through taxpayer dollars. Not one cent in millage dollars goes to fund the Met or MOMA. Graham Beal can be paid $50 million for all I care, the issue is that he is being paid through taxpayer dollars, and specifically through a special millage that was intended to save the museum, not enrich the leadership.

**bailey** · October-09-14, 12:49 PM

Originally Posted by poobert

Of course you guys are going to start screaming about perscriptions and other sensational nonsense. Did you even read the second part of the article?

Take a look at Charity Navigator. The DIA is a four-start rated charity and Graham Beal makes less than 2% of the annual budget. Nearly 80% of the budget goes to programs and services.
http://www.charitynavigator.org/inde...ary&orgid=3619

The Detroit Historical Society's CEO makes over 5% of its annual budget and it is a three-star charity.

Remember how that fuckhead Rochelle Riley was whining about saving the Charles H. Wright? It's a one-star rated charity with only about half of the money donated to it going to actual programs and services. Its CEO makes a higher percentage of the annual budget than the DIA's.
http://www.charitynavigator.org/inde...ary&orgid=6980

I am no way affiliated with the DIA. You know, the voters actually got to assent to this, and seem to be in favor of a world-class Museum. That is what we have. There is even data to back all this up. You think somebody is going to run it for $14.00 per hour?

The issue [[and to LBP's point) is really about the optics of it. Someone, somewhere in the DIA should have said...yeah, we know our funding is back where it needs to be and we know that we should be giving some raises, but c'mon we just went to the public to beg for a millage after the state cut our funding and we're still in the middle of this whole BK thing. Lets hold on the bumps and bonuses for another 12-18 months.

**poobert** · October-09-14, 01:21 PM

Originally Posted by bailey

The issue [[and to LBP's point) is really about the optics of it. Someone, somewhere in the DIA should have said...yeah, we know our funding is back where it needs to be and we know that we should be giving some raises, but c'mon we just went to the public to beg for a millage after the state cut our funding and we're still in the middle of this whole BK thing. Lets hold on the bumps and bonuses for another 12-18 months.

This is really the only logical argument for the opposition. I just looks bad. It's kind of an amateurish, sophomoric move.

However, there isn't really a reason for outrage. We had our say. There was nothing about pay freezes. Outside of that, his salary is by no means out-of-line with anything locally or nationally.

Further, I love what the DIA is doing. It's damn good. Isn't merit-based what you guys want??

So they're not directly tax-payer funded, but there are plenty of corporations located in tax havens [[Burger Thing), living on subsidies, using tax loopholes, relying on public infrastructure creation, and their CEOs are making billions. No issues there?

And for Bham supposedly knowing everything, do you really not freaking know how democracy works?? Stop comparing Western politicians and NGO leaders to a totally different economy. I'm sure the CFO at TCBY makes more money than him but doesn't imply the job is more important. The ideal of our elected officials' salaries being relatively low across the board is so citizens don't go into public service to get rich.

**noise** · October-09-14, 10:49 AM

Maybe they can hire one of you at half the salary. You probably know how to run an art museum. How hard can it be?

**Bham1982** · October-09-14, 10:58 AM

Originally Posted by noise

Maybe they can hire one of you at half the salary. You probably know how to run an art museum. How hard can it be?

There are plenty of people who have the business acumen to manage a large nonprofit at 250k + bonus + benefits. There are plenty of people who would do it for $1 [[rich people, like Mayor Bloomberg, who took a $1 salary). It's absurd to argue otherwise.

And this is a prestige position. You don't attract people to such a position strictly due to salary. You think it's impossible to find a President of the U.S. or Secretary of the U.N. because they aren't being paid as much as Graham Beal?

The Secretary of the UN makes 250k. The Mayor of New York makes 200k. The President of the U.S. makes 400k. The Prime Minister of Britain makes 140k [[pounds).

You really think Graham Beal has a tougher position than the UK Prime Minster? He needs to make 4x the salary of PM Cameron, or the museum will shut down? LOL.

**noise** · October-09-14, 12:01 PM

Originally Posted by Bham1982

There are plenty of people who have the business acumen to manage a large nonprofit at 250k + bonus + benefits. There are plenty of people who would do it for $1 [[rich people, like Mayor Bloomberg, who took a $1 salary). It's absurd to argue otherwise.

n=1. Good job. Where is the line of these people you mention who have offered their services to the DIA for free?

And this is a prestige position. You don't attract people to such a position strictly due to salary. You think it's impossible to find a President of the U.S. or Secretary of the U.N. because they aren't being paid as much as Graham Beal?

Again, who is positioning themselves to do it for less?

The Secretary of the UN makes 250k. The Mayor of New York makes 200k. The President of the U.S. makes 400k. The Prime Minister of Britain makes 140k [[pounds).

You really think Graham Beal has a tougher position than the UK Prime Minster? He needs to make 4x the salary of PM Cameron, or the museum will shut down? LOL.

Strange then that David Cameron didn't offer his services to the DIA for so much less money.

**Bham1982** · October-09-14, 12:05 PM

Originally Posted by noise

n=1. Good job. Where is the line of these people you mention who have offered their services to the DIA for free?

Sorry, I don't work for this allegedly cash-strapped nonprofit. Why are you asking me this question?

Pay me 50k [[probably not even a tenth of what the DIA board would spend on the endeavor) and I'll have a list of a couple hundred extremely qualified individuals worthy of the board's consideration within a few months.

Do you seriously believe that they would have difficulty filling the position with a competent individual absent obscene salary and benefits?