2012 conventions 2012 election 2013 session arts arts and culture author ballot measures basketball bomb books boy scouts budget bullying business charlie hales children clackamas climate change coal college courts crime culture culture club democrats drugs economy education environment family film fluoride food gay rights guns handguns health health care health insurance high school history housing immigration internet kitzhaber language law legislature lgbt literary arts living marijuana marriage media medicine mental health military minor parties mohamed mohamud movies music native americans news newspaper obama olympics oregon our town parenting pers photography police politcs politics port portland portland business journal president prevention public safety religion republicans rnc romney rural salem sam adams sandy hook schools science shooting sports suicide supreme court taxes technology television terrorism theater third parties transportation union university of oregon washington wildfire women

Wiggly:

My reading of the Oregonian article doesn't seem to raise either of these management questions, unless the Director's salary is seen as an example of "grossly overpaid", which at $164k it does not seem to be. Are there other citations?

In my recent time there, I would say the museum is reflecting the significant stresses it is experiencing, but to the extent that it is not truly a disaster (due to the Legislature not honoring its century-old funding commitment) is, I believe, a testament to it being anything but "poorly run".

Steve

posted 2 years, 6 months ago
view in context

Could you clarify why you think that the organization is "poorly run" and the staff "grossly overpaid"? Sources would be helpful. Did I miss some important facts?

Steve

posted 2 years, 6 months ago
view in context