He made 1.6 million because he deferred his compensation the previous two years. And he also retired and got some money for that. So you're basically looking at what he made for working for 3 years, not what he made in 1 year.

It's still a lot of money but nowhere near what you're implying.

Exactly. All a non-profit means is that they don't set aside money as "profit". They can still pay themselves outrageous salaries. It's also why rich people set up "foundations".

The counterargument is a well-intentioned but clueless volunteer should not be in charge of directing millions of dollars in donations. I imagine it's hard to find someone with skills to efficiently run a large organization without paying them an industry wage.