CSU, UC exec pay defended
Sacramento Bee 3/22/07
California State University Chancellor Charles Reed and University of California President Robert Dynes made an unusual joint appearance at a Senate hearing where they acknowledged that mistakes had been made but continued to defend salary increases for administrators as an important recruitment tool.
"If you have a really outstanding leader on campus, then good things will happen. And where you don't, it doesn't work well," Reed told senators the same day CSU faculty members voted overwhelmingly to authorize a two-day rolling walkout. Faculty members have been negotiating pay raises for two years.
Sen. Alex Padilla, D-Los Angeles, countered that fair compensation of faculty members should be of equal importance to that of campus executives.
"I can already sense, maybe, a difference," Padilla said, "when it comes to your commitment to executive compensation ... and the emphasis on faculty compensation. Because there's an equal need to compete nationally and beyond."
Sen. Jack Scott, D-Altadena, chairman of the Senate Education Committee, led Wednesday's hearing, asking Reed and Dynes separately what they have been doing in the wake of news that millions of dollars in pay and perks were paid out to university officials without public disclosure at both the UC and CSU systems.
"It's not real assuring if you have policies and procedures in place and there's constant exceptions ... to the point where the exception is almost the rule," Scott said.
Reed, who presides over 23 CSU campuses statewide attended by more than 400,000 students, said the board of trustees modified its executive compensation program in November to ensure that new hires will not be allowed to draw a salary after they leave for another job.
Former executives Peter P. Smith of CSU Monterey Bay and CSU Executive Vice Chancellor David Spence were among those who benefited from that perk. The two took paid leaves in 2005 that enabled them to receive most of their six-figure salaries for a year after they left. According to the San Francisco Chronicle, Smith received $157,932 during his transition while drawing a six-figure salary as assistant director of the U.N. Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization in Paris. Meanwhile, Spence received $173,952 from CSU while working as executive director of the Southern Regional Education Board in Atlanta.
Under new requirements, Reed said new hires would have to have at least five years of service before they're eligible for the system's "executive transition program," and not accept employment elsewhere.
However, Susan Meisenhelder of the California Teachers Association questioned why current executives -- including Reed -- were exempt from the changes.
"These are not improvements at all," Meisenhelder said.
She asked lawmakers to have the chancellor produce language of the new contracts containing the changes.
Faculty and employee advocates urged lawmakers to back a request for an audit of the CSU system's compensation and hiring practices, and to support Senate Bill 190, which would require both UC and CSU boards to hold public sessions when deliberating and voting on executive compensation.
Meanwhile, Dynes told lawmakers that UC has adopted a template for all 10 campuses to be more transparent about executive compensation.
He added that the board has an interim policy to make sure chancellors don't serve on more than three for-profit boards and face a "conflict of commitment."
Scott also asked Dynes whether he felt there was a problem with the university offering low-interest mortgages to executives.
Dynes said he defers each request to chancellors, who use it as a recruitment and retention tool.
"If he or she could not stay in the house and would have to leave the university, I could well imagine they'd use it to keep that person," Dynes said.