Editorial: UC should make its finances more public

Ever since it was disclosed that the University of California
paid out $871 million in extra compensation last year, officials
have vowed to make the system more transparent. But we want to see
actions, not words.

UC President Robert Dynes announced a series of reforms on
Wednesday to better explain the system’s salary practices to
the public. They include: random audits of accounts used by top
administrators; making more information available on raises and
salaries after action occurs on them; giving regents summaries of a
potential hire’s full compensation packages; and annually
providing regents a summary of UC leaders’ total incomes.

Those moves sound nice, but it’s questionable how much
more transparent they will actually make things. It’s very
possible UC officials will backpedal on public disclosure ““
something Dynes already has a start on. When asked whether UC
leaders’ income levels would be made public, the response of
the system’s president was: “I don’t know. We
haven’t thought about that.”

And even if UC officials are suddenly imbibed with the spirit of
public openness, the fact remains that it’s something they
should have been doing long ago. The UC is a state institution, and
California taxpayers have a right to know where their money is
going and to what ends.

Nevertheless, the reforms announced on Wednesday are a step in
the right direction because increasing transparency, even if just
by a smidgen, is better than doing nothing at all. But if the UC
really wants to show it’s taking decisive and fair action, it
needs to do more.

First, the regents need to kill a proposal that would increase
salaries using privately-donated funds. Currently, that proposal
has been tabled for consideration next year. Using private money to
pay officials and professors would make the salary system less
transparent, not to mention create conflict of interest scenarios
all over the system’s 10 campuses.

The regents should also take up the issue of increasing the
wages of staff who do less glamorous and less appreciated work at
the UC, such as clerical and dining hall employees. Last year,
dining hall workers went on strike to demand a cost of living
increase, and at the time the UC’s reason for not granting it
was that there was no money in the 2003-2004 budget. But now that
it’s clear the UC has found money to pay top administrators
even more than they usually make, that argument has lost its
validity.

Of course, the best action the regents could take is to clamp
down on excessive spending. Because, in spite of all the talk of
tightening our belts and digging deeper into our pockets,
it’s pretty clear the UC is not the model of financial
restraint. And while the UC might not be able to divulge all
aspects of its hiring and salary practices, making public what it
can and when it can would go a long way toward silencing the
critics.

The UC system prides itself on illuminating the education of
tens of thousands of students, and its motto, “Let there be
light,” is a testament to that. But it’s ironic ““
and embarrassing ““ that when it comes to the
university’s inner workings, the public is so often left in
the dark.

Leave a comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *