A recent news article
featured a student protest of excessive tuition fees at California's colleges
and universities. This student
campaign argued that because Proposition 30 was passed, the tuitions should, accordingly,
be reduced. Obviously, these
students either did not vote or did not bother to read the information
provided.
Many will recall Gov. Brown
declared this state was headed into a projected budget deficit of $15
billion. He pushed for approval of
Proposition 30 with a warning that if "we" don't raise the State sales tax by a
quarter percent and raise income taxes to individuals making more than $250,000
per year - well - funding for schools and social services will have to be cut
again. This taxing technique is much
like holding a loaded gun to the head of the electorate and declaring: "vote
for more taxes or else!"
Because Prop 30 passed, the
California State Universities (CSU) and the University of California systems
(UC) were spared from the $250 million "trigger" cuts this year and there is a
promise of possible additional funding of $125 million to each system next
year. Even so, it is unlikely
college students will see a reduction in tuition any time soon because College
and University administrative salaries and benefits are out of control.
An LA Times article (July of
2011) revealed the Board of Trustees granted the San Diego President Elliot
Hirschman a $100,000 raise bringing his total compensation to $400,000 and, at
the same time, considered increasing the annual student tuition by 12% or an
additional $294 per semester.
A recent article in the
Monterey Herald credited CSU Chancellor Timothy P. White as knowing that
"symbolism" matters when he took it upon himself to request a 10 percent pay
cut from the $421,500 a year salary that his predecessor, Charles Reed, was
getting to lead the 23-campus system.
The remaining $380,000 salary is augmented by a $30,000 per year
supplement compliments of the CSU foundation. The $410,000 still results in a nice bump from the $327,000
he got previously as president of UC Riverside.
We can conclude these 23
campuses allow their presidents to struggle along on a mere $300+ thousand
salary, plus benefits and then there is the vice-presidents who must draw down
an additional $150+ thousand. This
does not mention the immense salaries of the UC system, Board of Trustees nor
UC Regents who would supervise the various Chancellors and University
leaders. Moreover, the CSU-UC pension
program faces $12.9 billion in "unfunded liabilities" which is yet to be
resolved.
By comparison, the top
executive of the United States and so-called leader of the free world is paid
$400 thousand per year. It is
difficult to believe the job requirements and pressure involved in being a
"Chancellor" can compare with that of the U.S. President.
The student protest appears
to be legitimate. Tuition fees and college expenses are excessive. Many students mortgage their future
with student loans and upon graduation are turned loose on the real world with
a debt exceeding $100-thousand and no way to pay for it.
No amount of tax increases can solve this massive expense at
the top of the educational food chain.
Top management must be assigned reasonable salaries and the whole
structure needs to be reorganized.
It is little wonder there is diminished funds left over to pay for the
actual act of educating students.