• printer friendly
• mail this article
• iPod format
• digg

Correction appended

University of California officials acknowledged violations of UC policy and reaffirmed their commitment to accountability and transparency in compensation practices at a Senate Education Committee hearing Wednesday.

In the second of two hearings, state senators demanded from both UC President Robert Dynes and UC Board of Regents Chairman Gerald Parsky clear and definite action to correct policies that have lead to the recent controversy over UC pay practices.

They urged administrators to take responsibility for past transgressions, expressing frustration over the UC’s inability to comply with its own policies and to keep practices accountable to the public.

Sen. Gloria Romero, D-Los Angeles, said she believes there has been wrongdoing on the part of UC officials and there should be ramifications, such as the resignation or firing of those responsible.

“I hope that you and the regents have the sense to stand up and shake things up so that, for the next few years, things won’t go as awry as they have obviously gone in the last few years,” Romero said to Dynes.

Senators were dissatisfied with UC officials’ defense at the first hearing on Feb. 8 that UC compensation practices were on par with those of comparable institutions, saying the UC cannot be pardoned simply because other institutions may also lack transparency in their practices.

“The University of California may be average when it comes to accountability, but the average is mediocre,” said Sen. Elaine Alquist, D-San Jose.

And Sen. Jackie Speier, D-San Francisco, said that just because other institutions are run the same way does not make it right to be unaccountable to the public.

“What we need to do is lead the way by transforming our institutions,” Speier said.

UC officials were apologetic and admitted again to mistakes in which UC policies were not followed. Dynes blamed this lack of compliance on officials making exceptions to university policy.

“We have far too many (exceptions). Exceptions to policy have become the norm. Exceptions become policy, and nobody looks at the policy after that,” he said.

In order to solve the problem of compliance, Dynes said the UC Office of the President, in consultation with the regents, must now approve all exceptions to policy in compensation matters for senior managers.

One such “exception” was a $30,000 dog run that was built for UC Santa Cruz Chancellor Denise Denton.

Dynes called it a “project that just got out of whack” because no one was watching.

The UC Office of the President also approved $7,000 to build a fence for the university house, but the UC ended up paying $30,000 to finish the project, Dynes said.

To prevent such misuses of the university’s finances in the future, Dynes said he has asked the university controller to monitor projects more closely, so he will hear about runaway projects and “somebody will be there to raise the red flag.”

At the hearing, Parsky, along with Regents Judith Hopkinson and Joanne Kozberg, confirmed the board’s direct role in oversight of compensation at the university.

Parsky said the regents remain “valiant and very hands-on” in university matters and that the board has never hesitated to correct policies and practices when warranted.

“We do believe ... we have the responsibility of holding the administration accountable,” Parsky said. “If that means firing people, then we will.”

But he added that the regents must first have full knowledge of the facts surrounding each issue, including an understanding of whether the matter arose due to error, misjudgment or organizational deficiencies, he said.

Parksy said UC officials have failed to properly and consistently disclose their compensation practices to the regents and to the public.

He said the regents were not notified of the compensation packages given to former Provost MRC Greenwood and UC Davis Vice Chancellor Celeste Rose at the time of the agreements.

Greenwood resigned in November following violations of university conflict-of-interest policies, and the university has been criticized for paying her $300,000 for a one-year sabbatical before allowing her to return to a UC faculty position at an annual salary of $301,840.

Rose received a severance package that allows her to work from home with no specific duties for two years at $205,000 a year after she cited racial and gender bias after the UC asked her to give up her position as vice chancellor.

Dynes said Rose’s severance package could be better called a settlement and was negotiated by well-intentioned people who wanted to avoid a lawsuit.

Dynes said the “ambiguity and misjudgments” in the Rose case will not happen in the future because of a new UC policy that states that any separation packages or settlements worth more than $100,000 will have to go to the regents for approval.

But even so, Sen. Abel Maldonado, R-Santa Maria, said he is frustrated and saddened that compensation reports had to come from the press and did not come from the UC Office of the President.

Since the series of media reports, the UC has launched an outside audit of senior management compensation and separation agreements, which is expected to provide a preliminary report in mid-March.

The board also created a task force to review compensation policies and practices and a committee on compensation to provide ongoing regent oversight of university pay practices.

Dynes said the compensation controversy has driven the UC to a self-appraisal process that “isn’t very pleasant, but is true and real.”