Statements made by three state senators last week that urged
University of California President Robert Dynes to either step down
or be fired indicate itchy trigger fingers, not judicious aim.
Of the three senators who want Dynes out, one of them, Sen. Jeff
Denham, R-Merced, says he should be outright fired. The other two,
Sen. Abel Maldonado, R-Santa Maria, and Sen. Gloria Romero, D-Los
Angeles, have said he should resign.
The senators do not directly determine Dynes’ fate; that
power is reserved for the UC’s governing body, the Board of
Regents. The only way the state senate could directly fire Dynes is
if they strip the UC of its financial autonomy, which is a whole
different issue ““ and concern ““ altogether.
What inspired this vocal but so far small movement against Dynes
was the third of a series of audits of the UC system’s
payment and compensation practices. The audit found the university
system consistently failed to make compensation packages public, in
spite of repeated pledges from university officials to do so.
The audits come on top of revelations in the media that the
university gave generous severance packages, sometimes in the
hundreds of thousands of dollars, to officials and professors,
while student fees rose and other services wallowed during the
state budget crisis.
Though it’s true that over the past several months, the UC
system has been roiled by one revelation of financial mismanagement
after another, calling for Dynes’ ouster is premature.
Clearly the UC’s financial woes are Dynes’ to fix,
but he should at least be given the chance to fix them.
There have been clear problems with the way the UC system is
operating. But the reality of the matter is that Dynes is not
solely responsible for all of these problems.
It has not been proven (and in fact it’s highly doubtful)
that all these recent issues with compensation originated solely
during the span of Dynes’ tenure. The UC ran into a similar
compensation scandal in 1992, when it was revealed that the
university distributed about $2 million in questionable
compensation.
Those revelations inspired university officials to promise
reform and better disclosure of salaries. Clearly that promise has
been broken, but that’s the fault of many university
officials, not just Dynes.
It’s also questionable as to how productive firing Dynes
would be. It might make some senators feel pretty good, but the
task of overhauling the UC system would still remain.
Not only that, but with Dynes removed, university
officials’ attention would be diverted to naming an interim
replacement for him while the long, arduous search for a new
president was also put into motion. In short, it could very well
create a leaderless university.
Ironically, Dynes is probably one of the best people in the UC
system right now who can engineer financial accountability.
He’s an education leader with a proven track record of
integrity, he’s promised reform, and he feels the heat from
Sacramento and the rest of California.
The bottom line is that the UC’s problems are bigger than
one man, even though one man ““ Dynes ““ is arguably in
the best place to try to fix them.
We’re all for engendering reform and accountability in the
UC system, but only in ways that are practical and constructive.
Getting rid of Dynes would be neither.