"Lowest among peer universities". That's the title and subtitle from a new AP story.
The current chancellor scrapes by on not much over $320,000 per annum plus behind the scenes stuff and connections to be cashed out later. And he gave back two pay raises so I'm not trying to hammer him here.
But the thought that we might not be able to get a good replacement without doubling the salary troubles me. Look at the CEO pay in higher ed (like here) and you might wonder if somebody who demands $700,000 (the number that always gets named for top public university leaders, it seems) is really the person we want. Pushing for big executive bucks strikes me as an indication that a person might be a card-carrying member of The Problem, as opposed somebody looking for The Solution.
I'd much rather have a chancellor who says "gimme 250K and put the rest toward teaching more classes that can mean something to the people of Wisconsin — from biotech and animal science to history and local culture." Well, we can still dream, can't we?
Image from here.