As students face academic limbo and faculty face job uncertainty, Chico State’s top administrators occupy jobs paying more than triple the Chico average.
Unfortunately, the salaries of the top administrators at Chico State and other CSUs are not determined locally, but at a central level with decisions made by the Chancellor’s office. Therefore, it would be difficult for salaries to change at a campus level. The CSU system as a whole is facing a financial deficit, and campuses will have to make difficult decisions and cuts, likely without reducing administrative salaries. Still, the matter of whether this compensation is fair should be questioned.
Provost Leslie Cornick initially insisted that the reimagining of academic affairs initiative is not primarily budget-driven, however, its messaging emphasizes “resource efficiencies” and long-term cost savings. If more efficient resource management is needed, it is questionable as to why those at the top aren’t sharing in the sacrifice.
In 2023, Chico State President Steve Perez earned an annual salary of $504,757, including benefits. That is about 685% higher than Chico’s average annual wage of $64,280, according to the May 2024 report by the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics. In 2023, including Perez, Chico State paid eight of the top administrators a combined salary of $2,790,330, or about the same as 43 average Chico area employees would make in a year.
If the budget is at the heart of the restructuring of academic affairs, there is a fairly simple solution. Cut salaries of the top eight administrators, rather than making those on the bottom suffer. Taking a 15% cut to just that group of administration compensation would save $418,551 annually, slightly less than the expected savings from the restructuring models, but still a significant amount.
The CSU’s salary dispersion is not unique to Chico. However, when we compare campuses and what they pay administration, Chico State’s wages are questionable. CSU Long Beach has an enrollment of more than 39,000 students and pays its president $529,505 — only marginally more than Chico’s president, despite serving nearly three times the student population.
Similarly, CSU San Francisco has more than 23,000 students and pays its president, Lynn Mahoney, $523,585. Cal Poly San Luis Obispo, with an enrollment of more than 22,000, pays President Jeffrey Armstrong $509,336 – along with free housing – not a whole lot more than Perez’s salary, despite the location being significantly more expensive.
The cost of living makes this comparison even more outrageous. Other campuses such as San Francisco, Long Beach and San Luis Obispo are in much more expensive areas; cost of living is significantly higher than in Chico. Still, Perez’s salary is in the same range as the presidents of these schools.
Chico State has one of the smallest enrollments in the CSU system, yet its executive compensation remains at a strikingly high number when compared with other CSUs.
As previously noted, these salaries are not determined by Chico State leadership. This makes it difficult, but not impossible, for them to adjust those salaries through other means such as donating or requesting a pay cut.
Administrators could choose to donate a portion, even a small amount, back to the university. This would not solve the budget crisis, but it would send a powerful message of sacrifice and potentially lead others to do the same.
That being said, administrative salaries remain a valid concern. University leaders should be well compensated, but the inequities in salary allocation are undeniable. It is due time Chico State makes efforts in restructuring, but that should be done with transparency and fairness, ensuring disproportionality does not fall on those who are the foundation of the student experience.
Maya DeHoyos can be reached at orionmanagingeditor@gmail.com
