Last month, the Kansas Board of Regents reached an agreement with former Chancellor Robert Hemenway concerning his retirement compensation package and future at the University. The package included a year-long sabbatical at full pay along with guaranteed employment at the University during the next year. This compensation package, specifically the inordinate sabbatical leave and pay, is at odds with the current economic state of Kansas and the budgetary realities of the Kansas Board of Regents.

Hemenway deserves praise for his 14 years in a demanding executive position. It is clear that he had reduced personal time in between overseeing the University campus in Lawrence, pushing forward exciting new opportunities at the University of Kansas Medical Center and lobbying across the state and the nation. Hemenway even continued to teach during most of his tenure. It seems likely that with this busy schedule, he was forced to delay most of his academic research and pursuits.

With his planned return to the University in Fall 2010, a sabbatical seems like an ideal way for Hemenway to catch up. Many professors take sabbaticals for similar reasons such as to free up time to focus more intently on a specific project or opportunity. During this time, though, no professor at the University or any Board of Regents school is eligible for more than half pay, according to guidelines concerning sabbatical leave established by the Kansas Board of Regents.

Though Hemenway, as a direct employee of the Board of Regents, is not technically governed by these guidelines, it seems prudent that if the sabbatical is only a chance for academic pursuits, that he receive the same opportunities, and pay, as other professors. This becomes especially important when considering the extremely difficult economic situation in the state and the large budget problems the Board of Regents face. In a statement issued Nov. 12, 2008, Donna Shank, chairwoman of the Kansas Board of Regents, regarding former Governor Kathleen Sebelius’ suggested budget cuts for the state’s public higher education system, said “higher education funding would be reduced by a net total of $114.4 million ($24.3 million in FY 2009 and $90.1 million in FY 2010).”

According to Kip Peterson, spokesman for the Board of Regents, Hemenway will receive $120,000 from public funds during his sabbatical, with the rest of his $340,352 salary coming from KU Endowment. The sum from KU Endowment was requested by the Kansas Board of Regents according to Roista Elizalze-Mccoy, senior vice president for communications. The funds came from The Greater KU Fund, “which supports faculty and other University needs,” she said. This fund is separate from the money allocated for student scholarships.

Peterson pointed out that it is becoming more common for chancellors or university executives across the country are to receive a lump sum deferred compensation package, which is a set amount of money set aside each year the person is working. The total sum is then received upon retirement. Hemenway did not receive this, however, he was hired 14 years ago.

When asked about the difference between Hemenway’s sabbatical and that of other professors, Peterson said the situation was like “comparing apples and oranges,” with Hemenway having been in a demanding role with a national profile for much longer than what Peterson said was the five to seven year average for campus university leaders.

Though the state has made the right move by reducing the amount of Hemenway’s salary that is coming from public funds during the next two years, his sabbatical pay is still in excess of what is appropriate, especially in these tough economic times. Further, if continued employment and sabbaticals are serving as a replacement for some type of deferred compensation package, perhaps the Kansas Board of Regents should consider adopting this more standard approach, which could reduce confusion and allow for more prudent budgeting on the Board’s part in the future.

The Kansas Board of Regents should either choose to call the money Hemenway is receiving something other than a sabbatical salary, because it is not in accordance with their own policy about what a sabbatical salary is, or they should lower the amount of money he is to receive.

— — Alex Doherty for The Kansan Editorial Board