The fact that about half the Board of Trustees (as cited in the September 28, 2005 Washington Post) wants to retain Ladner, and even raise his salary to $800,000 with an additional $80,000 for his wife, reveals just how critical the current situation is and the scale of the challenge confronting us. This is on top of the almost half-million dollars his salary has increased since he arrived at American University in 1994. That's approximately a 13% compounded average annual increase while the rest of the University community was getting 2-3% merit based increments per year. But that, plus all his other perks, like a maintained house in one of Washington's most exclusive neighborhoods, wasn't enough for him
Substantial, detailed information has been published showing a pattern of excessive compensation and unauthorized expenditures. It's difficult to understand how there wouldn't be misfeasance, and, perhaps, malfeasance in Ladner's behavior. If there isn't, the problem goes even deeper into a system that would permit him to negotiate a contract allowing such avaricious behavior at a tuition-supported university where almost everyone else, students, staff and faculty, needs to sacrifice to make institutional ends meet. Furthermore, even if his contract permitted such outrageous self indulgence, it's a measure of Ladner as a person that he took advantage of, and exploited, the arrangement the way he did. We can not retain him as President and move forward as a university.
According to a current newspaper article, it appears that Ladner was even recently trying to obtain another million dollars from the University for himself. That alone says all too much about him. When is enough, enough? I haven't seen anything even remotely approaching this in my 38 years at American University.
It's abundantly clear that AU needs (1) better procedures for administrative oversight, (2) an independent auditor who isn't under the influence of BOT members appointed by the president and doesn't report to or through the president's office, (3) a broader based system of selection/election of the Board, and (4) a more transparent budget process.
The University must resolve this without a buyout! The damage Ladner's behavior and this crisis will do to AU's reputation, fund-raising and future is incalculable. However, the damage will be even greater if he is "bought out" because that implies a ratification of his misconduct and associates us with it. When dealing with such behavior, whether it was technically legal or not, buying someone out is wrong in principle.
It would be far better to spend any proposed buyout money proving his misconduct in court. This prospect could encourage him to be more co-operative, especially when in his "heart" he has to realize that he has been taking selfish advantage of a community that trusted them. The fact that many members of our Board of Trustees don't seem to appreciate this is difficult to understand.
If we stand on principle, reform our system of governance and end our relationship with Ladner in a manner that clearly doesn't endorse or reward his behavior, the University can survive this intact, move forward and even become a better institution.
Dr. Weiss is a professor in the Department of Psychology, and the president of the Eastern Psychological Association
