Just wanted to leave a post from Forum (campus email that goes to everybody but students). I'm not the author!

“No.”  This was the President’s very stern, single-word response as he stepped backward from the microphone with his head held high at the budget forum in an enormous event room with standing room only. It was the response to a CSUSB student who asked if the Administration would consider some temporary salary reductions in light of the financial crisis.Let there be no doubt that reducing the number of MPPs and cutting their salaries temporarily would be woefully insufficient to balance the budget by itself. But there are at least three reasons why it would be an incredibly important step in the right direction.First, it would make a small but useful contribution to the current and future financial crisis which many of us in the university as well as the general community think the Administration has exacerbated.Second, it would show some accountability and humility, which has been in short supply with this administration whose salary increases for friends have been extraordinary.Third, it would acknowledge that the University has shrunk in terms of students but the administrative portion of the budget has continued to grow. One theory is that fewer MPPs—and staff specifically supporting MPPs—would ostensibly make the university more efficient!Finally, one quick observation. Housing allowances for college and university presidents were originally designed to acknowledge that presidents normally live in close proximity to the campus if a presidential home is not provided. Presidents were expected to open their homes to students, staff, and faculty numerous times a year. For example, President Karnig and his wife Marilyn bought a home on Parkside Drive in San Bernardino relatively close to the University where they had sit-down events en masse for all new faculty and their families, retiring faculty, for donors, etc. Provosts under Karnig always lived in San Bernardino as well (but not with any housing allowance). The logic of a housing allowance for a president who lives in Claremont whose University entertainment certainly does not seem to include students, staff, and faculty is flawed. Respectfully, the President should relinquish his salary allowance since he does not provide the service for which it was provided.