-4-
members for 2009- l0 evaluated the president’s perfonnance. In addition, the UK Faculty Senate
and Staff Senate received the same questions and offered their responses. Responses are
submitted to Peggy Way, who handles board correspondence, and results were tabulated by Mr.
Miles and Ms. May.
The tabulation sheet shows that the president scored 95.68 percent on the evaluation
fonn, which was then rounded to a score of 96 percent. This score will be used to calculate this
year’s bonus. The results were shared with the president, and comments were passed on to him.
Mr. Miles then offered a history ofthe establishment ofthe president’s salary and other
compensation. When the president was hired in 200l, a state law required that no president of a
Kentucky state university could receive a salary higher than that of the chair ofthe Council on
Postsecondary Education (CPE), the agency in Frankfort that govems all state universities.
Many ofthe other state schools, and particularly the University of Louisville, had private
foundations that could pay additional amounts to their presidents, and therefore, their presidents
were able to receive total compensation above the amount of the salary ofthe CPE chair.
President Todd came to the university with a business background, making a salary far
above that ofthe CPE chair. The Board wished to pay him more than the CPE amount, so the
idea was born to offer a salary plus a bonus on a recurring basis that could put UK’s president on
an equal footing with other state university presidents.
That President Todd has consistently refused to accept the bonus has dismayed Board
members for nine years in that they know he is underpaid for his job. The situation is
exacerbated by the fact that, having received the president’s announced retirement in June 20l l,
the board now needs to hire a new president, and UK’s ostensible salary is among the lowest
among our peer universities. A proposed solution was reached by the Board’s Executive
Committee in its meeting on September 9, which Dr. Brockrnan explained with his slide
presentation.
Mr. Miles opened the floor to discussion by the members ofthe Board. Many members
ofthe Board offered their comments, including Mr. Shoop, Mr. Stuckert, Mr. Smith, Dr.
Gannon, Dr. McCorvey, Mr. Gatton, Ms. Brothers, Dr. Peek, Ms. May, Ms. Curris, and Mr.
Roberts.
Mr. Miles called for a reading ofthe recommendations of the Executive Committee. Ms.
May stated: "The motion that came out ofthe Executive Committee, Mr. Chair, is that the
officer’s base compensation shall be increased by the amount of $157,046 and be effective for
fiscal years 2009-l0 and 20l0-ll. The officer’s base compensation for fiscal year 2010-ll may
be further increased by means of a performance-based incentive of an amount not to exceed
$50,000.”
Mr. Miles asked for a motion to vote on the recommendations and Ms. Patterson moved
for the motion, Mr. Stuckert seconded.