University of Colorado President Betsy Hoffman apparently will go to great lengths to secure a hefty raise - including making things up. Hoffman demanded a substantial raise from the CU Board of Regents by telling them that Penn State University had offered her $900,000 to take over the Nittany Lions.
Last June Hoffman declined a pay raise from her $400,000 salary, citing concerns about CU's financial health. Those concerns have seemingly dissipated.
The truth?
Hoffman was not offered anything by Penn State, and in fact didn't even make it through the first cut of applicants. Never mind that the school doesn't pay anything near $900,000 for that job.
How will the CU Board of Regents react to this? We don't know if they've already decided on a raise or not, but here's hoping they don't cave because of a toothless threat.
If I was on the CU board of regents, I'd wish her the best of luck in her new position at Penn St.
Posted by: Joe | January 21, 2005 at 03:48 PM
Let Betsy Hoffman go. Straight to Hell. She has done nothing but ruin the University of Colorado with her nonsense and antics, with the crowning moment being her attempt to justify the use of the 'c-word' by a football player. He was quoting Chaucer? Give me a break. She doesn't earn her paycheck, she is incompetent, ignorant, stupid, foolish, worthless, useless--pick a negative term to describe her and you defined her shallow, self-serving, god complex.
Posted by: James C. Hess | January 21, 2005 at 05:28 PM
This is interesting. Perhaps she should try a career in politics.
Posted by: Ed | January 21, 2005 at 08:08 PM
Since I go to CU, it depresses me to see her as the president. And I still don't get why all people who represent CU to the media have a penchant to shove their foot in their mouth. Her with Chaucer, Barnett with "she's a horrible kicker", Bynny with incompetence in handling the sex scandal (yay on him being gone).
Maybe that is her leadership ability - make other people look as bad or worse than her. That would be an odd skill.
Posted by: peterco | January 21, 2005 at 08:09 PM
Second the motion of Rep. Hess. Only in Bush's Amerika could somebody screw the pooch this badly and then have the stones to ask for a raise.
Posted by: Ralph | January 22, 2005 at 10:37 AM
Maybe it's a lack of sleep somewhere along the way, but I have to ask for an explanation: President Bush is to blame for Besty Hoffman's attempt to financially strong-arm the Board of Regents for a pay raise?
I await the explanation behind this.
Posted by: James C. Hess | January 23, 2005 at 09:14 AM
In Bush's Amerika, the priviledged are never held accountable for anything. Whether it is lying to get us into war, failure to send enough troops, or ignoring the fact that in reality it is the OTHER 2/3rds of the Axis of Evil that actually has nuclear weapons, you aren't accountable for it. You can empty out people's savings accounts, like the still free Ken Lay did. You can bankrupt the nation. You can make "decapitation strikes" and then pretend to be aghast when headless bodies start showing up around Iraq. You can issue legal briefs showing that torture is OK to get information, and then when it shows up on the news, do you get fired? HELL NO! Have a promotion! And you can be National Security Advisor during the time that the US suffers its worst attack on civilians in its history and, rather than take responsibility, lie that "No one could have predicted that" while all the time they were planning for just such an attack in the VERY GODDAMNED BUILDING THAT IS ATTACKED. Prosecuted? NO! Given a promotion!
If there were any worse way that President Hoffman could be performing her job, please enlighten us. But instead of being a standup gal, she comes with her palm out.
If you still don't see the parallel, I'll try to diagram it.
Posted by: Ralph | January 23, 2005 at 05:29 PM
Has Betsy Hoffman done anything well? How about her valiant efforts in the last three years dealing with the Republican-controlled state government and its palpable hostility toward public higher education? She was forced to spend the greater part of her time from 2002-2004 as a political lobbyist. Nothing less than the future of CU as a public institution was at stake. Have you already forgotten the dire threats of certain Joint Budget Committee members to destroy higher Ed. in Colorado? Peterco, if you are a resident CU student you can credit her efforts (and those who worked for her) for the fact that your in-state tuition is still relatively low compared to other states. Sure, the higher tuition and voucher system (whoops, I forgot the Orwellian name: “College Opportunity Fund”) does great damage to accessibility for lower-income students and exacerbates Boulder’s already miserable lack of diversity in the student body, but the university admin. was forced to support these bills in exchange for their very survival as a state-supported Research I institutionm which depended on "Enterprise Status". It was a Faustian compromise.
That said, the other part of her job is public relations, and in this area she made some huge blunders in dealing with the football scandal. I am deeply concerned about the culture of athletics and especially their impact on women (though CU’s problem here represents a much larger national problem endemic in all male sports culture as whole, not just colleges). I wish someone would have been fired outright, but it does seem to have happened, though not in the way we would have liked. Tharp (the one most responsible, I think) was slowly forced out by having his power severely limited. Hoffmann was in impossible position politically, and as she herself said, any course of action was going to anger lots of people. Still, Peterco, your’re right that the Chaucer statement was inexcusable. But what many folks don’t realize is that the football scandal was small potatoes compared to the budget crisis. Unlike the football problems, the budget crisis posed a real threat to CU’s ability to educate Colorado’s students. Let’s hope the Democratic legislature and Owens can reach a compromise this year.
Posted by: Rebecca | January 25, 2005 at 02:22 PM