Spending Controversy at American U.

To the Editor:

As a former member of the board of American University and someone who has been intimately involved with the issues surrounding the compensation of its recently fired president, Benjamin Ladner, I take issue with his assertion that the controversy is a “case study in one institution being driven by a kind of fear that we were out of compliance.” (“American University Faces Scrutiny Over President’s Pay, Spending” October 13.)

While American University is a fine institution that has grown and prospered under Mr. Ladner’s leadership, it does not rank yet among the top 75 universities in this country, measured either by size or reputation. Mr. Ladner’s total compensation, if fully reported, would have ranked him consistently among the top 10 of all university presidents in the country.

The board’s position was to pay him very well, considering his performance, against a highly competitive group of peer universities selected by Mr. Ladner and the board’s compensation committee. When it became clear that his total compensation (some elements of which were not fully known by the board) were well above this level, the board undertook a thorough review, aided by a compensation consultant selected by Mr. Ladner and me.

While the Internal Revenue Service’s regulations were an appropriate concern in this review, the board voted to reduce Mr. Ladner’s compensation because it was too high by any reasonable standard, not because of compliance issues alone.

Pete Smith
McLean, Va.