There’s been a lot of talk lately about how much Bakersfield College is cutting from its catalog, what positions they are having to cut back on and almost certainly how the students are feeling the full force of the budget cuts. All you have to do is take a look around and see who’s on a waitlist to get into a class.

Then, of course, we have the district Board of Trustees who sweeps in to save the day. Certificates are being issued again, the students come first and let’s not forget about the new solar complex in the planning stages for BC.

All this sounds somewhat reasonable with just a dash of skepticism thrown in for good measure. So I ask you, the reader, a question. Why has the board just given our leader, Chancellor Sandra Serrano, a $19,700 annual raise? Aren’t we in the middle of a budget crisis? Aren’t we cutting back classes so we don’t have to operate in the red? OK, let’s be fair and offer up facts so you can make an informed decision as the paying student.

Back in June of 2009, Chancellor Serrano initiated a “Request for Board Action” in regards to her desired raise. The Board of Trustees contacted five out of the 72 community college districts throughout the state of California to find out how much their respective chancellors made. It’s less than 10 percent, but I’ll give them an ‘A’ for effort. Those five districts were Foothill-Deanza, Los Rios, South Orange, State Center and San Diego.

Now at this point in time, as was reported in The Renegade Rip’s last issue of the fall semester, the board determined that Serrano was the lowest paid chancellor in the state. Really? They canvassed five districts out of 72 and they determined she was the lowest paid chancellor?

Before Serrano’s raise, she was making $262,750 a year. That’s just base pay, so let’s keep it fair and compare base pay only. Out of the five districts our board canvassed , at least two have chancellors that are currently making in the $230,000 range. $262,750 seems more than $230,000 to me by quite a bit. So tell me again how she’s the lowest paid chancellor in the state?

Now, I have to give the board their due, it’s only fair. Before Serrano came into the picture, it seemed our district couldn’t hold a chancellor in office. We went through quite a few leaders in a very short amount of time. Serrano seems to be the only one who’s stayed long enough to make a difference and for that, I give her an absolute A+ for staying power.

So maybe the board was thinking this was their way of saying thank you to Serrano. As a student, I have no problem at all with her getting a raise. I’ll even shake her hand personally and truly thank her for a very difficult job well done. Even Amber Chiang of media relations here at BC said that $19,700 is not enough to keep a class in the catalog.

So while I whole-heartedly believe she deserved the raise she received, and I understand that $19,700 isn’t even putting a dent into our budget crisis, why couldn’t her raise have been postponed until we were a little better off as a district and not scrambling to find a way to keep the same level of services our students are used to?