Senator Alan Lowenthal Joins In Blocking Bill That Would Prevent Further 10% Pay Raises For Top CSU Administrators; He Chairs Committee & Is Present But Remains Silent And Is Recorded "No Vote Recorded"

Sen. Lowenthal votes to advance measure allowing top CSU administrators pay raises up to 10%

(March, 24, 2012) -- State Senator Alan Lowenthal (D., LB-Paramount) joined in blocking the advance of a bill by state Senator Leland Yee (D., San Francisco) that would prevent the type of 10% pay raises for top CSU campus administrators approved earlier this week by CSU's Board of Trustees. Senator Lowenthal and a Committee majority voted instead to advance a measure by state Senator Elaine Alquist (D., San Jose) that allows pay raises of up 10% for high level CSU administrators.

The bill by Sen. Yee (SB 967), blocked by the state Senate Education Committee, chaired by Sen. Lowenthal, sought to cap the salary of an incoming CSU officer at 5% above that paid to his/her immediate executive office predecessor and would prevent CSU Trustees from increasing monetary compensation or approving a monetary bonus to an executive officer for two years if there's a systemwide fee increase or a decrease in CSU's general fund appropriation. (Bill text here, Committee staff analysis here

The Committee advanced SB 952 by Senator Alquist that prevents CSU Trustees (starting July 1, 2012) from agreeing to a contract that provides a compensation increase of more than 10% over that paid in the immediately prior contract for the same position. (Bill text here; Committee staff analysis here.

The Alquist bill is substantively similar to SBX1 26 by state Senator Ted Lieu (D., southbay), who introduced his measure after the Trustees last year approved a $100,000 raise for an incoming CSU President in San Diego. Sen. Lieu's bill wasn't enacted after CSU's administration agreed early in 2012 to abide by the bill's terms [and did so when Trustees approved the two 10% raises awarded on Mar. 20].

With six votes required for Committee passage, the Committee advanced the Alquist bill on a 6-2 vote (Republicans Blakeslee and Huff dissenting)...but blocked the Yee bill on a 4-3 vote (details below).

Prior to the vote, Sen. Lowenthal said he was "torn" on the Yee bill, indicating he considers it "too restrictive, goes too far at this time." He said he wouldn't support the Yee bill on that day's vote...but didn't rule out supporting it in the future if it advanced. Sen. Lowenthal said he "extremely shocked" and "very surprised" at the CSU Trustees' voted action a day earlier, granting two CSU campus presidents (administrators) 10% raises..

To hear Sen. Lowenthal's remarks in full, followed by the response/closing statement of Senator Yee, click here.

As the vote was called (screen save right), Sen. Lowenthal remained silent, enabling his vote to be recorded as "no vote recorded." (Two Dems (Price and Hancock) and two Repubs (Blakeslee and Huff) voted "yes"; three Dems voted "no" (Alquist, Liu Vargas, Runner).

Audio and image screen save via the California Channel. To view video of the full state Senate Education Committee hearing on the Alquist and Yee bills (approx. 52 minutes) via the California Channel, click here.

Following the Committee action , Sen. Yee issued a release stating that the Alquist bill (advanced by the Committee with Sen. Lowenthal's voted approval) "codifies this abhorrent practice of catering to university elites...Rather than approving SB 967 and putting a stop to these exorbitant pay hikes, the Committee instead has ensured in perpetuity that students suffer and executives get rich."

Sen. Lowenthal granted the Yee bill "reconsideration," meaning it can be re-heard, usually after the author agrees to amendments to gain the support of the Committee's majority (usually including the Committee chair)

Meanwhile, state Senate President Pro Tem Steinberg indicated he wants the Alquist bill strengthened (coverage via LATimes.com click here.)

As heard LIVE on March 20 via a link on LBReport.com's front page (www.LBReport.com), CSU Trustees meeting in Long Beach approved 10% raises for incoming campus presidents (administrators) at CSU Fullerton ($324,500) and CSU East Bay ($303,660). Included in their pay packages: 60,000 a year for housing plus a $12,000 annual car allowance.

Sen. Yee's bill (blocked by the state Senate Committee) was supported by Academic Professional of California, the American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees, AFL-CIO; Associated Students UC Davis; CA Faculty Association; CA Federation of Teachers; CA Nurses Association; UC Student Association (UCSA)...and at the Committee hearing, a representative of the Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association testified in support of the bill.

The measure is opposed by the CSU and UC administrations.

The Committee analysis says Sen. Yee's bill was almost identical to SB 86, which passed the legislature in 2009 but was vetoed by then Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger, whose veto message stated:

This bill would limit the ability of the UC and the CSU to continue to provide a high level of quality education that our students deserve when they choose to attend California public universities. A blanket prohibition limiting the flexibility for the UC and CSU to compete, both nationally and internationally, in attracting and retaining high level personnel does a disservice to those students seeking the kind of quality education that our higher education segments offer. The Regents and the Trustees should be prudent in managing their systems, given the difficult fiscal crisis we face as a state, but it is unnecessary for the State to micromanage their operations.

The state Senate Committee's action comes as CSU Chancellor Charles Reed has indicated administrators are considering freezing enrollment for the spring semester and wait-listing all applicants for the fall semester unless CA voters approve a statewide tax increase in November.