By JOHN HRABE

On Tuesday morning, I sent an email to three high-ranking officials at San Jose State University, requesting information about the executive compensation for former president Jon Whitmore and two key employees. By law, the school is required to disclose the information to the public. Within two hours, I received this accidental reply from Larry Carr, the college’s Associate Vice President of Public Affairs, “Anybody know who this guy is? Check out his website.”

Carr’s accidental reply shares insight into California State University’s media strategy and utter disdain for the public. San Jose State University has no explanation for why it provided bogus executive compensation data to the IRS for three consecutive years. But, as long as it’s not the Sacramento Bee’s Dan Walters, the San Francisco Chronicle’s Carla Marinucci or the Associated Press’ Juliet Williams requesting the information, they know that they can delay, ignore, stonewall and deny.

Late Tuesday afternoon, I received Carr’s official statement: “I’ve requested the information you are looking for.  However, it will not be possible to meet your deadline of 5:00 PM today.  I expect to hear back tomorrow as to when the information will be available and I will let you know.” As of Thursday morning, I am still waiting on San Jose State University to respond to the public information request. Government agencies shouldn’t treat public information requests differently based on who is asking.

Obfuscation

San Jose State’s response is just one example of the systemic obfuscation by Cal State officials. On March 9, I asked Claudia Keith, assistant vice chancellor for public affairs in the Cal State Chancellor’s Office, for the compensation numbers for all 23 Cal State presidents and Chancellor Charles Reed. She replied, “The information is publicly available and included on 990 forms for each president and the chancellor that are posted on each campus website, as well as on the chancellor office website.”

Fine, I’m willing to sift through hundreds of pages of tax returns to find my answer. However, she lied: the Form 990s aren’t publicly available on every campus’s website. Cal State Fullerton is just one campus that hasn’t posted its most recent Form 990s for the college foundation. Nevertheless, I pressed on, this time asking the CSU Fullerton public affairs staff.

“Sorry, but by the time I got around to your email, the folks manning the office for the 990s were gone for the day. I’ll let you know tomorrow am as soon as I hear back from them,” replied Christopher Bugbee, a representative from Fullerton’s Office of Strategic Communications. “Questions 2-5 have to do with presidential compensation, which is set by the Chancellor’s Office and the CSU Board of Trustees. The CSU’s Chancellor’s Office is the office of record for that information.”

That’s right. The Chancellor’s Office sent me to Fullerton’s website, which didn’t have the information. In turn, Fullerton’s public affairs personnel sent me right back to the Chancellor’s Office. On March 15, I again asked Keith how much Chancellor Reed earned in total compensation. I never received an acknowledgement that the public information request was received.

Eventually, the CSU Fullerton university counsel’s office told me that the forms would be available  — for a price. “The CSU charge is 20 cents per page irrespective of the format in which they are produced (see Cal. Govt. Code section 6253(b)), the cost of these documents is $8.20,” an assistant to the University Counsel at Cal State Fullerton wrote. “If you would still like the information forwarded to you directly, please send a check for $8.20 payable to California State University, Fullerton.”

Cal State officials are fully within their rights to charge for such information. Nevertheless, it demonstrates Cal State’s contempt for public disclosure and a purposeful and determined effort to hide executive compensation data from the public.

By JOHN HRABE

In response to a CalWatchDog.com investigation series, two Democratic state legislators are calling on the California State University system “to come clean with a complete and detailed look at just how CSU executives are paid.” In a letter sent Tuesday afternoon to Cal State Chancellor Charles Reed, Assemblymember Anthony Portantino, D-La Cañada Flintridge, and Senator Leland Yee, D-San Francisco, urged CSU to end its repeated attempts to mislead the public about the total compensation of its top executives.

“Despite repeated attempts to ferret out the truth, recent news reports suggest that CSU officials continue to conceal details about excessive compensation for campus presidents — including tens of thousands of dollars in perks such as housing, car allowances, and retirement and health benefits,” the legislators wrote. “According to CalWatchDog.com, the president of Cal State Los Angeles makes over $515,000 in total compensation per year; that’s about $200,000 more than what’s listed on CSU’s website.”

Earlier this month, a CalWatchdog investigation revealed that Cal State officials have provided false and misleading information to the public about the total compensation provided to at least one of the system’s 23 presidents. According to IRS Form 990 documents of the Cal State University Los Angeles Foundation, CSULA President James Rosser reported receiving $515,612 in total compensation for fiscal year 2009-10, which ended on June 30, 2010. The half-million dollar figure is roughly $200,000 more than CSU’s previously cited base salary of $325,000 per year. In at least five instances, Cal State officials have claimed or implied the lower compensation amount for Rosser.

‘Open and Transparent’?

Following last year’s public outcry over the $400,000 base salary for San Diego State President Elliot Hirschman, Cal State established a special Web page for public information on its executive compensation policies. “As a public institution, the California State University is committed to being as open and transparent to the public as possible,” the Web site reads. “In response to recent discussions about the California State University’s executive compensation policies and practices, we have created this central page to make the documents related to those policies more readily accessible.”

The website makes no reference to any CSU president receiving more than half-a-million dollars per year in taxpayer-funded benefits. The webpage contains an executive compensation summary, titled “2011/2012 CSU Executive Compensation Summary.” This summarizing document lists Rosser’s total compensation as $325,000 per year, plus a $60,000 housing allowance. It excludes any reference to a car allowance or other non-taxable perks, such as retirement, FICA or health benefits.

‘No Justification’

“There is no justification for these bloated salaries and even less justification for hiding the truth from the taxpaying public,” wrote Portantino and Yee. “The need for transparency has never been greater, and thus why we call on you and your administration to use Sunshine Week to come clean with a complete and detailed look at just how CSU executives are paid.”

CalWatchDog.com has been repeatedly rebuffed in our requests for the total compensation packages of all 23 college presidents. “The information is publicly available and included on 990 forms for each president and the chancellor that are posted on each campus website, as well as on the chancellor office website,” said Claudia Keith, Cal State’s assistant vice chancellor of public affairs.

However, the IRS documents provided on the Cal State Foundation’s website are nearly three years old. The most recent IRS Form 990, which is available on the CSU Foundation’s webpage, is for July 1, 2008-June 30, 2009.

In addition to their letter, Portantino and Yee have proposed legislation to limit the excessive compensation of high-ranking government employees.  Portantino’s AB 1787 would freeze compensation for public employees making more than $100,000 a year.  Yee’s SB 967 would prohibit raises for top executives during bad budget years or within two years of a student fee hike.

Both legislators have a long history of championing government openness and transparency. Last year, Portantino led the effort to force the state Assembly to disclose its total operating budget. On January 1, new legislation authored by Yee took effect that expanded the state’s Public Records Act to include the University of California, Cal State and the community college auxiliaries and foundations. SB 8 provides the public with greater tools to investigate the financial statements and contracts of public colleges and universities.

By JOHN HRABE

Vox Veritas Vita — “Speak the truth as a way of life.”

— Cal State University Motto

From the Files of You Can’t Make This Stuff Up: A California government agency has lied about receiving an award for government transparency.

The California State University system has falsely claimed to have received a 2012 Sunshine Award, which recognizes “the most transparent government websites in the nation.”

“CSU wins 2012 Sunshine Award for most transparent government website ow.ly/9BuP6,” @Cal State, the official Twitter page for the CSU Public Affairs Office, tweeted on March 12. However, as of 1:30 pm on March 13, the ow.ly/9BuP6 link no longer worked, even though that exact link remains up on Cal State’s Twitter account.

[Editor’s Update: As a result of this article, as of 4 pm on March 13, 2012, CSU’s official Twitter page also no longer lists the lie about receiving the Sunshine Award. But the evidence from earlier is in the picture that follows. Two and a half hours is pretty fast for government work.]

Sunshine Review, the national nonprofit organization that sponsors the annual awards, confirmed to CalWatchDog.com that it would be impossible for the state’s public college system to win a Sunshine Award.

“We do not grade state universities or colleges at this time, so it would be impossible for Cal State to have won an award,” said Diana Lopez, senior editor of the Sunshine Review. “And you are correct, they are not on our list of winners here: http://sunshinereview.org/index.php/2012_Sunny_Awards.”

If that’s not ridiculous enough, remember we’re in the middle of Sunshine Week, the annual campaign to raise awareness about open, honest and transparent government.

It’d be easy to laugh off the irony of a government agency lying about receiving a government transparency award during the weeklong celebration of openness and honesty in government. Except, the Cal State system continues to lie and mislead the public about the total compensation of its top administrators.

Cal State officials have provided false and misleading information to the public about the total compensation provided to at least one of the system’s 23 presidents, a CalWatchDog.com investigation found earlier this month. According to IRS documents of Cal State University Los Angeles Foundation, CSULA President James Rosser reported receiving $515,612 in total compensation for fiscal year 2009-10, which ended on June 30, 2010. The half-million dollar figure is roughly $200,000 more than CSU’s previously cited base salary of $325,000 per year. In at least five instances, Cal State officials have claimed or implied a lower compensation amount for CSULA’s Rosser.

More Obstruction

When CalWatchDog.com requested the total compensation for all 23 executives, a Cal State spokeswoman told us to find it ourselves.

“The information is publicly available and included on 990 forms for each president and the chancellor that are posted on each campus website, as well as on the chancellor office website,” said Claudia Keith, Cal State’s assistant vice chancellor of public affairs.

CalWatchDog.com followed Cal State’s instructions and found another CSU effort to obstruct the public’s access to information. Cal State’s IRS documents are nearly three years old. The most recent IRS Form 990 available on the CSU Foundation’s webpage is for July 1, 2008-June 30, 2009.

The Sunshine or Sunny Awards honor “governments that are doing an exemplary job at proactively disclosing information to taxpayers.” While Cal State didn’t win a Sunshine Award, the state of California did. A complete list of the true 2012 Sunshine Award winners can be found here.