Gordon Schatz was born and raised in Tacoma, Washington, and he married his high school sweetheart Karen Lyle in 1964. They then moved to Hollywood, where he obtained a BA degree in photography from Art Center College of Design. He operated his own advertising photography studio until the family relocated to Humboldt County in 1975, to establish and operate the Schatz Tree Farm in Maple Creek.

Gordon’s reforestation work on the Schatz Tree Farm led to official recognition as the “California Tree Farm of the Year” award. Shortly after receiving this honor, the Schatz family donated the tree farm to Humboldt State University Sponsored Programs Foundation. Gordon continued working as resident manager of the tree farm until his passing.

In addition to his reforestation work, Gordon served for 12 years on the Maple Creek School Board and was a founding member and eventual Fire Chief of the Maple Creek Volunteer Fire Department during its’ 30-year existence.

Gordon enjoyed living with the land through gardening, orcharding, raising rabbits and sheep, and planting all the variety of trees he could fit on his homestead. He was always a person of self-determination, and enjoyed individual activities including backpacking, hiking, photography, sailboarding, skiing, snowboarding, and plenty of summers swimming in the Baduwa’t (Mad) river. He especially enjoyed mountain biking and was a successful competitor in cross-country races for many years.

Gordon also enjoyed sharing life and experiences and quiet contemplation with his beloved wife Karen, his sons Ian and Dylan, his daughters-in-law Elizabeth and Zia, and his grandchildren Jas, Griffin, and Leo. He was ever wishing for peace on earth and protection of our planet’s forests. His remains will be returned to the earth by his immediate family, to nourish the trees which he planted and loved.

Those who would like to honor his memory and wishes are encouraged to plant trees — especially Sequoia sempervirens — to help make our planet forever green.

Mark “Sparky” S. Hensley — beloved husband, father, brother and friend — passed away peacefully on November 10, 2025, in Eureka. He was born on November 27, 1954, in San Mateo, California, and spent his life surrounded by the people, places and passions he cherished most.

Mark grew up in San Mateo before moving north, eventually graduating from Eureka High School and later from College of the Redwoods. Throughout his life, he made his home in San Mateo, Weott and ultimately Eureka. He worked proudly as a salesman for Albee and Buck, where he was known for his warm personality, strong work ethic and ability to connect with anyone he met.

A true outdoorsman and animal lover, Mark’s hobbies brought him joy and peace. He spent countless hours raising fish and canaries, tending lovingly to his fuchsias, caring for his horses and doting on every animal lucky enough to cross his path. His love of nature and living things was a steady reflection of his gentle spirit.

Mark is survived by his devoted wife of 46 years, Dorothy Hensley; his son Travis Hensley, along with Amy and Aspen; and his daughter Shelby Marshall, along with Brett, Madison and Mariah. He is also survived by his sisters Linda Sesna of Washington and Brenda Gilbert and her husband Dan of Arcata; as well as his extended family of surviving brothers- and sisters-in-law: Louis Goselin (Wanda) of Fortuna, Bob Thomas (Lori) of Texas, Susan Thoms (Tal) of Oregon and Ken Thomas (Violetta) of Texas.

He was preceded in death by his mother Vera Hensley, father Horace Hensley, sister Judy Enos and grandmother Minnie White.

A celebration of Mark’s life will be held at a later date, where family and friends will gather to share memories and honor the extraordinary man who touched so many lives.

In lieu of flowers, the family requests that donations be made to a charity of your choice in Mark’s memory.

###

The Outpost reported some dire predictions last week for people dependent on the federal Housing and Urban Development’s (HUD) Continuum of Care funding. Although the outlook is grim, Robert Ward, the Housing and Assistance Coordinator for the Humboldt County Department of Health & Human Services, said in an interview it might be years before many of them are forced into the streets.

CoC funding houses 72 people in 64 households countywide, according to DDHS data. DHHS received $365,000 for the time period between Oct. 1, 2026, and Sep. 30, 2027 for permanent housing. The Arcata House Partnership, responsible for housing 31 of them, received $660,000. 211 Humboldt earned a much smaller $31,000 CoC grant for coordinated entry access services. 

The new HUD directive forces CoC grantees to spend at most 30% of the funds on transitional housing, which allows for tenants to stay up to two years. Permanent housing, which currently makes up 91% of CoC spending county-wide, supports participants indefinitely. 

Ward said the grants couldn’t be diced up and distributed piecemeal in an exact 30-70 split. Far more than 70% of the funding will be earmarked for transitional housing. They have until Sep. 30, 2027 to move the funds to transitional housing. 

After that, Ward said there was a possibility DHHS and AHP could use that money for people currently depending on permanent housing — for two years, at least.

“That gets us to September 30, 2029,” Ward said. “Assuming Trump can’t actually win a third term, we’ll have a new administration, and we could have different leadership at HUD. If we’re able to pull off these transitions, we may not see people on the street immediately. It may take a few years, and there could be policy fixes in the intervening time.”

AHP executive director Darlene Spoor told the Outpost they were “absolutely” looking into using their transitional housing funds to keep people sheltered. However, she’s worried that AHP may lose funding from the politicized HUD because they’re not a faith-based organization, as well as California’s status as a sanctuary state. Spoor thinks that other, more disreputable organizations might use the opportunity and score more of the funding. 

“People can stack up our progress to anyone. That’s not a concern to me,” Spoor said. “We are top-notch, running these programs. We have great results. I’m not afraid of that. But if we’re being compared to somebody that’s not in a sanctuary state, if they’re not doing the quality work that any of us in our CoC is doing — that concerns me.”

The CoC funding for permanent housing was also one of the most consistent sources of money service providers in Humboldt could depend on, said Ward. Most other grants aren’t awarded as frequently or aren’t as large. 

The fallout from these policy changes would be far less severe if rent prices were lower, Ward said. 

“The rent is just way too high for a certain percentage of people at the bottom of the income spectrum, and particularly people with severe disabilities,” Ward said. “…I don’t see how a lot of these folks can sustain housing without long-term support.”

###

The Humboldt County Board of Supervisors made quick work of its agenda this morning, wrapping up the public portion of the meeting before heading into closed session just before noon. Let’s get into it!

Board Appointments for 2026

At today’s meeting, the board made its selections for board chair and vice chair for the coming year. After passing on the opportunity a few years back, Third District Supervisor Mike Wilson agreed to step up from his current role as acting chair to chair of the board in 2026, with Fourth District Supervisor Natalie Arroyo to serve as vice-chair. 

Wilson | Screenshot

“I didn’t do chair [before] because we were in the midst of COVID, kids at home — all kinds of stuff,” Wilson explained. “We had a volunteer, [former Fourth District Supervisor] Virginia Bass, who did a wonderful job and enjoyed it so she took it on. I’m completely ready to take on the chairmanship, if that’s the desire of the board.”

Wilson assumed the chair’s responsibilities earlier this month after the board voted to censure Second District Supervisor Michelle Bushnell and remove her as chair in response to sustained allegations that she mistreated two county employees. At today’s meeting, Bushnell made the motion to appoint Wilson and Arroyo to the chair and vice chair positions. 

The motion passed in a unanimous 5-0 vote.

Continuing with appointments for 2026, the board selected First District Supervisor Rex Bohn to serve as a delegate for the Rural County Representatives of California (RCRC), a position he has held for more than a decade. Wilson was appointed to serve as an alternate.

The board also voted to appoint Arroyo to the California State Association of Counties delegation, with Wilson as an alternate. The board approved the appointment in a 4-1 vote, with Bohn dissenting, though he didn’t say why.

New Rules for Cannabis Microbusinesses

A little earlier in the meeting, the board approved a couple of changes to the county’s Commercial Cannabis Land Use Ordinance to ease the licensing process for small-scale cultivators and promote vertical integration. The amendment will allow cannabis microbusinesses (license holders with less than 10,000 square feet of cultivation area) to incorporate processing, sales and “non-volatile manufacturing” into their cultivation permit. 

“This exception essentially states, if you’re not expanding anything — no new buildings, all your cannabis that you’re working with is grown on site and you don’t have any customers on site — then you can go through this process as well for the microbusiness,” said Augustus Grochau, a staff planner for the county. “To make it easier to get manufacturing, we’ve also added another ZCC [zoning clearance certificate] option, provided that it is in association with a cultivation permit without customers on site.” 

Bohn asked if the change would allow small-scale growers to skip the distributor and sell directly to retailers, adding that “most of my complaints lately have been from distributors not paying the cultivator.”

“To be able to sell your product, you’re going to need to modify your permit in order to allow for off-site retail sales,” Grochau said, adding that a state transport license would still be required to self-transport.

Speaking on behalf of the Humboldt County Growers Alliance during public comment, Ross Gordon thanked staff for relaxing some of the rules for small-scale cultivators. 

Gordon | Screenshot

“This is definitely one of the top issues — if not the major issue — that farmers here are facing broadly, which is trying to sell a craft product, but having to go through multiple middlemen on the way to doing that distribution and retail,” Gordon said. “That means you’re not necessarily controlling the quality of your product as it moves through the supply channel … and it means, as I think was pointed out, you may not get paid, and a lot of people are in that situation.”

Marissa Hartley, a senior program manager for environmental consulting firm Antea Group, expressed concern about new sanitation guidelines from the Department of Cannabis Control that would prohibit animals and pets from being allowed in a cannabis processing facility. She worried that the new rules would impact microbusinesses operating out of their homes.

Following public comment, Planning and Building Director John Ford politely noted that pets can easily be kept out of cannabis processing areas.

“I don’t want to sound flippant, but if that’s going to be a requirement of the state, and you’re processing in your garage, keep the pet out of the garage,” he said. “I don’t know what else to say.”

After a bit of additional discussion, Fifth District Supervisor Steve Madrone made a motion to approve the amendments, along with an addendum to the environmental impact report for the county’s cannabis ordinance. The motion passed 5-0.

Homeless Supportive Housing Cuts

During the reading of a proclamation for Hunger and Homelessness Awareness Week, several community leaders raised concerns about federal funding cuts that threaten permanent supportive housing for the homeless. The item spurred a half-hour discussion, despite the fact that it appeared on the board’s consent calendar and was not pulled for discussion.

Nezzie Wade, executive director of Affordable Homeless Housing Alternatives (AHHA), said local providers are expecting a 50 percent reduction in funding for permanent supportive housing, which receives funding through the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development’s (HUD) Continuum of Care Program. 

“The prospects for our future, with respect to budget cuts and things that we’re facing now … make it look pretty bleak in our future,” Wade said. “We really need the state to step up, and we need to work better and put more input and pressure on housing and community development so we can open up different kinds of housing types that we need.”

Wade asked the Board of Supervisors to form a task force that includes people experiencing homelessness to better inform the county’s approach to the shelter crisis.

Food for People Executive Director Carly Robbins brought up the recent lapse in SNAP benefits and expressed concern that people living paycheck to paycheck would soon be forced to “make the choice between putting food on the table or paying their rent,” putting them at risk of homelessness. 

“Frankly, this has been a challenging year for anyone doing food security work,” she said. “From the cuts we’ve seen to just the last few weeks of folks losing benefits, it’s pretty dramatic, and I really only see it going further in that direction. Pretty soon, federal changes to policy will have significant impacts on how supplemental nutrition assistance programs are administered and who’s eligible. … And ultimately, it’s going to kick people off of the program.”

Asked to clarify some of the points made about the federal funding cuts, Robert Ward, housing and assistance coordinator for the Humboldt County Department of Health and Human Services (DHHS), said HUD plans to put a 30 percent cap on permanent supportive housing for the homeless and shift its focus to temporary shelters. 

Robert Ward | Screenshot

“HUD wants to move back in the direction of transitional housing in kind of an extreme way,” he said. “[W]e could potentially transition 60 percent or so of our permanent supportive housing to transitional housing. We’ll get one year to transition, [which] takes us to October 1, 2027, when they would have to fully be transitional housing projects. The big difference between transitional housing and permanent housing is the 24-month limit on how long people can remain in the transitional housing.”

Following public comment, Madrone noted that the board had formed an ad hoc committee to address some of the issues surrounding homelessness.

“I’m hoping that our ad hoc will absolutely reach out to these folks and seek their wisdom and advice [on] how we might continue to partner on this compassionate assistance approach to solving some of our problems,” he said. “When we work together, we’re going to do a lot more.”

Arroyo said she was “deeply worried” that losing federal funding could put more people out on the street. Speaking to a previous comment questioning the efficacy of the county’s homeless outreach efforts, Arroyo noted, “Just because we currently see people on the street doesn’t mean that our programs aren’t serving other people who aren’t on the street.”

“Whatever we can do as a board … to advocate, I’ll say I’m willing to do, and I believe this board would be willing to do so,” she added.

The board eventually approved the proclamation along with the rest of the consent calendar, but did not take any additional action on the subject.

###

The county government recently started requiring volunteers at the Humboldt County Animal Shelter to sign a new liability waiver. Spokespeople for the county and the Sheriff’s Office, which oversees the shelter, say it’s a fairly standard legal document, similar to ones used by other government agencies, including Cal Poly Humboldt. It was implemented at the suggestion of the Risk Management Division. 

But nearly a dozen volunteers reached by the Outpost say the legal language of the waiver is far too broad: They’re being asked to assume risks that rightly belong to the county, they say, and forcing them to sign it has left them feeling insulted and unappreciated.

And yet, while they’re reluctant to sign away their legal rights, given the risks of working with animals at an aging facility in dire need of repairs, they’re also aware that if they refuse, they won’t be allowed to volunteer anymore, which will negatively impact shelter staff and animals. They feel trapped.

“The waiver relieves the county of any responsibility and puts it all on us,” a volunteer named Lucy Rapp told the Outpost. “Right now, I feel disrespected and unsupported by the county.”

Sandra Spalding, who has volunteered at the shelter for nearly 20 years, said she doesn’t blame shelter manager Andre Hale. 

“I mean, this is not coming from her; it’s coming from people that just have absolutely no connection, no concern at all about the dogs and cats,” she said. “This feels like a slap in the face to all of us.” 

Mara Segal is a director at the nonprofit Redwood Pals Rescue, which works hand-in-hand with the shelter, where she serves as the main volunteer coordinator. In a recent phone interview, Segal said the work of Redwood Pals and shelter volunteers is responsible for keeping the animal euthanasia rate at the shelter far below the statewide average among government-run shelters.

“We make those dogs adoptable so they don’t have to euthanize them,” Segal said. 

When she read over the two-page liability waiver, she was struck by provisions requiring volunteers to assume the risks not only of their own actions, but also risks stemming from “the condition of the facilities, equipment, or areas where the events or activities are being conducted.”

That strikes her as unfair given the state of the place. Segal said ceiling tiles have been dropping for years, two rust-eaten lampposts in the parking lot have fallen down, and there’s always an element of risk when handling animals, especially when many of the current staff members are new to the job. 

Segal said she’s the baby sister of a couple of attorneys, one of whom reviewed the waiver and advised her not to sign it. But that puts Segal in a tough spot.

“I’m the volunteer coordinator,” she said. “I’m the person who is supposed to tell new volunteers to sign this [and] explain to them why this is a good thing. I can’t do that. … My upbringing says you don’t compromise on something that’s really wrong.”

Janine Melanson agreed. She and other volunteers have decided that they can’t sign the waiver in good conscience.

“Others will put themselves at financial and physical risk and sign because they cannot walk away from the care of the animals,” she said in an email. “This volunteer work is something I’ve wanted to do for years — finally in retirement I have the time and energy. As I’ve spent time there, it has become very important to me. I am disappointed and sad that now I feel like I am being threatened (sign or ELSE) and pushed away by this waiver.”

Melanson typically volunteers one day per week, and today is her usual day. But this morning she reached out to let the other volunteers know she won’t be there.

“This waiver situation has me tied in knots,” she told the Outpost. “I need to step away for a bit. I hope I will be back.”

###

Volunteers contribute so much time and effort to the Humboldt County Animal Shelter that when last year’s Civil Grand Jury investigated operations at the facility, its ensuing report recommended that the county establish an annual Volunteer Appreciation Day. 

The Grand Jury report says volunteers collectively donate an average of 400 hours per month to the shelter, socializing, walking and training the animals so that they’re happier, healthier and more suitable for adoption.

Segal told the Outpost that in recent months the shelter has been short-staffed, and most of the employees who are there are new. So volunteers have carried an even heavier load, donating more like 800 hours per month — equivalent to five full-time employees.

The Grand Jury report mentions a long list of deferred maintenance and safety concerns at the 20-year-old facility. “The delay in fixing the roof and outdoor lighting fixtures have created unsafe and unhealthy conditions for the staff, the volunteers, and the animals,” the summary reads. Its recommendations include finishing a reroofing project by the end of this past October and replacing and repairing the outside lighting before the end of the year.

Shelter volunteer Josh Solomon looks back on that report with bitterness.

“It seems like the county’s response to the grand jury report, which rightly recognized the importance of the volunteer group and also the need to maintain the premises properly, was to have us all sign a waiver which says that they do not need to maintain the premises properly,” he said in an email.

The waiver describes itself as “a complete and unconditional release of all liability to the greatest extent allowed by law.” It requires volunteers to acknowledge, “I understand that I am giving up substantial rights, including my right to sue,” while paradoxically making them promise to reimburse the county for any legal actions they might bring against the county.

Honsal

Late last month, Segal sent an email to Sheriff William Honsal, expressing her objections to the waiver and telling him that it will drive away some of the facility’s best volunteers. At least a dozen other volunteers have sent similar messages to Honsal, county supervisors or both, she said. The Outpost has reviewed a number of these emails.

One, sent to Honsal by volunteer Christina Paleno Ericksen, says, “Our shelter provides a vital link to what makes us a civil society — care for creatures who have been neglected or abandoned and cannot care for themselves.”

Honsal wrote back, saying, “I understand that the new volunteer liability form has caused frustration among some of our long-term volunteers. Please know that I understand that frustration, and that your feedback has been heard.”

His email goes on to say that the county will not automatically deny claims brought by volunteers who’ve signed the waiver.

“Each situation will continue to be reviewed and processed through the County’s normal claims procedures, including those involving potential negligence,” he says. “The purpose of the waiver is to protect the County and by extension, the shelter and its programs, from unfounded or unjustifiable claims, while ensuring that everyone clearly understands the nature of their volunteer service.”

The county’s Human Resources Department produced a Frequently Asked Questions document for volunteers to review. It says, “Waivers are standard practice for cities and counties throughout California,” adding, “It’s not about blame or fine print — it’s about being transparent.”

If a volunteer is injured on or by county property, the FAQ document says the situation will be “reviewed and addressed appropriately per County rules and procedures.”

It goes on to say that formal language is necessary because the waiver is a legal document designed “to meet insurance and risk management requirements.” Furthermore, it is similar to waivers used “across California for volunteer programs involving animals, outdoor work, or community service.”

The FAQ responses strike a placating tone.

“We appreciate that you are taking the time to read it thoroughly and ask these important questions before signing,” it says. “[T]his underlines your serious commitment to volunteering.”

We compared the Sheriff’s Office’s liability waiver with a few others. It is indeed quite similar to the one required of volunteers at Cal Poly Humboldt (link), which says “this document is written to be as broad and inclusive as legally permitted by the State of California.” CPH’s waiver likewise makes volunteers promise not to sue over the conditions of the premises where they work.

But other agencies are less restrictive. Mendocino County, for example, requires volunteers to fill out an application, but it doesn’t require them to sign a liability waiver. 

Humboldt County Public Information Specialist Cati Gallardo said the county has several different volunteer waivers that are tailored to specific volunteer programs. 

“Whether a volunteer is participating in a lower risk activity, like helping at library events, or a higher risk activity, such as working at the animal shelter, they are asked to sign the appropriate waiver, so they understand the typical risks associated with their role,” Gallardo explained.

Last week, Lt. Jesse Taylor with the Humboldt County Sheriff’s Office told the Outpost via email that more than 70 animal shelter volunteers have signed the waiver. [CORRECTION: Taylor was referring to volunteers from across multiple Sheriff’s Office programs, not just the animal shelter.]

A few of the volunteers we interviewed mentioned a serious incident from last year in which a volunteer was viciously attacked by a dog. His injuries required multiple surgeries, which were covered by the county’s workers’ compensation insurance, they said.

Mara said she asked county staff directly whether this new waiver was introduced in response to that incident and was told it was entirely unrelated.

We asked Gallardo whether the waiver was prompted by any legal action against the county, but her emailed reply to several questions didn’t address that one specifically.

The volunteers we spoke with said that their work at the shelter used to feel like a valuable gift to the community and to needy animals, but the waiver requirement has made them feel like they’re being exploited.

“It seems like if we were to sign something like that, then at least there should be adequate staffing and proper maintenance to actually make sure that the volunteers and everyone else there is safe,” volunteer Ana Zurawski said in a phone interview. 

“1 also feel it is inherently UNFAIR to expect the volunteers to provide free labor, often doing the same job as staff would, but not be covered for any accidents [and] not being willing to accept any liability,” said nine-year volunteer Ellen Monterie in a letter scanned and emailed to the Outpost.

Another volunteer, Danielle (who asked us not to use her last name), said the county’s liability waiver is probably not legally enforceable. “Case law pretty well establishes that public agencies can’t ask other people to be liable for their negligence,” she said.

Regardless, the county has shown no signs of backing away from the requirement. The note below is now posted in the volunteer room at the shelter.

###

This story was originally published by CalMatters. Sign up for their newsletters.

###

California State University’s trustees will vote tomorrow on whether to increase how much the system’s 22 campus presidents and other senior executives earn, potentially paving the way for up to 15% in annual incentive-based raises paid for by philanthropic funds and base salaries that reflect how much presidents at similar universities earn.Exact numbers aren’t available; those will be revealed during tomorrow morning’s board meeting. Committee members will discuss the matter and decide on whether to advance the idea during a scheduled vote before noon. The full board will vote on the measure in the afternoon. The plan will kick in the next year or two. No executives will receive raises under the proposed plan this year.Several hundred unionized staff and faculty rallied outside the board of trustees meeting today, raging against the proposed executive raises at a time of budget austerity, layoffs and program cuts.

“I am mad,” said Erin Foote, a union board member for California State Employees Union, during the rally. The union represents 35,000 office and student workers. The union is in a dispute with the system over additional raises of roughly 3%. “We are going to knock the doors of our legislators so hard there will be holes in them until they stand with us in their budget negotiations,” she said, and vowed to organize for a governor who’d replace Cal State’s chancellor and appoint more union-friendly trustees.Average base pay for campus presidents currently is $453,000, ranging from $370,000 to more than $500,000, system data show.Under the compensation plan, raises to executive base pay would be part of overall wage increases for Cal State workers. That’s in addition to the 15% incentive-based bump to base pay executives would be eligible for.The criteria for receiving the 15% increases hasn’t been finalized, said the system’s interim chief financial officer, Patrick Lenz, in an interview last week. The chancellor’s office will need a year or two to work on that, he said.

The plan would depart from Cal State’s previous standard of capping base pay of presidents at a salary that’s no more than 10% above what their predecessors made. That plan, last updated 18 months ago, “inappropriately prevents the CSU from offering competitive compensation” to presidents who can lead large universities, the chancellor’s office staff wrote for the board meeting agenda item.

High-ed landscape in turmoil

The overhaul comes at a time when the system is hurting for cash and is also contending with epochal challenges to higher education as the Trump administration seeks to claw back billions in funding to universities and challenge long-held academic freedoms at campuses.

Last month Cal State pushed through initial hesitation to seek a $144 million zero-interest loan from California lawmakers, a financing deal the Legislature permitted to compensate for an equally sized cut to the system’s state support this year. System leaders say they want to use the money to offer pay raises to unionized workers and other staff, including senior executives.

And Cal State is expecting smaller increases in state support than lawmakers initially signalled. The Legislature intends to increase state spending for Cal State in 2026-27 by just $101 million — far lower than previous promises from Gov. Gavin Newsom of about $250 million.

That’s upset some system trustee members, who say they OK’d raises for workers — many who went on strike for higher pay — and other spending increases based on those promises.

Cal State explains need for plan

In explaining the increased executive compensation proposal, a senior Cal State official said few individuals have the experience and skill set to run campuses with budgets in the hundreds of millions of dollars.

“We want people in these positions who will ensure that a campus’s fiscal condition is spot on, that they’re trying to meet enrollment challenges, that they’re dealing with the overwhelming fact that the state’s going to be hard pressed to invest in higher education over the next couple of years, and the federal government is decimating us,” said Lenz.“These are the people that we need to come in and help us get through these really tough times,” he added.

Cal State in the last four years increased staff and faculty pay by 17%, Chief Human Resources Officer Frank Hurtarte told CalMatters last week. He said campus presidents saw a 7% raise in that time span.The faculty union calculates that presidential pay has grown 81% in the past two decades even as inflation grew 63%.While typical executive pay is several times what it is for faculty and staff, the vast majority of the system’s spending goes toward pay for workers who aren’t executives — $5.6 billion, or 73% of the system’s budget, wrote Jason Maymon, a Cal State spokesperson, in an email.Executives — the systemwide chancellor, campus presidents and vice chancellors in the central office — collectively earn $18 million, or .25% of the Cal State operating budget, Maymon wrote when asked. That’s about as much as the chancellor’s office cut from its budget this year, part of a systemwide effort to slash costs, including letting go of some lecturers.

Hurtarte pointed out that nationally about 30% to 40% of campus presidents left their jobs in the past 24 months. Cal State has six campuses with president vacancies, he noted. There’s both a lot of churn in the campus presidential job market and competition to fill vacancies.Margarita Berta-Ávila, president of the California Faculty Association, which represents 29,000 members, said in an interview that the executives have mismanaged state and tuition money and don’t deserve raises anyway. Some faculty don’t earn enough to afford rent in expensive cities, she said.

“It’s unconscionable that they’re even talking about (the raises) when you got people living in cars,” she said. She’s also upset that leadership at Cal State Los Angeles shared faculty names and other personal information with the federal government as part of an investigation into alleged antisemitism. The union has sued the Cal State board of trustees.

Pay plan details

Executive compensation under the proposed plan would have four components: base pay, standard executive health and retirement benefits plus housing and car perks for presidents, a new deferred compensation plan and the possibility of the annual pay rising by as much as 15% after a performance review.

While the base pay, like much of Cal State’s budget, would be paid with tuition and state revenue, the extra 15% would be funded with campus philanthropic efforts. Each university has a fundraising arm and they’d be expected to raise the money to supplement presidents’ pay, Lenz said.That fundraising money will also go toward the new deferred compensation program, basically an additional retirement account for executives at nonprofit or governmental organizations, such as universities.Cal State wouldn’t be alone in paying campus leaders with private funds. At the University of California, several campus heads, called chancellors, have a portion of their salaries paid with outside funds.

“Compensation decisions must also be fiscally prudent, align with the CSU’s public mission, and be made within the constraints of available funding and budget priorities,” the agenda item says.Under this plan the systemwide chancellor will propose raises each November for board approval.

The new compensation plan seeks to better attract and retain campus presidents by offering new presidents and other executives a base salary that reflects what peer universities pay and the skills the candidate brings. Those peer institutions include the public college and university systems in New York, Texas State University and the UC, Maymon wrote.

Under the current policy, raises for incumbents are also no higher than 10%. They kick in only after a satisfactory employee review and an analysis of whether the executive was underpaid relative to other presidents across the country. This approach “constrains competitiveness and adds administrative burden,” the agenda item says. The 10% cap for incumbents would also sunset in favor of the eligibility for annual 15% incentive pay.

Today was an historic day, friends. Two and a half years after Humboldt officials posed with those goofy golden shovels at the groundbreaking ceremony for the long-planned Indianola Undercrossing, LoCO finally got to live the dream: cruising a beater ‘99 Mazda Miata — top down, naturally — across the freshly opened southbound lanes of the project while listening to Redbone’s “Come and Get Your Love” (mostly drowned out by the wind).

All of this on the same day the House voted to release the Epstein files? Wowza. We livin’.

Anyway, that’s done. Take in a few seconds of Humboldt Bay from a slightly higher vantage point than you’re used to seeing it in the clip above and dream about your own trip. 

PREVIOUSLY:

• Construction of Indianola Undercrossing and Other Safety Corridor Improvements Set to Begin This Spring
• 75 Trees Cut Down Along the Arcata-Eureka Safety Corridor in Preparation for Indianola Undercrossing Construction
• Caltrans Breaks Ground on Indianola Undercrossing and Half Signal at Airport Road
• Caltrans Completes Phase 1 of Indianola Undercrossing Project; New Traffic Restrictions to Take Effect Next Week
• Underpass Update! Caltrans Issues Video Update/Explainer on Those Big Pillars They’ve Built Near Indianola