Cal State trustees approve two-step tuition increase
Dozens of protesters, including some faculty, staff and students from several of the university's 23 campuses, protested outside the trustees' meeting in Long Beach, hoisting colorful balloons and signs.
Inside, students asked trustees to reject the fee hike, saying it placed an unfair financial burden on their shoulders, coming on top of a 5% hike this fall and a 32% fee increase last year.
The two-step increase will raise undergraduate fees 5%: $105 for the rest of the school year, and an additional 10% -- or about $440 -- for next year.
The fees will raise an additional $27 million this year and $121.5 million next year.
Trustees and several Cal State university presidents said the new revenue was essential to maintain the quality of education, add classes and increase enrollment in the face of reduced state support in previous years.
-- Carla Rivera in Long Beach
Photo: California State trustee William Hauck, center, during a meeting to vote on raising tuition at California State University. Credit: Katie Falkenberg / For The Times








This way parents only feel the pain TWICE?
Posted by: Still_Walking_Point | November 10, 2010 at 11:15 AM
So sick of all these Cal state and UC students protesting. If you can't afford it, set a day aside like every other college student in the country and fill out a FAFSA, apply for financial aid and look for some scholarships!
I mean, come on! Any Cal State grad that takes out loans will be in far less debt than their private school counterparts. Quit your whining!
Posted by: Oh, Please! | November 10, 2010 at 11:15 AM
Just truly horrible news. They already raised tuition 37% in the last year. Don't they realize that tens of thousands of unemployed who are trying to find a new career have no way to pay for increases??? Cut all the members of the board of trustees salary by 37% and see how they like it! Boo!
Posted by: Gail | November 10, 2010 at 11:16 AM
Sorry, kids. There is no Santa Clause. The Nanni state can't give you anything for free.
If schools are expensive, what makes people think adding bureaucrats and their pensions makes things cheap?
Posted by: Chase | November 10, 2010 at 11:18 AM
well, this is what the writers of prop 209 wanted, to raise the cost of education to get us back to the status quo where only the rich will have access to education and training.
Posted by: Lloyd | November 10, 2010 at 11:20 AM
Decreased state funding? Why should access to higher education be about money rather than merit? Because our country was brainwashed in the better-dead-than-red era and the manipulators scare us about BigGov. The kings, privileged and Cardinals never wanted the masses to be educated. / If you belong to the working class and want the details on how you are being "sucker-punched", there are 2, good articles on the internet: 1) Welcome to the Plutocracy, by Bill Moyers 2) The Laws and Policies of the U.S. are for Sale, by Johann Hari // Jean Clelland-Morin
Posted by: Jean Clelland-Morin | November 10, 2010 at 11:23 AM
Feel sorry for students. Blame the government for giving away so many grants to students who really do not belong in school. Students quit because they do not care since the money coming from grants is free. Since it is not out of their pockets, no lose. Students who do pay out of pocket may find it hard and will hate to see them quit. I will feel sorry for future generations. They will not really be able to go to school. Government should stop giving away too many free grants or have a clause stating that "if the student quits, the student is liable and will re-imburse the government.
Posted by: vochoa0371 | November 10, 2010 at 11:27 AM
This is why people fail to vote. Instead of providing education for free to all citizens our officials jack up the already outrageous price.
Then after practicing economic vast economic segregation of potential scholars they whine and wonder why Japan and China can accomplish so much and we can not.
Posted by: jim sadler | November 10, 2010 at 11:32 AM
How unfair. These students will have to pay to get College degrees costing several thousands of dollars for a few years, which could earn them millions of dollars in income over a lifetime.
Technically, they are in school to get an education concerning subjects they are ignorant of. Why do we listen to these whiners?
Posted by: Aces928 | November 10, 2010 at 11:36 AM
No surprise there... Teachers union raises kicking in and retiree pension increases...
Posted by: astar2b | November 10, 2010 at 11:55 AM
The protesting faculty can take a pay-cut. California has shoo-ed away business. Now, the youngsters pay the price.
How's that "Hopey-Changey" thing workin' for you? Keep voting for Liberals!!!
Posted by: Steven M. | November 10, 2010 at 11:57 AM
I love it ! Enjoy the fruits of rampant immigration, expanding social programs, and public service unions in control of Kalifornia.
Your mess kids, you gotta fix it.
I am soooo sure Jerry MoonBeam Brown, Barbara Boxer, Diane Feinstein, et al will have great solutions.
Posted by: Irma | November 10, 2010 at 12:00 PM
CAL State trustees are failing to tell everyone the real reason for the increases while the rest of the country is takinga hair cut. The resason: To maintain the high wages being paid, not only to the administrators but to the instructors. Huge benefit costs and pensions that are double everone else's is the main problem. They didn't want to take a pay cut so they passed on the costs to the students. Nice job CAL State! England is right around the corner!
Posted by: TaterSalad | November 10, 2010 at 12:02 PM
Let's go ahead and extent tax cuts to the rich all the while raising tuition on education so less people can afford higher education. An uneducated populace is the governments goal. C'mon people, grab a balloon and let 'em know how you won't stand for this!
Posted by: socalcomment | November 10, 2010 at 12:13 PM
given that a very high percentage of CSU students (CSLA is, I think, somewhere in the 90 percentile) are on one form or another of public financial assistance, who is really paying for this fee increase ????
Posted by: tennyson | November 10, 2010 at 12:16 PM
Gee, this tuition rate hike is less than the cost of student's iPhones.
What were they thinking??
Posted by: Sick and Tired in LA | November 10, 2010 at 12:17 PM
LA Times needs to keep an eye on whose salaries from CSU get raised after this tuition hike. Thanks.
Posted by: Felix | November 10, 2010 at 12:19 PM
What percent reduction in the safe and secure pensions for professors was agreed to before hiking tuition? And do the professors at Cal State campuses still get to retire with those big pensions at agre 60 or less?
Posted by: Pensions Again | November 10, 2010 at 12:20 PM
How many of the students were texting during the protest? As someone who will graduate from a CSU (Fresno State) in May, I know that while many, many students struggle to pass their classes, they are Rhodes Scholars when it comes to texting.
Posted by: Michael Kincheloe | November 10, 2010 at 12:21 PM
Wow- we gave Weg Mitman a $200 million tax cut to make bad TV commercials where she dons a George Washington wig and pretends to be a citizen or we can screw over everyone who is trying to get an education!
Posted by: BluePhildog | November 10, 2010 at 12:27 PM
Hey kids: I've got the answer. We'll raise your parents' tax rate to 50% and eliminate tuition altogether. Just think, school will be free. Only problem is that you'll have to do your homework by the light of the trash-fire burning next to the car in which your whole family lives. But on the bright side, when you finish a class you can burn your books and notes to keep warm.
Posted by: Joe | November 10, 2010 at 12:31 PM
What we have here is the crop the was sowed by Prop 13, a champagne social welfare system built upon an off-brand soft drink revenue stream, an out of control pension system, and a general cost of living that comes with living the California dream. Unlike the feds, the state has to (more or less) live within their means. Until there is a meaningful and lobbyist-free reduction of expenses and increase in revenues, there will be a special interest of the week protesting that somebody took away what was important to them.
At the same time, I'm sorry... $105 increase for the spring semester--the protesters could have earned that much at a "living wage" job in the time they spent outside protesting the tuition increase.
Posted by: jim | November 10, 2010 at 12:56 PM
In economic times like this there is no way that tuition to colleges should be more expensive. If anything tuitions need to go down making a higher education more accessible to all Americans. Nothing should be more expensive now. All across the board prices and fees should be going down in the public sector.
Posted by: trajan | November 10, 2010 at 01:05 PM
Ouch.
Posted by: Jenna | November 10, 2010 at 01:06 PM
hahaha i was actually surprised to see random conservative Obama-makes-me-sad commentators on this article. cutting education costs is bipartisan. our middle class is gone people, million dollars for a degree??? youve gotta be kidding me. i have a degree from Occidental college and was almost homeless in LA. there are no jobs, and the education makes you a slave to debt and mindless employment since you cant take any risks or make more investments while you are so buried at such a young age. guess where i live? MEXICO. i opened my own business within 10 months and am happier than i have ever been in the USA. and that never would have been possible for me in the now non-capitalist USA. as for my college debt? ill leave that behind for you morons to add to your deficit since it was such a HEIST!!!!!! keep investing in war and not education, that way we can turn our downfall into a complete and utter collapse of yet another stupid empire in the history books.
Posted by: Melanie | November 10, 2010 at 01:07 PM