Roanoke Times
Copyright (c) 1995, Landmark Communications, Inc.
DATE: SUNDAY, December 18, 1994 TAG: 9502100008
SECTION: CURRENT PAGE: NRV2 EDITION: NEW RIVER VALLEY
SOURCE: DEAN ANDY SWIGER
DATELINE: LENGTH: Long
This is the worst time in the life of the college. We are hurt and perplexed by public criticism. We are shocked by the unending loss of funds with which to do our work.
This college has begrudgingly wound its way through five years of excessive budget cuts and has arrived at a crossroads. The outcome of a request to the governor and the General Assembly to restore nearly $3 million to the university's budget for research and extension plus a buyout offer to tenured faculty will send us either to a deeper and darker valley or begin the climb upward.
I want each faculty, staff and student in the college to share with me the acrid taste of an uncertain future - of a college with a diminished capability to serve the state and to serve science and our professional societies.
Cuts in state funding have persisted for six years and still the state's finances remain difficult. For the first time, we may also face severe cuts in federal funds. Just last week, the governor took steps to further reduce the number of state employees - and the beat goes on.
If we do not get requested funding to preserve essential programs, the very character of the college will change. We will have to reduce to levels that do not serve all of our expectations and our clients' expectations.
In 1989, our college, including extension and the experiment station, spent $50 million in state funds and employed 1,800 people. The first cuts to higher education began in January 1990. Of that $50 million, only $38 million remains.
In October 1990, 62 staff across the college, including 10 extension agents, lost their jobs. This action was very traumatic and was the only time we forced people out of their jobs. We later transferred 38 extension agents to different offices. We lost many colleagues through early retirement. We cut back on the personnel of all units by attrition, eliminated administrative and administrative support positions, and joined two small departments with larger ones.
This year, the valley grew darker and deeper. We have now lost more than $12 million since 1989 and reduced our faculty and staff by 280 positions. Despite drastically reducing operations, we still had to ask the university to lend us money to pay salaries.
Now, with the strong support of President Paul Torgersen, Virginia Tech is requesting nearly $3 million be returned to the permanent base budget of Virginia Cooperative Extension and the Virginia Agricultural Experiment Station.
Obviously, what we are going through can devastate morale. I am proud of the extraordinary response made to cope with the devastating losses of faculty and staff colleagues and operations support. New requirements and policies seem to be heaped on us with each new day. Faculty are upset and discouraged because they feel undervalued and unappreciated.
How will we handle next year's further reductions? Without a successful budget amendment, we must rely on the loss of tenured faculty through a buyout and other attrition to reduce our salary costs. Should the buyout not attract enough faculty, a reduction in force will likely become a reality.
So what does this mean? Certainly, the budget request would allow us to preserve the essential programs that remain. As we function with severely diminished resources, we will emphasize research, teaching and extension programs that serve Virginia agriculture, youth, families, communities and the general public and preserve natural resources and protect the environment.
We will stress quality of programs.
We must develop an attitude of flexibility and willingness to do what is asked. For example, we will need an animal nutritionist who can move freely among different types of animals in his or her work. Faculty and staff will serve all three of the college's missions: teaching, extension and research. We will continue to emphasize the constructive, synergistic relationships of teaching with research.
Why, then, should the state invest in us? Merely that we lost $12 million is not good enough. Why are the college, the Agricultural Experiment Station and Cooperative Extension a bargain for Virginia? The answer is both economic development and the quality of life.
In Virginia, agriculture employs one in six of the work force and generates nearly one-eighth of the gross state product. The potential is great for further economic growth. Investments in agricultural research, teaching and extension in Virginia have return rates of around 50 percent - remarkable for any industry. Our university research is the engine that makes our industries thrive. We are a good investment.
Our contributions to youth development are monumental, with 120,000 young men and women involved in 4-H through 107 county and city offices.
Perhaps our greatest contributions will come in our role as a national leader in research in sustainable agriculture. We are developing techniques to reduce chemical fertilizer and pesticide use that will result in a safer environment. We are a good investment.
President Torgersen has said that Virginia Tech will become the premier land-grant university of the 21st century. Agriculture and life sciences will continue to be the bedrock of this great, land-grant university.
Our commitment to the state remains strong though our ability to serve is threatened. I pledge to work both to convince this state that we are indeed a great asset while working to increase the effectiveness and productivity of this college's faculty and staff.
Andy Swiger is dean of the College of Agriculture and Life Sciences at Virginia Tech.
by CNB