At Cañada, faculty from all divisions and various departments suspended business as usual and taught about the cuts—how they fit into the broader budgetary commitments of the state and federal government and how they are affecting students, staff, and faculty here on campus. Some faculty stayed with their own classes and used their curriculum to elucidate the cuts. Math professors taught statistics by examining Cañada’s budget numbers; Reading instructors taught research skills by bringing students into the library to find information about the cuts for themselves.

Meanwhile, other faculty and students pooled classes and gathered in larger classrooms to hear panels of speakers and participate in open forums on the cuts. Eight-o’clock panels on both days drew 70-80 students to hear student Jose Antonio Perez, Librarian David Patterson, and Professor Robert Ovetz speak about the growing student movement, the history of community colleges, and the neoliberal economic agenda.

The highlight of the teach-in on Wednesday was a mid-morning panel that drew close to 200 people—the room was so full, some classes could not get in at all. Library staff worker Valeria Estrada voiced her frustration about not having the resources to help students as she has in the past. Counselor Gloria Darafshi spoke about cuts to counseling, EOPS, and DSPS that have reduced staff, funds, and programs that help first generation college students to succeed. Sociology professor Robert Ovetz spoke about the state’s use of the crisis to decimate and privatize public education. San Francisco State University students Jasmine LeBlanc and Jerald Reodica talked about why they decided to form a General Assembly and occupy a building to protest cuts and fee hikes at the CSUs.

The last event of the teach-in was a showing of Estamos Aui!, a documentary about the 2006 strike at UC Santa Cruz, with an introduction by Javier Garay. Garay noted that March 4th had the potential to be a history-making event, but that without ongoing organization, the student movement could go the way of the immigrant rights movement: after the brilliant “Day without an Immigrant” in 2006 the movement was driven down as racist attacks on immigrants continued. “It’s not just what happens on March 4th,” said Garay, “but what happens after.”

At Skyline more than five hundred students turned out on February 3rd for a teach-in that included:

Is there a better way?

Where Initial Proposals Appear to Be Aiming

The roll-out of initial proposals dealing with the massive budget cuts facing the District and it’s three colleges has begun. The most well developed proposal is that currently being debated at College of San Mateo. This initial administrative proposal focuses on cutting courses, departments and programs. While elimination of two CSM administrative positions has also been formally announced, and other cuts have been alluded to, major emphasis has been placed on cutting classes, which in many cases results in elimination of entire departments and programs.

At the state level, it is already clear that the current state budget plan for fiscal year ’09-‘10 will not work and that, despite budget plans already in place, there will indeed be an additional significant budget shortfall for the current year. In addition, conservative estimates project a three year budget shortfall of $35 billion dollars for the state of California with no certainty as to when the budget situation might improve. It appears that ongoing budget deficits will plague community colleges for the foreseeable future.

In the face of this daunting situation it is reasonable to ask if the still emerging District budget reduction plan is the right way to go. Judging by the document distributed to faculty at CSM, it appears that the key District budget reduction strategy focuses primarily on cutting classes.

What Should Be the Guiding Rationale For Budget Cuts?

As one considers which criteria should be used in determining cuts, it is important to keep in mind the underlying core mission of the community college system. The term “core mission” is being thrown around a lot these days to justify cuts. This term apparently means different things to different people.

Probably the best definition of what is meant by “core mission” can be derived from the initial movement to establish community colleges in the first place. Prior to Proposition 13, community colleges were locally funded and locally controlled. As the community college movement progressed in California, local communities wanted their own open-entry colleges whose mission it would be to offer a college level curriculum, including occupational and vocational programs, to local residents. From this perspective the core mission of the three colleges in the SMCCCD is to offer college level classes and programs to local residents of San Mateo County.

Given that this is the historical core mission of our three colleges it makes sense that everything should be done to protect the college level curriculum, including vocational and occupational programs.

The apparent initial strategy being utilized by the District, as evidenced in proposed cuts at CSM, reflects the exact opposite of the above stated rationale. Rather than being the last to go, classes and programs are the first to go. A track record of several semesters of significant cuts has already been established. Over the past several semesters cuts have been made at all three colleges that have focused on eliminating course offerings.

In addition, faculty are the only group to receive no recent pay raises. Indeed, in fall of 2007, the Board of Trustees increased pay for District administrators by approving a new five step pay schedule for administrators as recommended by District administration. At the time, AFT pointed out to the Board that major budget cuts were looming and yet administrators were still given significant pay increases. Faculty have also been told that no senior administrative positions are slated for elimination at the District Office. At this point it is appropriate to wonder to what degree our Board and administration support academic programs and classes as opposed to other priorities.

Are there other alternatives?

While it will, in all probability, still be necessary to cut classes, it is absolutely clear that the impact on courses and programs can be significantly reduced through implementation of strategies other than cutting classes. In addition, should budget cuts continue into the future, as appears to be the case, the current strategy of pruning back the existing curriculum will not work if the colleges are to remain viable. Of course, if cuts continue to be severe, nothing will be protected. But based on the original mandate that established the SMCCCD and the core mission of our District, it seems clear that everything should be done to try to protect the college level curriculum.

A well established, well researched strategy for dealing with change in the face of crisis involves the distinction between first-order and second-order change (please go to the National Academy for Academic Leadership website for more information, www.thenationalacademy.org/ready/change.html). What this research shows is that first order change strategies, essentially the pruning back approach, work when dealing with limited change. However, in the face of massive cuts, larger scale second order strategies are more effective. First-order change strategies will not work over the long run in the face of big, ongoing deficits. Second-order change focuses on saving dollars by first looking at structural reorganization and centralization strategies. The focus of second-order change is on doing things differently. So far, all of the emphasis of proposed cuts has involved first-order change that focuses on cutting back on what is already being done.

Examples of Possible Second-Order Change Strategies

Before proceeding to cut classes and programs vital to the core mission as defined above, every effort should be made to enact second-order change by focusing on structural reorganization and centralization. Clearly, some of the possible choices in this category cannot be accomplished given the short timeline involved in finalizing District cuts. However, a significant amount of money could likely be saved by implementing those second-order changes that can be accomplished by Fall of 2010. What follows is a brief list of possibilities for consideration. These possibilities, if enacted, would need to be costed out and vetted by all key constituencies before final decisions are made. It is highly likely that other second-order change ideas might emerge as a result of more focused discussion and brainstorming.

It is important to say that there is no joy in proposing the following possibilities. The situation is indeed so dire that we are cutting into bone no matter which way we go. But cut we must, inevitably dictating that any way you look at it, important components will need to be eliminated or redesigned.

The following possibilities are meant primarily as examples designed to illustrate second-order thinking and designed to show that there are many ways to go once you start thinking “outside the box.” They are intended as examples to explore and are not meant as firm recommendations.

1. Centralize student services by creating one stop student service centers on each campus. Eliminate or integrate free standing programs (Skyline is already doing this).
2. Reorganize District Office operations. Consolidate and integrate functions. Keep in mind that the District Office budget is equivalent to that of Cañada College.
3. Eliminate Division Dean positions. Have VPIs with two full time, high level administrative assistants handle Division Dean duties.
4. Eliminate several high level District Office administrative positions.
5. Consolidate financial aid operations. Have financial aid for the entire District handled by one central office.
6. Consolidate enrollment functions. Have enrollment for the three colleges handled by one central office.
7. Eliminate printed schedules. Print only a brief, “Guide to Online Registration.” Direct potential students who do not have internet access to campus computer registration terminals.
8. Relocate District Office staff and functions to the CSM campus. Rent out or sell the District Office site. Few remember that, at one time, we had no District Office; the District consisted of the three colleges and a rented District Office site in downtown San Mateo.

If even a few of these strategies prove possible literally millions of dollars might be saved. These dollars could then be devoted to saving sections of classes and important programs, all critical to the core mission of the District.

Inform Students

As word of impending cuts is getting out to students through word of mouth conversations it is apparent that there is a great deal of confusion, misunderstanding and understandable frustration among our student population.

Since students are our customers and the reason for our existence, a better job must be done of informing students and supporting them through this crisis. It is not enough to leave it to the good efforts of campus student government leaders to inform students. Our student leaders must be helped by administration to establish an effective process for informing our students about what is happening. A special effort must be made. Perhaps campus student convocations could be organized. An additional possibility would be to establish a special online site devoted to information sharing and dialogue about the budget reduction process as it continues to unfold.

Creative and Responsible Administration