PANIC: New Budget Cuts

There has been a lot of discussion the past week or two regarding the lack of "new student college deposits."

Vocabulary
New Student College Deposit - n - a $500 deposit that students pay to the school, showing their intent to attend St. Mary's. A student who makes this deposit generally attends the school, but some may "melt" and never attend.

The Issue
These deposits are a really good indicator of how many students are actually going to show up in August. This year the school got a lot of applications (in part due to the new Common Application, which makes applying to SMCM as easy as "checking a box") and the college accepted a good number of students. The issue is that not enough students have "accepted" St. Mary's as their choice, resulting in a lower than expected number of "new student college deposits."

Apparently this shortfall comes in the form of about 150~ less deposits than previous years (including last year, which already had a shortfall). The school was looking for around 124~ more in-state and 24~ more out of state students to submit these "new students college deposits," indicating their intent to attend SMCM.

The fallout
This represents, according to indicators, a budget shortfall of approximately $3.5Million.

(Math? 150~ x $23,000 = $3,500,000~)

This is, obviously, a lot of money. And it is going to have a big impact on several areas of campus (more on that later~) and departments and positions. Faculty and Staff had meetings this week where they were briefed with this new information, which has obviously upset many. The new budget (one where $3.5Million has been cut) is being taken to the Board of Trustees this Friday.

How did this happen?
Apparently (according to Anonymous [still don't know who that dude is but they seem to have a lot of opinions]) Urgo has blamed the lack of enrollment on "failures of facilities and faculty curriculum, but it has nothing to do with changes to admissions in the past two years." Could this be the ghost of Rich Edgar, haunting admissions and causing this to happen? Could this be the result of sacking Rich Edgar and Lisa Crowe last year?

"Failures of facilities and faculty curriculum" seems like a tough sell (hello, let's also take a moment to recognize that this quote may not necessarily be accurate nor correct). When students apply to a college, how much do they look into the specifics of the faculty and curriculum? I feel that there is only so much that a prospective student can know without actually sitting in on a classroom, which very few do (or maybe a lot do this, IDK). Does "the failures of facilities" refer to the various mold incidents over the past years (really decades...)? The "Mold Ship" got SMCM a ton of press #allpressisgoodpress.

What about admissions then? According to students working at the admissions office some "early admission" (I did this!) prospective students received their letters of admission until later than usual. Additionally, these students have stated that "counselors have been encouraged to go to private institutions rather than public."

But why? Could it be at the request of Maureen Silva, new (2010) Vice President for Advancement (AKA fundraising) for the college? It's no secret that more rich people go to private high schools, and rich people are probably more likely to give money to the college. Could this shift be part of this issue?

Theory: More public high school students view SMCM as a reach school, whereas more private high school students view SMCM as a safety school. This could explain the lack of students accepting their admission into SMCM. But this is just a theory, one based in stereotypes and assumptions.

Impact
So what does this impact? A lot of things. Less money means smaller budgets. According to the same Anonymous from above (who appears to be "in the know") and other "sources"the following may be cut

• No new staff positions
• No visiting professors
• No sabbaticals 
• Boyden Gallery will be closed 
• No cost of living adjustments for staff
• Staff job cuts
• Other cuts that will be made throughout the summer

 And a staff that once again feels like they have very little input.

Solution
Is there a solution? Maybe "don't fix what ain't broke" #southernsayings. 

The faculty is obviously upset. They want to delay the voting so that there can be faculty input.

Something clearly went wrong here.

You should be
Mad? Scared? Angry? Disappointed. This is all really disappointing and I hope it does not lead to further big changes. I really just want an explanation.

Note:
This is long. I did not proofread. Some of this information may be inaccurate. Comment with thoughts, corrections, etc. <3 br="">

Rich Edgar Follow Up, feat. PANIC

The recent post about Changes at Admissions (from a few days ago) resulted in a huge outpour of support for Rich Edgar, to the extent that a Change.org petition was created, asking that Rich be reinstated, which already has over 500 signatures.

Additionally, it seems that the removal of Rich and Lisa has sparked a PANIC among staff members, that they could be next.  This is evident from many staff members supporting the aforementioned petition, but not signing it to avoid being publicly associated.  And the following is a leaked (via Investigative Journalism ™) email which shows that the fear has even inhibited some staff members from initiating a going away party.

Faculty are generally safe from being fired, but staff are not.

That being the case, it would be helpful if one or two tenured faculty would sponsor a party for Rich and Lisa, determine a location, and then ask all of us  (staff included) to   bring little bits of this and that. I think so many of us would like to “be there” for Richard Lisa.

Are staff members overreacting, via this PANIC?  PANIC regarding whether or not hosting a party for Rich and Lisa could get them sacked as well?  Hard to say, but I don't blame them.  It seems pretty clear that this was done during the summer, weeks after Alumni Weekend so that students and alumni alike would have a diminished reaction towards the news.  The email above resulted in the following response

It's very sad that we have to fear being fired for attempting to honor respected and beloved colleagues, who have worked here for decades and deserve our support.  I suggest that one of the first things we take up in the fall is to rededicate ourselves to the "spirit of community" that is proclaimed in our mission statement.  A humane workplace is essential for all of us -- staff and faculty alike.

A response that is hard to argue with.  And granted, we don't know the whole situation inre: why Rich and Lisa were sacked, but any workplace where people are removed so easily is only going to create tension and PANIC among the employees.

Wonder what is gonna happen.  Lots of alumni in the comments on this blog and on the Change.org petition saying that they are gonna 'vote with their wallets'.

Also the bay net http://www.thebaynet.com/news/index.cfm/fa/viewstory/story_ID/28501 picked up the story...I think primarily using what I had already written.  And they referred to this as 'a student blog' LOLZ.

PAYCHECK PANIC

Recently [well, really a discussion that has been going on for awhile, and will continue to] a lot of discussion over the paychecks to staff [primarily grounds, maintenance, housekeeping, etc.] faculty and administrators.  Just gonna post some of the information/emails and not actually comment on it via it is a difficult situation.

Here is a Point News Article Terrorist newspaper article about the increase to administrative salaries of 15 administrators which Dr. Urgo later pointed out was semi inaccurate via there were increases to staff and faculty salaries as well (see email below).

It is particularly distressing to me to face external limitations on employee eligibility for salary increases. We will continue to work with legislators in Annapolis to broaden eligibility, and ultimately, to see an end to the state wage freeze.

This year, despite the state wage freeze, we have been able to work within state guidelines to make a number of salary increases effective in January 2012.  

Scheduled January 2012 Increases:

Faculty – 58

23 Assistant Professors

22 Associate Professors

13 Professors

Also, in January 2011, 40 tenure-track, assistant professors received increases.

Faculty adjustments listed here do not include salary increases that come as a result of promotions, tenure, and periodic reviews. Over 50 faculty members received this category of salary increase in 2011. Others are eligible for these increases in 2012.

Faculty Librarians – 2

Staff – 18

4 Athletics

4 President’s Cabinet

2 Business Office

2 Campus Technology Support Services

1 Academic Services

1 Advancement

1 Facilities

1 Financial Aid

1 Registrar’s Office

1 Waterfront

The student newspaper has a story this week with partial information about salaries on campus that I and others have found to be misleading, and unfortunate. I intend this email to help us all understand the issues we face regarding salary increases, and the progress we’ve made within state limitations. I am happy to meet with anyone, singly or in groups, to discuss the situation and the decisions we’ve implemented.

Joseph Urgo

President

St. Mary's College of Maryland

Only comment here that I want to make is that while positions such as athletics, president's cabinet, CTSS, and the various offices, none of these (other than the one facilities pay increase, which I could guess may have gone to Kevin Mercer [bless his soul, beautiful man]) are going towards the staff that the students are concerned about, those working for low(ish) hourly wages. 

So, there are some facts about this, primarily for the alumni readers.  Check out the article's comments, especially the 4chan troll, along with some insightful commentary. 

Oh and there was a reply to the Urgo all student email from above:

I agree with President Urgo’s statement that The Point News article is not totally accurate, but I disagree that it is “misleading” and “unfortunate.”  The salient message of the article is that the most poorly paid employees at SMCM are not getting raises.   In this message, the article is accurate, and tells a story that needs to be told. 

Matthew (25:29) said it millennia ago:

For to everyone who has, more shall be given, and he will have an abundance; but from the one who does not have, even what he does have shall be taken away.

So, how do we solve this problem within the constraints of the State’s mandate?  We have efforts under way to establish a Joe Carroll Staff Award, with a 1 of 1 match for an unnamed donor.  If you haven’t already contributed to that fund and can afford it, do so.  Your $1 is worth $2. 

But a once-a-year fund will not solve an endemic problem.

The Point News article mentioned support for establishing “a fund to reserve money until it would be legal to disperse among the staff.”  I, and I am sure many others, call on the President and other “operationally critical staff” to explore this and other creative solutions.  Let’s all be part of the solution, not the problem.

Not sure that we needed the religious quote, but it does bring up the issue of 'rich get richer, poor get poorer' along with other good points.  Hope this educated yall to some degree, please leave comments if I missed anything or am wrong about anything or if I am still unfunny etc. thank you

SEACREST OUT

Fundraiser to Benefit SMCM Staff TONIGHT

Check out this event to benefit SMCM staff  http://www.facebook.com/events/105929422856137/  on the facebook. 

Come to DPC at 5PM for a Holiday Dessert Party to raise money for staff bonuses (via they need more money) through donations that you can give at the event.  There will also be desserts to eat.  Also donate money.

Also there will be raffles for Campus Store gift cards and other rad stuff.

So check it out and support our staff (grounds, housekeeping, maintenance, and other staffs) with this event.