“Share Sacrifice Needed at SMC”

Dear Surf Santa Monica editor -
Your article on the Santa Monica Community College struggle to balance its budget while preserving educational opportunities caught my attention. The Board of Trustees seems determined to abolish 10 vocational programs, and lay off dozens of classified staff tomorrow night.
As an adjunct English as a Second Language instructor at Santa Monica College, I see the ground level injustice of additional "invisible" proposed cuts that will silently close hundreds of classes, and kick thousands of students out of the college. My entire department, like several other departments, will be abolished without even a Board of Trustees vote.
These cutbacks will have immediate consequences.
Some of my students who get up at 5:30 AM, work one – and often two - lousy jobs, and attend practical English classes in evening are being sacrificed. The nannies who care for our babies, the valets who park our cars, the busboys who clear our tables, and maids who make our beds are being locked out of Santa Monica College. Many immigrants and refugees already have very difficult lives, and this action adds more burdens and takes away education opportunities from hundreds, probably thousands of people.
The Santa Monica Board of Trustees, who seldom visit classes and perceive themselves as looking down from the mountain, claim these actions are necessary and wise. They are wrong.
Perhaps they miss the big picture because they are cushioned by privilege, abstract language, and a lack of imagination. Perhaps they also lack sympathy since they have chosen to protect so many administrator’s jobs, often at over $100,000 per year, instead of keeping classes open for immigrants and refugees.

I know those words sound harsh, but those are the simple consequences of their decisions. Once again, the few and powerful are making a “tough” decision to protect other powerful and well-paid associates from salary cuts and reassignments into classroom while laying off classified workers, dumping adjunct faculty by dozens and dozens, eliminating hundreds of classes and shutting the doors to thousands of students. Oh, yeah, they are also spending more money on a new Madison Arts center and continuing expensive remodeling of buildings. Does that sound fair, reasonable, or wise?
Let's be real. The last census showed that 40% of the people in L.A. County speak another language at home. The adult students in the Non-credit ESL need to learn English for work, school, and survival. They don't really care about getting a piece of paper or a grade on paper. They just want the information so they can go from busboys and maids to waiters and salespeople. The Administration plans to shut the down on these people, and tell them to go elsewhere.
Is the Board going to combine the non-credit ESL and credit ESL programs? No. They are going to abolish the non-credit ESL program for struggling immigrants and refugees - and cut the lucrative for-credit ESL classes for visiting foreign students by a third. Therefore, the 2400 registered students in the non-credit ESL will left out in the cold. Couldn't the Board at least combine the departments and "only" cut the combined department like other departments? Or are immigrants and refugees just easy targets?
Perhaps SMCC Administrators and Boardmembers honestly believe that immigrants and refugees don't really need to learn English, immigrants don't want essential language classes, or immigrants are not full members of the Santa Monica community. Fine. They can believe whatever they want. Would they please, however, have the decency to vote publicly for the brutal cuts that they believe are neccessary, fair, and enlightened?
From my perspective, the Board of Trustees is putting the greed of a comfortable few ahead of the needs of the many. A community college, like a society, can be judged by how it treats the least advantaged not the most privileged. Just as Bush's tax cuts favor the very wealthy and Davis' budget has a special sensitivity to campaign donors, the SMC Board of Trustees seems to be a bit blind or tone deaf to the pleas of working class and immigrant students and far, far too sensitive to the pleas of overpaid administrators.
May I ask an impolite question. Why does Santa Monica Community College need so many administrators? Why does SMC have one of the worst ratios of administrators to fulltime faculty in the state?  Why can't SMC just be an average California community college and reassign several more administrators to the classroom?
The rejection of this option seems particularly insulting since all these great administrative minds have come up with no ideas except cutting services to working class students and other vulnerable members of the community. How exactly are these administrators earning their salary? How many of the estimated 10,000 scheduled to lose educational opportunities are being kicked out to keep surplus administrators in very high-paying jobs?
Classified workers, faculty, and the Academic Senate have all offered budget proposals and alternatives - and many individuals get the distinct impression that the administration is not really open to suggestions.
For instance, the Academic Senate’s sensible suggestion to prepare three budgets – worse, bad, and tolerable – have consistently been ignored. Why does the Administration seem to be in such a rush to assume the worst and make unequal cuts?
The elected Board of Trustees, not just Governor Davis, has made critical decisions that were both short-sighted and negative for Santa Monica Community College. They are maintaining high reserve levels for a rainy day. If cutting $15 million isn't a rainy day, then what would a rainy day look like?
Perhaps there are no victories to be won on Monday’s Board of Trustees meeting. There are certainly points to be made, alternatives to be explored, and reasonable compromises found that call for shared sacrifice from members of the community college.

Of course, SMC faces a terrible budget crisis. Whose fault is that? It’s not the students, classified staff, or adjunct faculty’s fault. Yet we are being asked to pay the price.

 

Back to top