"Greed is the new Crimson. No Layoffs!"

This afternoon, FAS Dean Michael Smith hosted a town hall meeting on FAS finances in Sanders Theater. He opened the event with a PowerPoint presentation on the state of the budget. He said that the budget for Academic Year (AY) 2010-11 will have a starting deficit of $220 million and in order to make up that deficit we must "not just resize but reshape and revitalize" the university.

To do this, the FAS administration says it has already achieved $4 million in cuts and has another $73 million planned. Dean Smith did not describe in any detail where exactly those planned cuts would take place. However, he did say that in assessing the FAS budget, expenses were categorized into three "buckets": (1) expenses that can be made up for by better use of resources, (2) expenses that if cut will have a "challenging or negative effect on some people", and (3) expenses that if cut would have a negative effect on Harvard's educational mission. He said that cuts would then be coming from the first and second buckets.

What was most striking about the meeting was the narrow scope in which the administration seemed to see Harvard's educational mission. Lowell House Master, Professor Diana Eck, asked why house staffs were being cut when they were such a central part of the educational experience at Harvard. An HCL staffer asked why the library system was not being valued as an integral part to the educational mission of Harvard. I asked about the exclusion of service employees (janitors, dining hall workers, security guards) from town hall meetings when they are responsible for the safety, health, and comfort of every student on campus.

Despite our certain differences on how Harvard should move forward, the overall tone of the event reflected the frustration and exclusion that members from all parts of the university feel in addressing the budget crisis. All accept that cuts will need to come from somewhere, but the lack of transparency thus far has raised fear and suspicion throughout the university - pitting workers against one another and department heads competing for cash. One audience member even asked for Dean Smith to clarify rumors that certain insiders were being exempt from the hiring freeze. Additionally, when I asked Dean Smith whether high level administrators would be taking pay cuts like at Stanford, Wash U, and UPenn he said that he is essentially taking a pay cut (since he is not getting his raise this year and the effects of inflation). He then quickly added that would need more than "a few dollars" to make up the deficit.

The irony is rich (pun intended): when an amount of money is coming from his salary it has no real impact, but when a similar amount is used to pay the entire salary of a low-income worker it suddenly becomes so significant that it is holding back the educational mission of the university.