SDSU Controversy

In defense of the Day administration at SDSU, John Witherspoon (Commentary Sept. 13) argues that President Thomas Day was facing a 25% budget cut in two years; that Day was merely implementing the academic Senate’s restructuring document, and that Day was carrying out his concept of “what makes the university unique” through protecting graduate programs, research, diversity and recently hired professors. These statements are all essentially incorrect.

First, the CSU budget was not cut by 25% in two years. According to Steve McCarthy, Director of Public Affairs at the Chancellor’s Office, the CSU budget for 1990-91 was $1.691 billion; for 1991-92 it was $1.640 billion, and for 1992-93 is $1.517 billion. Thus, the CSU budget was cut $51 million in 1991-92, and $123 million in 1992-93. This amounts to a 3% cut 1991-92 and 7.5% in 1992-93. Overall, the budget has been cut 10.3% using the 1990-91 budget of $1.691 billion as a base year.

Second, Day’s departmental eliminations were in no way authorized by the Senate. This group actually produced a decisive vote of no confidence in him in July. The Senate was indicating its belief that Day had not in good faith implemented the restructuring document it had given him. The document did authorize “deep and narrow” cuts, but did not authorize summary departmental elimination, in violation of Senate and university policy (as well as the California Faculty Assn. bargaining agreement) regarding due process, consultation, and notice for programmatic changes.

Third, Day’s cuts have reduced rather than enhanced those qualities mentioned as unique about SDSU. The cuts would have wiped out numerous master’s degree programs and seriously jeopardized others. Along with these programs goes millions of dollars in grant-funded research.

Last, I doubt that either ethnic diversity or the “youngest and the brightest” have been protected by these cuts. One-third of those laid-off were women, while 10% were members of ethnic minority groups. Also, one-fourth of those laid-off have come to SDSU in the last five years, while 37% of those laid off are under 45 (compared to 26.6% of the total faculty).

It is unfortunate that so much misinformation surrounds the situation.

ROBERT WINSLOW, Professor of Sociology, San Diego State University