It’s frustrating that due to an arbitrary budget reduction
target of $422,000, a package of valuable agricultural programs are
in danger of losing funding. And it’s doubly aggravating that
bureaucratic stonewalling from the University of California system
might prevent the rescue of the least expensive and perhaps most
important of those programs: 4-H.
It’s frustrating that due to an arbitrary budget reduction target of $422,000, a package of valuable agricultural programs are in danger of losing funding. And it’s doubly aggravating that bureaucratic stonewalling from the University of California system might prevent the rescue of the least expensive and perhaps most important of those programs: 4-H.
County Agriculture Commissioner Greg Van Wassenhove has been directed to find budget reductions in his non-mandated, discretionary programs. The only agriculture programs that meet that criteria are part of a multi-program package from the University of California Cooperative Extension.
With a modest price tag of $438,000, the UC package offers a Master Gardener program, county farm advisers who are expert on such subjects as pesticide use and irrigation dispersion and, oh yes, 4-H.
These are all valuable programs and their loss will be felt especially hard here in the South Valley, where agriculture is a major industry and an important part of our still-rural lifestyle.
We’re encouraged that County Supervisor Don Gage and Van Wassenhove haven’t given up hope on the entire UC package. They’re planning to meet with 4-H leaders in the next few weeks to try to find a solution.
Van Wassenhove had one idea: Buy the 4-H program from UC, but not the rest of the package. The price for 4-H is $20,000, roughly the difference between what Van Wassenhove has been ordered to cut and the UC package cost.
That was a reasonable fallback plan, but UC officials said “no” – their ag programs are a package deal, take it or leave it.
In these lean budget times, that kind of bureaucratic stubbornness is irresponsible. For California, its cities, counties and schools to survive the fiscal crisis, we need our leaders to be flexible and focused on priorities. If offering its ag programs individually, instead of as a package, is the way to save 4-H in Santa Clara County, then UC officials need to make that happen. Anything less just adds to the burden of difficulty during a time when government needs to make tough budget cuts.
Supervisor Gage, we’re confident, will find some place other than 4-H to make necessary cuts. And we urge him to closely look at the other cuts in agriculture department. If there’s a way to save all of the UC ag programs, we’re sure he’ll find it.
Agriculture is a key industry for South Valley and UC services provide an important support network for that segment of our economy.
Sending the 4-H program into oblivion would be almost criminal. Teaching our young people leadership skills, while giving them responsibility and a sense of business is invaluable.
For $20,000 a year, the path is clear: Save 4-H.
WHO TO CONTACT
Proposals will be sent to the county executive’s office on March 30 with a final decision on the budget to be made by the Board of Supervisors in June.
Supervisor Donald F. Gage, District 1
Santa Clara County
San Jose Office
Phone: 299-5010
Fax: 295-6993
70 West Hedding Street
San Jose, CA 95110
San Martin Office
686-8742
80 Highland Avenue
San Martin, CA 95046 681-4609
e-mail: do******@bo*.org
Peter Kutras, County Executive
70 West Hedding St., East Wing 11th Floor
San Jose, CA 95110
299-5119
e-mail: pe*********@ce*.org
