University of Hawai`i at Hilo
College of Agriculture, Forestry & Natural Resource Management
Open Letter to UH-Hilo Faculty & Staff
From the CAFNRM Faculty Senate regarding
Reorganization of Some of the Colleges of UH-Hilo
22 April 2016
The on-going process to reorganize some of the colleges in UH-Hilo (CAS, CAFNRM, CoBE, and
possibly CCECS) has the potential to significantly change the institution. “The administration believes
that reorganizing these Colleges into units with more common integrated cultures and missions will lead
to wiser management of resources and resource allocations. Collectively, we should be seeking an
organizational structure that best allows us to enhance student success, support faculty scholarship and
create a productive work environment for staff.”1 We doubt that anyone could disagree with the goals in
the previous statement. But the current process proposes 4 options without any detailed analysis to
support the administration’s belief that reorganization will lead to the desired results.
The CAFNRM Senate is not against reorganization per se. In the past, some of our members have even
made informal proposals for possible reorganization. But we believe the current efforts are rushed,
incomplete and based on invalid or misleading assumptions. Our more important concerns follow:

The Reorganization Committee followed its mandate and provided 4 options for reorganization.
But, without an analysis on costs, benefits, implementation procedures, etc., how do we know
that these 4 options (or any of the other rejected options) will lead to the desired results.

Faculty and staff have not been formally surveyed regarding the need/value of reorganization but
informal surveys have indicated that high levels of support exist only in Natural Sciences.

It has been verbally stated that CAS is difficult to manage because it is too large and diverse.
Even a cursory examination of universities will find that large Colleges of Arts and Sciences are
common with 5,000 to 10,000 or more students and faculty numbers above 1,000 (including
teaching assistants). We believe CAS management difficulties are not a function of structure but
a reflection on the CAS deans, the process by which they were selected, and UH policies (or lack
thereof) that contribute to successful management. Can these problems be resolved by
policies/personnel changes or reorganization of only CAS (instead of reorganizing 4 colleges)?

Although our current administration has stated that they have no intention of using reorganization
as a reason for retrenchment, reorganization will take a considerable period of time and we do not
know whether our current administrators will still be here when reorganization is completed. If
they leave, will the new administrators feel bound by their (our current administrators’)
reassurances. Reorganization is clearly stated in the UHPA contract as a reason for
retrenchment.

Reorganization often follows a strategic plan. But UH-Hilo does not have a current strategic
plan. Pushing reorganization before the plan is “putting the cart before the horse”.
______________________________________
1
see VCAA Platz e-mail dated Mon. April 18
200 W. Kawili Street
Hilo, Hawai`i 96720-4091
Telephone: (808) 974-7393
Fax: (808) 974-7674
www.hilo.hawaii.edu
An Equal Opportunity / Affirmative Action Institution
2

Currently, faculty cannot be required to teach in another college without the faculty member’s
agreement. If CAFNRM faculty are joined with Biology and/or Marine Science, the new Dean
can direct them to teach biology or marine science (or vice versa). Some would welcome this
introduction of flexibility. But there are potential downsides - e.g., given the biology background
of most CAFNRM faculty, administration could cancel upper division Ag classes so CAFNRM
faculty could teach basic biology (and not have to refill biology vacancies).

Joining tenured faculty from different colleges together reduces the opportunity for faculty input
in the tenure process (for those already tenured).

The Reorganization Committee report assumes no cost to reorganization. That is patently absurd.
The costs will be in the hundreds of thousands of dollars when the value of faculty and staff time
is included. A great amount of time has already been spent on the process with other important
work being given less priority because of the short time line imposed on the Reorganization
Committee.

The Reorganization Committee had considerable restriction placed upon its deliberations so that
the reorganization could move through the approval process more easily:
 Only 4 options;
 Exclude Ka Haka ʻUla o Keʻelikōlani and Pharmacy;
 The total number of E/M cannot be increased;
 Do not explore non-traditional management structures.
When something that can have a major impact on the institution is being proposed, we believe all
options should be considered.
Not just the jobs and working conditions of the faculty and staff in the affected colleges are at stake. In
the short run, reorganization will take away from our teaching, service and research duties. If, in the
long-run, reorganization can be shown to “lead to wiser management of resources and resource
allocations”, then let’s reorganize. But we have to do so in a thoughtful and complete manner. Not the
rushed process currently being followed. We strongly recommend that any reorganization effort should:
1. Be in response to a plan with specific goals and objectives. Not the other way around. Having a
current strategic plan should precede reorganization;
2. Start with the work already done by the reorganization committee (including the rejected
options);
3. Look at UH-Hilo in its totality (including all students, faculty, staff and our clients);
4. Provide opportunity for the entire UH-Hilo community to have significant input into the planning
process; and
5. Conduct comparative analyses of all potential options including costs, benefits, implementation,
changes in faculty numbers, etc. before selecting a preferred option.