Proposed Academic Affairs Cuts Prompt Student Action
- Anna Belong
- Apr 23
- 4 min read
Attempting to correct a $10 million state-inflicted budget deficit that was reportedly heavily influenced by the pandemic in 2019 and years following, the administration has instructed Academic Affairs to begin processes of eliminating cost from all the schools and departments – and that their savings will have to account for 60%, or $6 million dollars of the cuts, as it accounts for 60% of the school’s costs.
In an email sent to all unit leaders in Academic Affairs, the provost instructed deans and department chairs to “substantially reduce spending” for Fiscal Year 2026 by cutting out any services that are not essential or high priority. This came with a clarification that optional programs should be considered cut from the budget, “even if it is of some value or was deemed to have value in the past.”
The suggestions to increase savings included merging and consolidating departments, implementing course caps at 18 students to do away with smaller (or more specialized) classes, postponing sabbatical applications, and freezing hiring even in cases of gaps in teaching.
Only days after the budget cuts and the “Guiding Principles” document was sent to leaders in Academic Affairs, the Salisbury Chapter of the American Association of University Professors (AAUP) released an emergency statement detailing a multitude of concerns expressed by faculty.
Criticizing the logic of cutting 60% of the budget for Academic Affairs due to its costs making up the same percentage, AAUP's statement also emphasized that there was a lack of both transparency and of collaboration with faculty in drafting the budget proposal. Salisbury’s AAUP claims that not only does a strategic value lie in the university’s niche programs and interdisciplinary studies, but that undermining funding to academic units is contradictory to the university’s very reason-to-be.
Sparking unrest among students and faculty alike in conjunction with these budget cuts is an approximate 6.3% average increase in administrative salaries in Fiscal Year 2025 – despite the expectation that average yearly increase percentage is only 3% for cost of living adjustment, and a possible 2.5% more if the employee qualified for merit increases.
Although the salary increases were at first described as closer to 7-9%, Salary Listings available for checkout in Academic Commons proved this untrue. However, many students still find admins salary generally to be exorbitant and unnecessary – more than that, those affected by these cuts have expressed a distaste for admin pay raises in the face of cuts to Academic Affairs.
“I think that it's unfair to the students, [and] I think that it would be a different story if there was an explanation… if they explained why they’re getting such increases, more so than the standard inflationary increase,” said SGA Vice President Murtaza Aquil in regards to the budget cuts and administrative raises.
As the Vice President of the SGA, Aquil spoke briefly and clearly about a consensus forming on campus.
“From a student perspective, from an SGA rep perspective… it's upsetting and it's not fair at all, because yes everyone is being affected, but students are having our education rolled back and we will be affected in one way or another. We need everyone a little upset, we need to put an explanation to it, and hopefully open up a dialogue of, can [this] higher up echelon take I don’t know, a 5% decrease in their salary?”
This sentiment appears to be gaining more traction on campus, as student and history major Charles Reigle also touched on when discussing a lack of administrative accountability at the faculty senate meeting hosted by the provost yesterday.
“The meeting was a lot of professors complaining that they didn’t have input in this process, that this wasn’t a co-governance decision, and the administration [responding] with, well now we’re looping you in – and it really didn’t feel adequate.”
He also noted that the provost emphasized that the administration would also suffer budget cuts, but that when prompted about admin salary cuts, Couch was less forthcoming.
“At one point a professor asked, would they [be willing] to take a symbolic 10% pay cut. It wouldn’t fix it, but it would certainly help it to an extent – there was definitely a deflection in that [response]. I think the answer was, ‘I haven’t heard anything about it'… it became clear that the professors wanted to have input, and they didn’t. I think that's the issue here, is that this budget was devised without the help of professors.”
Reigle is a part of a growing collective of students who are in opposition to the allocation of Salisbury’s funding, and are planning on collective action. This budding student coalition is hopeful to make a difference in budgeting plans, inclusion, and transparency for the coming year.
A number of these students are planning a meeting tonight at 7pm in Fulton Hall 111, to gauge support and find next steps towards asking the administration for financial change.
President Lepre is set to host a town hall on April 30th at 3pm to discuss the budget and the changes to come – the location is to be determined.
By Anna Belong
Managing Editor