USDA Relocation Plan Will Save About $4 Billion, Officials Say

By Ryan Hanrahan

Government Executive’s Eric Katz reported that “the Agriculture Department is confident its push to move more employees out of Washington and into five new hubs around the country will retain most staff and large-scale layoffs will not be necessary, a top official told lawmakers on Wednesday.”

“The plan is not yet finalized and still subject to change, USDA Deputy Secretary Stephen Vaden repeatedly stressed to members of the Senate Agriculture, Nutrition and Forestry Committee, and the department is only now starting to solicit feedback from employees, stakeholders and lawmakers,” Katz reported. “Ultimately, Vaden said, the most significant goal of the reorganization is to build the next generation of leadership for USDA through the career ranks.”

“USDA announced last week it would relocate 2,600 Washington-based employees to its five new hubs and consolidate dozens of offices. It will close one of its headquarters buildings and three additional offices in the Washington area,” Katz reported. “In the plan, Secretary Brooke Rollins said reductions in force would be utilized ‘if needed,’ without specifying what would lead to their deployment.”

Agri-Pulse’s Steve Davies reported that “Vaden said the department would be saving about $4 billion from the deferred resignation program and building closures, including the Ag South Building in Washington – $1.9 billion from the DRPs and $2.2 billion in deferred maintenance on the buildings, which also include Braddock Place in suburban Alexandria, Virginia, and the Beltsville Agricultural Research Center in suburban Maryland.”

“The $4 billion is the ‘baseline’ of savings before considering the lower cost of living for employees and lower lease rates, he said,” according to Davies’ reporting.

Why Regional Hub Locations Were Chosen

Katz reported that “USDA’s new hubs will be located in Raleigh, North Carolina; Kansas City, Missouri; Indianapolis; Fort Collins, Colorado; and Salt Lake City, Utah. The locations generated some pushback from senators in both parties, who noted none of the top five agricultural states were chosen.”

Progressive Farmer’s Jerry Hagstrom reported that “the No. 1 reason that the Trump administration has chosen the five hub locations is the cost of living, Vaden said. He explained that decision through the ‘story’ of Ralph Linden, currently the USDA acting general counsel. He said Linden had moved to the Washington area in 1982 and bought a house in suburban Virginia. At that time, the other residents were government employees, but today, the houses cost ‘seven figures,’ and Linden’s neighbors are two-income households composed of doctors, lawyers and lobbyists.”

“In the hub communities, government employees will be able to afford homes and ‘grow and expand their families,’ Vaden said,” according to Hagstrom’s reporting.

“Sen. Adam Schiff, D-Calif., noted that California is the No. 1 agricultural state but that the nearest hub is in Salt Lake City. Vaden said there is no hub in California because it has a high cost of living,” Hagstrom reported. “…The second reason for choosing the hubs is that USDA already has facilities in those places, particularly in Fort Collins, Colorado, and Salt Lake City.”

Katz reported that Vaden “added the department’s intention is any employee willing to move will keep their job. ‘It’s hard for me to predict how many will,’ Vaden said in response to Sen. Raphael Warnock, D-Ga. ‘Do I think 100% will say yes and relocate? No, senator, that will not be realistic for me to say that but I think a significant percent more than a majority will come.’”

Most Agricultural Research Service Laboratories Will Remain Open

Davies reported that “Vaden also said that 90 of 94 Agricultural Research Service laboratories would stay open. He did not identify the four locations slated for closure. He also said that although the Food and Nutrition Service’s headquarters building in Virginia would be shut down, that doesn’t mean all FNS employees would be farmed out to the hubs.”

“Some employees in each of USDA’s eight mission areas, including food and nutrition, would remain in Washington in either the Whitten Building or the Yates Building,” Davies reported. “When it comes to FNS, he added, in response to a question from Sen. Tommy Tuberville, R-Ala., ‘As we shift more people into the field who are focused on the states and focused on the regions of the country that you serve, that means more people or individuals in Alabama and every other state to reach out to’ for technical assistance or other issues.”

Hagstrom reported that “Vaden told Sen. Jerry Moran, R-Kan., that the Foreign Agricultural Service might be among the lesser affected mission areas because its work is ‘diplomatic,’ but that he could not guarantee that ‘there won’t be some employee who gets relocated.’”

“Sens. Michael Bennet, D-Colo., and Ben Ray Lujan, D-N.M., both expressed concerns about the impact of the reorganization on firefighting, but Vaden said the reorganization won’t interfere with the Forest Service, a USDA division, during fire season,” Hagstrom reported. “He also said reorganization will not affect employees who work on disaster relief, although some of them will be asked to move to new locations.”

USDA Relocation Plan Will Save About $4 Billion, Officials Say was originally published by Farmdoc.