Why we diverge

Above photo: Antonio Permuy, junior political science major, speaks out against the proposal to end USF St. Petersburg’s separate accreditation. Courtesy of Antonio Permuy 

By Antonio Permuy

I was appalled when I read Jeff Brandes’ recent statements about our university having “no vision.” Brandes’ previous silence on the issue, while most of his local colleagues came out against it, spoke volumes, only now to be broken by these disappointing, hurtful and stunningly ignorant claims to justify his support for House Bill 423, which provides the legal vehicle for the proposed system-wide consolidation. It’s disgraceful to hear this kind of blatant disregard coming from a “leader.”

Of course, there’s one magic word you are sure to hear from any proponent of the plan: “pre-eminence!” It is repeated with such fervor and frequency that they seem to believe it disarms any other point of consideration. While it is certainly beneficial to have our flagship campus carry the esteemed status (and funding) of pre-eminence, I challenge the idea that all USF campuses must surrender their own accreditation and autonomy in order to benefit. I also question the optimism some have for expecting any substantial portion of these new funds to be spent on either of the regional campuses. Meanwhile, these proponents attempt to placate our very real concerns by consistently reverting to dangling the carrot of pre-eminence — all while shutting us out of consideration and expecting us to go along without binding guarantees. It is more than disconnect, it’s betrayal.

Yet Tallahassee legislators and Tampa administrators continue to insist that this plan is truly in our very best interest. If this were true, why did they not ask us in advance about our views on the subject? Why did they slip this dramatic restructuring plan into the last three pages of a 52-page bill? Why was their meeting with the USF System President Judy Genshaft kept secret for months, by all parties involved, only to feign surprise later? And why have they avoided interviews on the subject until now, while their colleagues in opposition hold public forums?

Furthermore, I question whether a state legislature that itch at every turn to cut taxes and funds truly has the best interest of USF at heart. We (Tampa included) might be exceedingly naive in assuming so, particularly since the other pre-eminent universities of UF and FSU would have to share pre-eminence state funds with us and they have been suspiciously silent on this issue. After all, we should remember the effort just last year to change the pre-eminence metrics and move the goalpost as we were closing in. It is worth asking what they could stand to gain this time by including USF St. Petersburg and USF Sarasota-Manatee to Tampa’s total system metrics long term.

As a former satellite campus, this is hardly a theoretical territory. We have the advantage of experience, at least for those willing to listen to those who were there. That is why we have our hard-fought independence today, which evidently some in Tampa seem to resent. It may explain why our campus leadership has been consistently undermined, and more so since 2000. It’s like clockwork.

But this isn’t just about our campus; it’s about the broader infringement of local culture by outside forces that do not have our community’s best interests at heart. It’s this same broader assault that has caused the gradual, organic rise of slogans like “Keep St. Pete Local,” which reinforces and reasserts what it means to keep our community culture and vision alive and the fact that there is a distinct need to do so.

The long-running and expanding invasion of culture, resources, and influence has caused the “Tampa Bay Area” to simply become interpreted by many as merely a polite synonym for Tampa proper. Now, with this major move by the Florida legislature, it is being formally institutionalized.

We are more than Tampa add-ons. We have our own goals, identity, and, yes, vision. It is shameful when one of our own state senators joins these efforts and prioritizes them over our will, as his dismissive and insulting interview with The Crow’s Nest clearly proves he does. However, it also makes us all the more proud and grateful for his counterparts who have done their elected duties and stuck with us, like Sen. Darryl Rouson, Rep. Ben Diamond, Commissioner Ken Welch, Rep. Charlie Crist, and our local leaders in City Hall. Additionally, it speaks volumes that community organizations like the USF St. Petersburg Retired Faculty & Staff Association and the St. Petersburg Area Chamber of Commerce have also come out strongly against consolidation. 

They understand the deep, positive impact our university has had over the years. Likewise, we also understand this concerning larger trend in St. Pete, Sarasota, and beyond. The story of USF St. Petersburg and USF Sarasota-Manatee is a symbolic microcosm of that broader struggle, and what signal would that send if this bill continues to proceed without regard for the strong local opposition?  

If history is any indication, it would be wise for the leadership in both Tampa and Tallahassee to take heed of this community’s resistance. Polytechnic University has done impressively well since it’s clean break from the USF system just five years ago, and few realize USF St. Petersburg almost beat them to the punch. Now, if some are currently discussing the idea of attempting such an effort again following this forced consolidation, it may well go further this time with greater public momentum building and the success of the former USF Lakeland to point to.

Just as there are reasons why every single resident of Pinellas County lives where they do (and not Tampa), there are valid reasons why USF St. Petersburg and USF Sarasota-Manatee students choose to attend their respective universities and stay there. The Tampa campus is a beautiful, massive complex with many resources, much like the city of Tampa. However, it is not for everyone. If we are wooed by the benefits of USF Tampa then we reserve the right to transfer there individually, but we should not be forced as a body back into a system where every campus is treated as a Tampa clone or underling.

This bill spits in the face of the decades-long struggle for autonomy after blatant neglect from Tampa that had existed right from USF St. Petersburg’s inception. Of particular note are tireless and ceaseless efforts of many formative campus leaders. These great leaders fought for decades to get USF St. Petersburg the respect, recognition, and self-determination it deserved, even when it was a steep uphill battle against a Tampa-led system that has been called a “guillotine.”

They were bound by a love for this university and the vision of what it could be. It’s a vision that so far has manifested into two dorms, a University Student Center, a state-of-the-art business building, the Carnegie Community Engagement Classification, and even the new Salvador Dali Museum – all since achieving separate accreditation. This would not have been possible as merely a satellite campus. These are the stakes and why the St. Petersburg community stands with us in defense of this legacy and our future.

We will not lose our identity, we will not be silent, and we will not forget — especially on Election Day. As things stand with this bill, our “vision” is good enough to see more than a few changes coming this year.

To learn more about “Diverge the Merge,” click here.

+7

0

Written by: Antonio Permuy on February 19, 2018.
Last revised by: Emily WunderlichFebruary 23, 2018.