In late July, Agriculture Secretary Brooke Rollins announced the department would be undergoing a reorganization effort, which includes relocating employees to five new hubs across the country.
The overarching goal of the reorganization is to refocus the department’s core operations to better align with supporting farming, ranching and forestry, Rollins said. She added that a review of the USDA shows that the department is “bloated, expensive and unsustainable.”
“Over the last four years, USDA’s workforce grew by 8%, and employees’ salaries increased by 14.5%—including hiring thousands of employees with no sustainable way to pay them,” Rollins said in a press release. “This all occurred without any tangible increase in service to USDA’s core constituencies across the agricultural sector.”
As part of the reorganization effort, Rollins announced four pillars:
• Ensure the size of USDA’s workforce aligns with financial resources and agricultural priorities.
• Bring USDA closer to producers.
• Eliminate management layers and bureaucracy.
• Consolidate redundant support functions.
USDA plans to relocate much of its agency headquarters and staff out of the Washington, D.C. area to five hub locations. There are currently about 4,600 employees within the National Capital Region, an area that has one of the highest costs of living in the country, USDA said.
“In selecting its hub locations, USDA considered where existing concentrations of USDA employees are located and factored in the cost of living,” Rollins said. Washington, D.C. will still hold functions for the department’s missions, but USDA expects no more than 2,000 employees to remain in the region.
The five new hub locations and current federal locality rates are the following:
• Raleigh, NC (22.24%).
• Kansas City, MO (18.97%).
• Indianapolis, IN (18.15%).
• Fort Collins, CO (30.52%).
• Salt Lake City, UT (17.06%).
“This is only the first phase of a multi-month process,” Rollins said. “Over the next month and where applicable, USDA senior leadership will notify offices with more information on relocation to one of the regional hubs.”
USDA noted that the reorganization is another step to make certain the department can afford its workforce, by reducing its workforce. Much of this reduction was through voluntary retirements and the Deferred Retirement Program. More than 15,000 employees have voluntarily elected deferred resignation.
Senate hearing
The Senate Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry held a hearing on July 30 over the USDA reorganization proposal. During the two-hour-long hearing, senators questioned USDA Deputy Secretary Stephen Alexander Vaden over the plan, which several criticized as a last-minute decision.
In his opening remarks at the Senate hearing, Chairman John Boozman (R-AR) said he supported Rollins’ intended goals of improving effectiveness and accountability, enhancing services, reducing bureaucracy and cutting waste. However, he noted that the implications of how the proposal will affect producers must be fully understood.
“We must also prioritize what matters most to producers and rural communities: service, responsiveness, and results,” Boozman said. “USDA is often the most visible face of the federal government in rural America. That presence, whether through FSA offices, conservation staff, or rural development programs, needs to be preserved and empowered.”
Boozman added that he looked forward to learning more about how the proposal will strengthen on-the-ground support for producers as well as support farm bill implementation.
Sen. Amy Klobuchar (D-MN), committee ranking member, acknowledged the short notice for the hearing, attributing it to the administration’s “half-baked plan with no notice and without consulting agricultural leaders.”
Klobuchar said she supports efforts to making USDA work, but “I don’t think getting rid of 15,000 employees—which has already happened because of early buyouts, because of firing people, because of everything else that’s happened—is good for agriculture.”
Klobuchar also expressed concern with the effect the reorganization would have on USDA research. She called the 2023 relocation efforts of the Economic Research Service and the National Institute of Food and Agriculture a disaster, and said a report by the Government Accountability Office showed the agencies produced fewer key reports and took longer to process grants because of relocation.
Vaden rejected Klobuchar’s statements and defended the reorganization proposal. “USDA’s entire focus of its reorganization efforts has been on voluntary decisions by employees,” Vaden said. “The secretary has been frank with our employees about what our budgetary numbers require and what the administration’s expectations are so that those employees can make the best decisions for themselves and their families.”
Vaden stressed throughout the hearing that the plan is not final and is still subject to change based on feedback from employees, stakeholders and lawmakers. While he noted that he didn’t think 100% of employees would choose to relocate, he predicted a “significant percent more than a majority will come.”
Vaden said the intent of the proposal is to retain talent and establish offices in cities that will have a more affordable cost of living. “We want people to come to USDA for a career, to start a family and to stay with us,” he said. “Unfortunately, given the cost of living in the National Capital Region,” it is becoming difficult to do so in Washington.
Sen. Adam Schiff (D-CA) pointed out that California is the No. 1 state for agriculture, yet the closest hub will be in Salt Lake City. Vaden responded that there is no hub in the state due to its high cost of living.
Sen. Jodi Ernst (R-IA) applauded the Trump administration for mandating federal employees to be back in office, and consolidating or selling unused office space and moving USDA closer to the people it’s meant to serve. “The status quo is forcing taxpayers to foot the bill for billions in deferred maintenance,” she said. “There’s deferred maintenance and the ongoing operating costs all for buildings that are almost entirely empty.”
Sen. Deb Fischer (R-NE) said she agreed with the overreaching goal of the plan, but she was disappointed that Nebraska wasn’t considered for a hub and with how the proposal was rolled out, including the lack of engagement with Congress.
Fischer also questioned Vaden on whether the USDA research facilities in Nebraska, such as the U.S. Meat and Animal Research Center, would be affected by the plan. Vaden replied that 90 of the 94 Agricultural Research Service facilities would remain unimpacted by the plan.
Opposition
Following the hearing, the American Federal of Government Employees (AFGE) submitted a public letter to Boozman and Klobuchar, rebuking the idea that most employees will choose to relocate to the new hubs. “I’m concerned this reorganization is just the latest attempt to eliminate USDA workers and minimize their critical work,” said AFGE National President Everett Kelley.
Environmental groups also expressed opposition to the plan, calling it “deeply concerning.” Sierra Club Associate Director of Legislative and Administrative Advocacy Anna Medema said it was imperative to have a fully staffed and functional workforce as wildfire season progresses this summer.
“Agencies like the Forest Service have already suffered some of the worst consequences of the wide-reaching DOGE cuts, and are now facing further confusion and disorganization by the administration’s rushed proposal,” Medema said. — Anna Miller Fortozo, WLJ managing editor
1 Comment