CLARION, Pa. (EYT) – Clarion County Commissioner Ted Tharan confirmed on Tuesday morning that Clarion County is not being considered for the relocation of Federal USDA offices that could have brought 620 jobs to the county.
“We’re not on the list,” said Tharan. “They said we didn’t qualify on certain things. Tim Reddinger from Trinity Point was calling to see on specific items. Tim Reddinger might have gotten something in writing because he was one of the applicants. I believe only one site in Pennsylvania remains on the list, an identified individual in Hanover Township. There are several Hanover Townships in Pennsylvania. A total of 67 applicants remained out of 136 expressions of interest
When first announced, the proposed relocation of the USDA National Institute of Food and Agriculture (NIFA) and Economic Research Services (ERS) to spread the offices to more rural locations away from Washington, D.C.
“Did we even have a chance?” asked Tharan. “Sometimes you have to make these applications and you know the odds might be against you. Hats off to Tim at Trinity Point and the Miles Brothers for taking the time and money to do that to increase the workforce.”
“They don’t want to be rural—they’re just blowing smoke.”
The March 15, 2019 issue of Lancaster Farming raised questions about the list.
“The Ag Department released its pared-down list of outside-the-Beltway locales this week despite continued opposition from agriculture and science industry groups,” reported Lancaster Farming.
“USDA received 136 expressions of interest last year to host the offices. The bids were submitted mainly by universities, local governments, economic development groups, and real estate companies, with some bids naming a multitude of partners. Pennsylvania’s lone remaining entrant, listed only as a ‘Private Citizen’ from Hanover Township, is the only competitor that is not identified.”
The story also noted that USDA did not respond to questions about the applicant.
A statement by Mike Lavender, senior manager of government affairs in the Food and Environment Program at the Union of Concerned Scientists (UCS), raised serious concerns about the selection process.
“The Trump administration’s reality TV-style contest to relocate USDA research agencies makes a mockery of food and agricultural research,” stated Lavender.
“The White House continually touts its support for farmers, ranchers, and rural economies, but has worked to systematically dismantle evidence-based research and programs that serve those very constituents. Just yesterday it proposed a seven percent cut to the USDA research portfolio. Moreover, the administration has developed this proposal with little to no stakeholder input.”
In an earlier press release, the USDA gave the following reasons for the move:
• Improve USDA’s ability to attract and retain highly qualified staff with training and interests in agriculture, many of whom come from land-grant universities.
• USDA has experienced significant turnover in some positions, and it has been difficult to recruit employees to the Washington, D.C. area, particularly given the high cost of living and long commutes.
• To place these important USDA resources closer to many stakeholders, most of whom live and work far from the Washington, D.C. area.
• To benefit the American taxpayers. There will be significant savings on employment costs and rent, which will allow more employees to be retained in the long run, even in the face of tightening budgets.
USDA defined the following criteria to apply to the Expressions of Interest:
• Quality of Life: Subcategory examples include Diversity Index, Residential Housing Costs, Access to Healthcare, and Home and Community Safety Ranking.
• Costs (Capital and Operating): Subcategory examples include Cost of Living Adjustment, Commercial Real Estate Costs, Land Costs, and Wage Growth Rate.
• Workforce: Subcategory examples include Labor Force Growth Rate, Unemployment Rate, and the Labor Force Population.
• Logistics/IT Infrastructure: Subcategory examples include Lodging Availability, Proximity to Stakeholders, and Travel Time to/from DC.
Calls to the U.S. Department of Agriculture for comment were not immediately returned.
