By SARA DRYDEN
Indiana Correspondent

CHARLESTOWN, Ind. — Indiana Farm Service Agency (FSA) officials listened as more than 100 farmers, citizens and state leaders discussed the proposed restructuring of Clark and Scott counties’ offices.

Meeting at the Clark County Fairgrounds, in view of the local FSA office that could close, many individuals voiced opinions opposing the closure.

FSA is hosting 10 public meetings to gain feedback from farmers about restructuring several county offices that have smaller workloads and a small staff. No employee jobs would be lost in this restructuring. In the case where the two counties each have a manager, one of the managers would be relocated. The restructuring is part of a plan suggested by a state task force, formed after a more drastic proposal called FSA Tomorrow was shelved. State leaders wanted to start fresh and from the ground up.

The restructuring and closing of several county offices is at the proposal level now. FSA must hold farmer meetings, which are being recorded, and all suggestions will go before the state FSA committee for consideration.

From that point, the committee will submit its recommendation to USDA Secretary Mike Johanns for final consideration and decision.
Many county FSA offices have a smaller workload due to less agricultural production. In southern Indiana, the tobacco buyout had an impact on the amount of work for staff.

Some offices have three employees. At times, more than one employee is on vacation or sick leave, leaving the office without enough employees to help the farmers.

FSA estimates the restructuring will save $95,000 for each closed office.

According to Steve Brown, Indiana FSA executive officer, the main reason for closing the Clark office and combining it with the Scott office is infrastructure. The Scottsburg office is newer and larger. The urbanization of southern Clark county was also taken into consideration.

Jeannine Wiley, vice chair of the Clark County FSA committee, does not think the growth of the Louisville/Clarksville area should be a concern.

“There is urban development in southern Clark County; but it is still a strong and viable agriculture county,” she said.

Clark County’s total farm income of $32 million doubles Scott County’s $16 million. Clark has 101,000 acres of farmland; Scott has 69,000. Many of the farmers at Thursday’s meeting believed these numbers, plus the fact that agriculture production is nearly twice the size, is reason enough to keep the Clark office open.

“Clark County has twice as much agriculture, so they (Scott County farmers) should have to drive here,” said a Clark farmer.

“Comparing counties is not how the task force came about this proposal,” said Brown. “It’s really about workload and trying to consolidate those counties that have smaller workloads.”

Every task performed by FSA employees is measured by volume of work. Out of the 80 county offices, Scott ranks 79th and Clark ranks 73rd.

Brown said comments from the farmer meetings have been across the board.

Some counties are more concerned about conservation issues, while others are focusing on drive time and inconvenience.

“This is not a rubber stamp,” said Kenny Culp, Indiana FSA executive director. “There have been many good ideas. We are just a part of the chain. We’re going to take these suggestions and pass them on.”

Federal and state lawmakers were in attendance to show support for the Clark County office. Local leaders of Farm Bureau and the county commissioners also want the Clark office to stay open.

This farm news was published in the July 18, 2007 issue of Farm World, serving Indiana, Ohio, Illinois, Kentucky, Michigan and Tennessee.