Officials’ February announcement that they were selling the Virginia Science and Technology Campus caught many at GW by surprise. Faculty and staff who operate out of the school were immediately filled with questions, saying they were not consulted on the sale and officials didn’t inform them where they would relocate their programs to and how exactly they would use the funds from the sale. Officials at first did not disclose who they sold the property to and for how much, only announcing after The Hatchet’s reporting that they had closed the $427 million sale with Amazon Data Services so the company could build a data center on the campus. Chief Financial Officer Bruno Fernandes told The Hatchet in February that officials hadn’t spoken to community members about the sale before they publicly announced it due to confidentiality issues. 

Now, as the fall semester approaches, there seems to be no concrete transition plans to relocate staff, faculty and students from the school, which unfortunately showcases the University’s inability to effectively engage the VSTC community and plan ahead for how they would address community concerns and their needs after the sale. While the University’s agreement with Amazon allows them to use the campus for the next five years as they transition operations elsewhere, the VSTC community deserves a more definitive answer about what the future of their programs and the transition process will look like. 

As the months have passed by, it has become clearer that the University did not seem to have an established plan in place for where or how they would relocate the VSTC campus and its community before making the monumental decision to sell the campus. Officials announced earlier this month they had formed two committees and retained two outside firms to help solicit community input regarding the transition of VSTC operations as they seek to produce a “preliminary five-year roadmap” for the transition in the fall. However, at a town hall meeting earlier this month, officials told VSTC community members they still had no specifics on where individual programs or offices would be relocated. They also did not provide a concrete timeline for the transition, but said officials will not move any large school or department from VSTC, like the nursing school, earlier than the summer of 2028. Officials can still use the campus for five more years, offering some wiggle room for their relocation plans, but their lack of details or plans will only cause more uncertainty for the VSTC community.

It is a good sign that officials are working to include the perspectives of the community and increase transparency, but it is not enough to have barely started engaging with them and have very few answers to the questions and concerns that their community has months after the sale’s completion. This is a delicate situation that has to be addressed with a lot of transparency from officials on how this will affect the community, and the fact that there was so little community input before the sale only heightens the need for clear answers and certainty going forward. The reality is that many in the community are probably feeling concerned and uncertain about the future of the campus, and if officials cannot offer answers right now, they should at least be transparent on how they understand that the community must be feeling. While officials said they are working with the community to establish a “preliminary five-year roadmap” in the fall, at this point in the process, we should be well past preliminary projections and starting to discuss concrete plans of action.

It is concerning that the University at this point in the year doesn’t have more answers or plans to show the community to assuage their concerns. Instead, the few answers that officials gave to the community demonstrate that there wasn’t much planning made into this large decision. While it is certainly difficult to relocate a campus with hundreds of people and several degree and certificate programs, such a consequential decision calls for a more thoughtful and well-planned approach. The University is attempting to include the perspectives of the community as they decide on how to make a plan — and while that is essential, having to relocate an entire campus and community can’t start to be planned after the sale of its campus. It is a decision that requires months of planning and community input. By the time that GW had sold the campus, they must’ve had an idea of how and where they would relocate it and have something concrete to show the community — especially if they didn’t include the community in their decision-making process. 

The lack of community engagement on the VSTC sale reflects a troubling trend this academic year, where officials have continuously excluded faculty, staff and students from key University decisions, leading to lasting community complaints about a lack of shared governance. While one could argue the formation of committees to gather community input is officials’ attempt to repair this dynamic, they have also enlisted the help of outside firms, Brailsford & Dunlavey and Perkins & Will, to help inform their decision-making and lead their relocation process. This means officials have decided the best people to lead this transition effort are not VSTC community members themselves, but outside consultants, which is the very antithesis of the principle of shared governance. Instead of commending officials for creating committees to solicit community input on the sale, I want to acknowledge that it is simply the bare minimum. The community was excluded from the beginning and including them now is too little too late. 

I understand that confidentiality issues and the relocation of hundreds of people make it increasingly difficult for the University to efficiently include the perspectives of the community or come up with a perfect relocation plan without any kinks. But when the University makes a huge decision like selling a campus, there does need to be a more settled and finished plan rather than one that seems to barely be in its conception. The University should take these summer months as a pivotal time to come up with an actual plan that they can soon start carrying out and shouldn’t delay community input or production of any relocation plans. 

When The Hatchet first reported on the sale of VSTC, it became glaringly apparent the amount of information that was missing — from their exact plans on how they would use the money from the sale to how they would help the VSTC community transition from the campus. I remember reading the article and feeling like I had more questions and concerns after reading it because it didn’t seem like the University had a thoughtful plan in place for the students, faculty, and staff of VSTC. Four months later, I am no less confused and no more confident that officials have given the proper thought to ensuring a smooth transition of operations.