Twitter
Facebook
Reddit
Digg
Tell us what you think!Send a letter to the editor about this or any other article in The Maine Campus.
A recent letter from Gov. Paul LePage to the chair of the University of Maine System’s board of trustees said “innovative and dramatic change” is necessary to facilitate statewide job creation.
And, according to a top LePage advisor, “senior leadership” within the university system has told the governor the system office’s efficacy is harmed by “squandering and squashing of innovation.”
The letter, delivered to trustees at a Sept. 19 meeting in Bangor, also asked trustees to find a new chancellor “with a proven track record as an agent of change.” Chancellor Richard Pattenaude announced in May that he would step down in summer 2012.
The letter, addressed to board of trustees chairwoman M. Michelle Hood, was delivered by Jonathan Nass, a senior policy advisor to LePage on a number of issues, including education.
Perhaps most notably, LePage asked trustees to “take a hard look at the notion of a central office” and whether it “adds value” to the system or “adds cost and bureaucracy.”
“He’s heard the system office hasn’t let campuses run with the ball,” Nass said. “[Senior leadership] said new ideas brought to the chancellor weren’t well-received.”
In an email statement following Nass’ remarks, system spokeswoman Peggy Markson cited the AEWC Advanced Structures and Composites Center and classes in innovation engineering at the University of Maine as examples of system innovation.
“Chancellor Pattenaude has long said that a system is strong only if it has strong campuses. Our campuses have significant room for moving forward with new ideas and programs,” Markson wrote. “We try to provide plenty of room for campuses to move forward with new ideas. However, our office looks at things within the context of the entire University of Maine System, not just one campus.”
When asked who has been reporting problems, Nass said he didn’t want to go into specifics. He also said the letter wasn’t “a call for abandoning the system office” or even a knock on Pattenaude. Others close to university have told the governor the central office is efficient, Nass said.
“I think the chancellor gets a bad rap — it’s the way the system is designed,” Nass said. “Funds to each campus are still being distributed on a model from 1969.”
Minutes from a Sept. 14, 2009, trustees meeting confirm the issue has been discussed at length. Then-trustee Norman Fournier then said a task force recommended trustees “look at the funding formula because it had not been adjusted for 40 years.” Fournier couldn’t be reached by press time.
In the letter, LePage said resource allocation to campuses is outdated and urged “at least an incremental reform” to the practice.
“Currently, system funds are largely distributed based upon a formula that is the same as it was in the formation of the system in the late 1960s,” LePage wrote. “This rigid practice hinders innovation and suppresses true system-wide reform.”
After Nass delivered the letter, Pattenaude said LePage “offers us valuable ideas and reinforces the sense of urgency we feel to make the university system more efficient, more affordable and more responsive to the needs of the state.”
“Many of these efforts are underway, but we look forward to meeting with the governor and discussing his thoughts as we work together to better serve the people of Maine,” Pattenaude said.
In the letter, LePage also recommended examination of potential savings on services between the Maine Community College System and university system.
“The governor is not happy with the status quo,” Nass said. “I don’t think he’s coming in with any preconceived notions.”
Retraction: A story that appeared on page A1 of the Oct. 25, 2010 version of The Maine Campus used incomplete information when referring to overlaps between University of Maine and University of Maine System budgets.
Only 36.4 percent of UMaine’s 2011 preliminary budget was for financial management, development, student affairs and facilities management, part of the president’s office, administration and finance and research, areas also with system budget lines.
This statistic was errantly rounded to 37 percent in that original story and interpreted later in A1 stories on Sept. 8 and Sept. 29 as being indicative of duplication between UMaine and the system office. Online versions of those stories have been edited accordingly.
In an editorial on Sept. 29, it was said UMaine Vice President for Administration and Finance Janet Waldron verified the duplication. She verified the original statistic, but not in the context of duplication.
Bangor Daily News