The curtailment order for all state entities totaled more than $63 million dollars. The system’s cut of $5.97 million is the third-largest, representing 3.38 percent of its state appropriation.

Public education took the largest curtailment order of $38.1 million, and the Department of Health and Human Services received the second-largest cut of $11.15 million, representing 1.35 percent of its state appropriation.

The system was expecting a curtailment order of $7.5 million, according to Rebecca Wyke, vice chancellor for finance and administration. The smaller curtailment order is intended to reduce the impact on the system’s three smallest campuses and reduce the number of class sections eliminated, Wyke said.

“We were notified in mid-October that we would have a likely reduction of approximately $7.5 million. The governor’s announcement of his curtailment today actually reduces that to just under $6 million,” Wyke said.

The individual schools won’t know exact numbers for a few days, but UMaine spokesperson Joe Carr said the university would not cut any personnel because of the curtailment.

“We’ll do things like reduce capital projects and cut in other non-personnel areas,” Carr said.

The expected curtailment could have meant the University of Maine at Machias would have to cut its campus security, but a UMM spokesperson Erik Smith said Friday that was no longer the case.

The system received $174.9 million in fiscal year 2001, according to Wyke. This year’s initial appropriation was $176.4 million, which has since been reduced to $170.5 million.

“It has been fluctuating quite a bit over the past years,” Wyke said.

“He was a really committed guy — committed to the university. He loved the university; he loved students,” said Robert Dana, dean of students at the University of Maine.

Percy was employed at the university through a federal program aimed at employing retired senior citizens part-time. He was the only person at the university employed through the program, Dana said.

Percy originally worked at Maine Bound, shuttling students and performing tasks such as repairing tents. Later, he was appointed caretaker of the arcade, where he meticulously cleaned the room and games and attended to students’ needs. He became a fixture of the arcade.

“Percy was a genuine Mainer,” said Kenda Scheele, associate dean of students at UMaine. “He loved the University of Maine. He was born and raised here. His family is from here. He was the heart of UMaine.” Scheele worked with Percy when she first came to UMaine and said he truly enjoyed the work he did for the university.

Percy was always more than willing to talk to students. He would often get involved in long conversations with students about the arcade, gathering opinions on particular games and ways to make the room better.

Less than a week before he died, Percy could be heard in the arcade speaking animatedly with a student about the history of the popular arcade game Dance Dance Revolution. But it was unusual to see the student do most of the talking; usually Percy was eager to entertain any willing ear.

And that attitude — willing to talk or listen to a student — made Percy the distinguished character he was.

David Welch, a UMaine student who frequents the arcade, said Percy was supportive of the arcade’s visitors.

“He very much liked his job and was very much concerned with the students having the arcade,” Welch said. “It certainly was his place.”

When students had concerns or suggestions about the arcade, Percy was eager to listen. He took time to respond with handwritten notes to suggestions, posting them on the wall of the e-Sports room.

“I think that’s what made him able to connect to people, is that he was very genuine. He wished nobody ill will, he was always willing to help and he loved students,” Scheele said. “It kept him young to be around campus and to be around students.”

When The Maine Campus wrote an article featuring Percy in December, Scheele said he “got such a kick out of that.”

“He took about 10 copies, brought them to everyone he knows, sent them to his daughter in California,” Scheele said.

Percy did not deteriorate near the end of his life, Dana said. Though he had medical problems, he continued to live by himself and perform all his own chores, such as mowing the lawn and shoveling the snow at his Bangor home. He also remained mentally strong.

“He was right on his game, I tell ya,” Dana said. “Sharp as a tack.”

Percy died while leaving work, Dana said. An ambulance took him to Eastern Maine Medical Center, but he was pronounced dead before he arrived at the hospital.

“I think he would have been thrilled,” Dana said. “I think he would have wanted to die with his boots on.”

Percy is survived by a son and a daughter.

Loredo, who headed UVote, multicultural services, judicial affairs and GLBT Services, among other programs, joined the UMaine community as associate dean in June 1999. He previously served as director of multicultural services at the University of Houston-Clear Lake. His responsibilities will be absorbed by Dana and Senior Associate Dean of Students Kenda Scheele.

The decision to cut the position was made by Dana, in consultation with several other people who Dana declined to identify.

“We’ve cut 25 percent of the budget in the last four-plus years, and I had cut 12 positions leading up to this,” Dana said Friday afternoon. Most of the positions that have been cut so far were characterized by Dana as “front-line” positions, but Dana said he had cut those positions as much as he could afford.

“To provide excellent service to students, I cannot cut on the front lines,” Dana said. Previous cuts have affected campus recreation, campus activities and administrative support, but Dana said the cuts have not dramatically impacted students.

“Student Affairs personnel are willing to do what needs to be done to help people,” Dana said.

Dana told Loredo of the decision on Tuesday.

Loredo would like to stay in the academic arena, but was unable to comment on whether he would be able to stay at UMaine due to contractual limitations.

“My passion has always been working with students,” Loredo said.

Scheele called the cut “a horrible thing,” but said budget cuts dictated the action.

“At the end of the day, we have to make the money work,” Scheele said.

Zachary Knox, president of Wilde Stein, UMaine’s GLBT alliance, said Loredo would be “sincerely missed.” Knox said Loredo was the community’s “source of influence and support” in the administration.

Scheele said Student Affairs has suffered other personnel cuts in recent years, including losing an administrative assistant last year. The elimination of an associate dean position is the biggest cut of a single job UMaine has seen since the recession began.

Dana said the university compensates for position cuts by allocating additional jobs to other people. He said when he first joined the university, there was a vice president for student affairs, a dean of students and three associate deans. With the elimination of Loredo’s job, just Dana, as vice president and dean, and Scheele, as associate dean, remain.

“We haven’t been unfairly treated; we’ve been proportionally treated,” Dana said. He expects $200,000 of Student Affairs’ $2.9 million budget to be cut next year.

Public Safety will come under the purview of Student Affairs, effective Jan. 1. The department was previously under the direction of Vice President for Administration and Finance Janet Waldron, according to Dana.

Loredo’s salary and benefits totaled just under $101,000 last year, according to MaineOpenGov.org.

With 99 percent of precincts reporting, Yes on 1 had 52.81 percent of the vote and No on 1 had 47.19 percent.

Yes on 1 declared victory shortly after midnight, when it became apparent No on 1 could not overtake its lead.

“What the people of Maine had to say is that marriage matters and that it’s between a man and a woman,” said Marc Mutty, chairman of Stand for Marriage Maine, in a speech.

“It has been the little guy against the big guy in terms of resources — human resources, financial resources — and we prevailed because the people of Maine, the silent majority, the folks back home, spoke with their vote tonight,” Mutty said.

Yes on 1 gathered at the Eastland Park Hotel in Portland and at Jeff’s Catering in Brewer; supporters of No on 1 gathered at the Holiday Inn in Portland. While a few dozen supporters attended the Yes on 1 party in Portland, several hundred attended the No on 1 party, which featured a live band and a disc jockey later in the night. Some supporters danced and drank, while others watched a live feed of the results in front of two large screens.

The Yes on 1 parties were linked by live video feeds, and the two locations competed several times to see who could chant “Yes on 1” the loudest.

Early results showed No on 1 in the lead by a wide margin, but as the night wore on and rural precincts started to report results, No on 1’s lead shrank steadily. Shortly before 10:30 p.m., Yes on 1 took the lead for the first time, to cheers from its supporters.

The No on 1 campaign did not concede immediately. Mark Sullivan, spokesperson for Protect Maine Equality, said shortly after midnight the campaign intended to continue to count the vote well into the day.

But around 2 a.m., No on 1 seemed to concede. In a statement on No on 1’s Web site, Jesse Connolly, campaign manager for Protect Maine Equality, thanked supporters and vowed to continue the fight for same-sex marriage.

“We’re in this for the long haul,” the statement said. “For next week, and next month, and next year — until all Maine families are treated equally. Because in the end, this has always been about love and family and that will always be something worth fighting for.”

Reverend Bob Emrich said in Yes on 1’s victory speech that the campaign was never about hating gay couples.

“There are some bridges that need to be built, some fences that need to be mended. We need to reach out to some people who may very well have been doing what they believed in. We disagreed with them very strongly, obviously, but we need to reach out to them,” Emrich said.

“The institution of marriage has been preserved in Maine and across this nation,” said Frank Shubert, Yes on 1’s campaign manager.

Schubert said polls had Yes on 1 up by about 6 percent going into Election Day, so he was confident throughout the day, even as early returns had No on 1 up.

Scott Fish, communications director for Stand for Marriage Maine, said Question 1 passed because voters got away from the spin and realized what was in the bill.

“I think they saw that whatever inequities there are in domestic partnerships — gay or straight — that they realized that these can be dealt with through lawmaking, that we don’t have to redefine marriage to do that, and when they realized that the pending bill would have redefined marriage they didn’t like it,” Fish said.

Supporters of Question 1 said they had no immediate plans for the future. Schubert said he did not think same-sex marriage was likely to come up again in the future.

“I think the other side will try and push it, but I don’t think the legislature or the governor is going to turn their back on what the people have decided,” Schubert said.

Maine was the 31st state to vote down same-sex marriage at polls; no states have approved gay marriage by popular vote.

Maine and Rhode Island are now the only states in New England where same-sex marriage is not legal. New Hampshire is set to start marrying same-sex couples in January.

—

Dylan Riley contributed to this report.

The hearing, held in the Collins Center for the Arts, was the last in a series of visits to each campus and the system office to solicit comments from the community.

The chancellor’s initiative, titled “The University of Maine System and the Future of Maine,” seeks to balance the system’s budget and ensure long-term viability. Chancellor Richard Pattenaude presented the plan to the board of trustees Sept. 15 and has said he wants the board to vote on it by November.

Michael Grillo, associate professor of art history, said he had heard there would be cuts encompassing a quarter to a third of faculty by 2014. Grillo asked how those cuts would benefit the system and how they could be avoided.

“If you cut a substantial number of faculty, I think you will also lose a substantial number of students,” Grillo said. “What type of organization structure is there to facilitate the discussions of, you know, what the mission of the system is as it returns to that and how we are best serving our citizens, and how we actually can provide for an educated citizenry?”

Grillo’s question received a round of applause from the audience and rebuke from Joe Wishcamper, the board’s chairman.

“Who says 25 percent of the faculty? That is ridiculous,” Wishcamper said, to a smattering of applause. “People are scared of change, and disinformation flies around like wildfire.”

“We have no interest in seeing a quarter of the faculty gone, ever,” Pattenaude said, but did not provide specifics.

Pattenaude did elaborate on the process through which faculty cuts would be made.

“Shared governance, process, union rules and understandings and agreements will all be respected in this,” Pattenaude said.

Wishcamper said the system did not have specific numbers.

“We don’t know what the economy’s going to do. We don’t know what the legislature’s going to do and, frankly, we have things that are within our control and the control of our administrators that can change all of our assumptions,” Wishcamper said. “All we can do today is do scenarios on what might be the uncontrollable things that we have to deal with. And we have to plug in assumptions about the things that we can control, such as tuition, numbers of students, so forth and so on.”

“The numbers that you may be hearing are simply because we’re running scenarios to inform ourselves about how to make decisions in the event that the future unfolds in ways that are not embedded in our base projection,” Wishcamper said.

Steve Butterfield, state representative for House District 16 and a UMaine student, applauded the board’s efforts, saying as a legislator he understood the process and criticism the board went through.

“A lot of what’s in [the report] is not going to be popular,” Butterfield said. “I really applaud you for putting forward some serious thought here, some serious changes, despite the fact they will inevitably be unpopular.”

Butterfield said he appreciated the report’s stand against “unnecessary and repetitive tuition increases.”

“As somebody paying for my own education now, for somebody whose family was involved when I was in school before; the old habit of relying on tuition increases to make up for the gap in revenue simply can’t work anymore,” Butterfield said. “[Students] are broke; we are in debt, and there’s simply nothing left to get from us.”

“We must recognize that the University of Maine System cannot any longer be all things to all people,” Butterfield said. “That will mean downsizing or completely eliminating programs. That’s never an easy process, but it is, sadly, a necessary one.”

Butterfield’s thoughts, though, were in the minority. Multiple attendees asked about the system’s plans to eliminate courses and programs.

“We try to provide targets for the campuses, but we don’t try to tell them how to change their administrative structure,” Wishcamper said.

Pattenaude said the system office would leave such decisions up to the universities.

“Decisions will be made at the campus level,” Pattenaude said. “Campuses make those decisions and present them to the trustees for support.”

“There are programs at every university that are vestigial,” Wishcamper said. “There are programs that exist today because they’ve existed forever. And there are programs that don’t exist today that should exist today because they have to do with the future needs of the population in terms of being educated.”

Several graduate students spoke on the importance of UMaine’s research mission.

Julie-Ann Scott, a doctorate candidate, said she attended a small liberal arts college for her undergraduate degree.

“If I had to do it over, I would have gone to a research university,” Scott said. “And I would have gone to a research university because it is amazing to be close to the creation of new knowledge.”

Kurt Klappenbach, a graduate student in the communications and journalism department, said UMaine “presents a unique climate for research” and asked what steps were being taken to ensure students will be able to continue working in a research climate.

“There is only one land-grant university in Maine, and that is the University of Maine. And with that comes a distinct mission and a distinct set of responsibilities,” Pattenaude said.

“We agree and understand the immense centrality and importance of the research agenda, the doctoral agenda, but also the statewide service mission of this institution,” Pattenaude said.

About 300 people attended the session, according to university spokesperson Joe Carr, and more than 5,000 people are estimated to have watched the live stream online. Toward the end of the session, the board stopped answering questions in order to allow as many people to speak as possible.

The poll, conducted by the Portland-based Pan Atlantic SMS Group, found 48.8 percent of registered voters were likely to vote against Question 4 — the Taxpayer Bill of Rights also known as TABOR II. According to the poll, 42.1 percent are likely to vote for the proposal, and 9.3 percent are undecided.

The findings are a dramatic reversal from a poll released Oct. 14 by the same group that found supporters of TABOR II to have a 14 point lead. The earlier poll said 52.8 percent of respondents said they would vote or were likely to vote for the proposal, with 38.7 percent saying they would vote or were likely to vote against it. The poll found 8.5 percent to be undecided.

Mark Brewer, associate professor of political science, said he did not know much about the polling company, so he could not gauge its accuracy. Pan Atlantic sometimes provides polling services for businesses.

“I’ve been looking at those numbers with a pretty skeptical eye,” Brewer said. “It’s not to say that they’re not accurate; it’s just based on the little I know about this outfit.”

Brewer said the wide swing on TABOR was large, but not implausible. While many people are very passionate about same-sex marriage, TABOR is a more complicated and nuanced issue, Brewer said.

“As people learn more about it, as they are lobbied, indirectly at least, one way or another, I don’t think it’s that unusual for a swing like that to happen on an issue like TABOR,” Brewer said. “I’d be stunned, on the other hand, if you saw that kind of a move on an issue like same-sex marriage. Most people have made up their mind.”

Opponents of Question 1, which would repeal Maine’s law allowing same-sex marriage, showed small gains. The new poll found 52.6 percent of those polled were likely to vote against Question 1 — in favor of keeping the law — and 41.5 percent said they were likely to vote for Question 1 and the repeal. Six percent said they were undecided.

“I doubt that the final outcome’s going to be anything near that big, and if it is, I’m going to be surprised,” Brewer said. “I think if there’s a difference of anything more than five points, I’m going to be really surprised.”

Campaign finance reports released Oct. 23 showed No on 1 continued its fundraising streak, raising $1.36 million in the period for a total of more than $4 million this year compared to Yes on 1’s $1.41 million in the period for a total of $2.55 million.

On Question 2, which would lower Maine’s excise tax on vehicles, 60.8 percent of respondents said they were likely to vote against the measure, with 28.5 percent saying they were likely to vote for the reduction and 10.8 percent undecided.

Question 3, which would repeal Maine’s school consolidation law, dropped slightly as well, with 44.5 percent responding they were likely to vote against the repeal and 39.1 percent saying they were likely to vote for it.

Question 5, which would create a distribution system for medical marijuana, was not polled earlier in the month. Monday’s poll found 59 percent of respondents said they were likely to vote for the proposal, with 32 percent likely to vote against it and 9 percent undecided.

Question 3 on Maine’s Nov. 3 ballot would repeal a law requiring school districts to consolidate. The law requires most school districts with fewer than 2,500 students to consolidate with surrounding districts to form Regional School Units. Very rural and island districts are exempt.

The consolidation law was controversial when it was passed, and the debate over Question 3 has been heated. Advocates for “no” on 3 have accused opponents of misleading voters.

Skip Greenlaw, head of the Maine Coalition to Save Schools, which advocates voting “yes” on Question 3, said he is not opposed to school consolidation in general, just mandatory consolidation.

“I agree with the governor that we cannot maintain the level of spending at the state level on education. That’s very clear,” Greenlaw said.

“I think it’s probably premature for either side to say either that there is no savings or there’s a lot of savings because I don’t really know … until the end of the year when you take a look at what has happened all year long,” Greenlaw said.

Greenlaw said repealing the law would not require the RSUs to de-consolidate.

“We’re not opposed to RSUs that are successfully going forward,” Greenlaw said. According to Greenlaw, Maine’s commissioner of education told the legislative education committee the current RSUs could be made into School Administrative Districts, which existed under the old law.

“The communities can stay consolidated if they want to, but there are a number of communities that want to withdraw from the districts,” Greenlaw said.

Newell Augur, campaign manager for Maine People for Improved Education, which advocates voting “no” on Question 3, disagreed. He said language allowing districts to stay consolidated would have to be approved by the legislature, which isn’t assured.

“Skip’s making a guarantee he can’t back up,” Augur said. “And let’s remember, he’s the one who drafted the question, and he drafted it for the complete repeal.”

“Skip wants to preserve 290 school districts in Maine. That’s way more than we can afford. And it doesn’t produce good results for our kids,” Augur said.

Greenlaw admitted the initiative isn’t perfect. “I didn’t foresee all the complications — no one can foresee all the complications when they put a petition like this together,” he said. But, he thinks the issue would be relatively easy to deal with.

“I think that problem is absolutely overblown,” Greenlaw said. “It can be done without too much destruction.”

Augur pointed to RSUs that have successfully consolidated and saved money. He cited four RSUs that have collectively saved $2.5 million through consolidation and said others can do the same. He said the passage of Question 3 would result in the state losing $25 million to $30 million, a number he didn’t explain.

“We will be losing a number of significant improvements in the classroom, and specifically in the high schools where we’ve seen … expansion of programs like advanced placement and gifted and talented programs in Maine high schools, and we’ll be throwing that away as well,” Augur said. Greenlaw said Question 3 would not undo savings.

“I do not understand where the opposition is saying that it’s going to cost the state money. If there’s money that’s been saved, so be it. It’s not going to all of a sudden disappear because the law gets repealed,” Greenlaw said.

Greenlaw said consolidation can result in increased salary costs for teachers because of collective bargaining.

“The reason why 200 communities voted against consolidation is because the cost of collective bargaining is exceeded [by] any savings,” Greenlaw said. “It’s sort of common sense, which Maine people have a lot of. Why would they vote for something that costs more than it saves?”

Maine Rep. Emily Cain, D-Orono, sits on No on 3’s letterhead committee. She said the consolidation law does not force any districts into unwelcome partnerships nor does it allow schools to close.

Orono has formed an RSU with Veazie and Glenburn.

“The state did not force any two towns or districts to come together, but rather set parameters around what a new district might look like,” Cain said.

Cain said the state found 2,500 students per district to be the most efficient size for a school district.

“If you got bigger than that, you ended up becoming less efficient on a per-student basis, or if you were smaller than that, the next level of efficiency down actually was 1,200, which is why that number was chosen. It was not random,” Cain said.

“Maine has a long history of every town having its own school and its own superintendant. That is as emotional as it is anything else. The reality is that Maine, population-wise, looks a lot different 50 some-odd years ago, which was the last time school districts were restructured,” Cain said.

Before we get into whether it’s a good idea to place such limits on government spending, it’s imperative to remember that we do not live in a direct democracy.

The mass, as a whole, is uninformed and uninterested. The idea that we, as a constituency, should make decisions on each line of the budget can only result in one thing: chaos.

Our job as constituents is to tell our representatives what we want in the broadest terms possible. Our representatives should then accurately reflect the desires of their constituents in legislation.

If we disagree with the bills our legislators are voting for, we can tell them so, either by phone, letter or vote. Don’t want health care reform? How about public education or well-paved roads? Tell them so. But don’t tie their hands with overly simplistic and incredibly constrictive legislation.

More than a failed ideal of direct democracy, TABOR intends to cut government spending.

If anything, Maine needs more government spending. Before conservatives die of heart attacks, let me explain. In order for Maine to raise itself out of recession, infrastructure must exist to make this state more pleasing to businesses and residents. Maine must build high-speed Internet (really high speed, not DSL), pour millions more into public education (both primary and higher) and make sure our basic infrastructure needs (such as roads) don’t fall to the wayside in the process. And while I’m a great believer in the free market — really, I love competition — no company in its right mind would invest in Maine. We are a large state with a sparse population, spread out over vast distances, making infrastructure even more important.

If TABOR passes, such infrastructure will be the first to go. The state will no longer be able to pave roads, much less subsidize high-speed internet and cell phone towers. Maine’s technology gap will widen, making the state further unappealing to companies.

Infrastructure, not belt tightening, will raise this state out of economic depression. Maine has never been a prosperous state, and the era of manufacturing is over. People in Maine abstain from buying big-ticket items not because they’re frugal or because taxes are high, but because they’re poor. Maine has one of the lowest median incomes in the country.

The way to fix all this is to attract high-tech industry. Vermont, for example, has higher tax rates than Maine, but still has several forward-thinking companies, such as Green Mountain Coffee, Ben and Jerry’s, Cabot and Seventh Generation. It also has the fifth-lowest unemployment rate in the country. Maine has … lobster.

To micromanage our elected representatives is a fallacy of epic proportions. Such officials are elected to deal with our problems so we don’t have to. Few people can grasp the intricacies of a multi-billion dollar budget. It’s hard enough to get 188 people to agree on a budget. It’s even harder to get several hundred thousand to agree.

If people have a problem with an item in the state’s budget, they should oppose that item. Think we spend too much on roads or education? The best way to deal with it is to tell your representative. The worst way to deal with it is to cut your representative off at the knees. The upshot will be a decrease in funding for essential services, which I will guess nobody wants.

Maine has an active citizen’s veto process, of which dissatisfied residents are more than welcome to avail themselves. It is much easier to get people to care about a specific issue — same-sex marriage or medical marijuana, for example — than it is to get them to care about a budget.

William P. Davis is editor in chief of The Maine Campus.