Lawmakers on the Education Committee soundly rejected six bills Wednesday aimed at the University of Maine System, from efforts to earmark funding to restore cuts to requiring a state audit of the system’s finances.

Lawmakers said the bills all represented efforts to micromanage the university system, which has had years of financial difficulties and seen deep cuts across the seven campus system.

“We haven’t adequately funded (the system) and that is where this is coming from, all this frustration,” said committee co-chair Rep. Victoria Kornfield, D-Bangor. “It is in flux and that makes people anxious and upset. I’m not going to micromanage, I’m going to put my efforts into getting the system more money.”

University officials plan to use $9 million in emergency reserves to balance the system’s $519 million budget for the fiscal year beginning in July. Last year’s $529 million system budget required using $11.4 million in emergency funds and cutting 157 positions.

In all, the committee voted unanimously “ought not to pass” for five of the six bills. One bill had a single supporting vote.

Rep. Dianne Russell, D-Portland, sponsored two of the bills but said she was happy with the outcome, even though they were rejected. One of her bills, LD 18, would have required the Legislature’s watchdog agency, the Office of Program Evaluation and Government Accountability, to audit the system finances, even though the usual process for an OPEGA review is to ask the legislative Government Oversight Committee to consider the request.

The committee rejected the bill, but said they would send a letter to the Government Oversight Committee noting the issues raised in Russell’s bill.

“Sending a letter … sends a very clear message to the folks who have been fighting for an open and transparent process that they were heard,” Russell said after the vote. “I would call that a victory.”

Chancellor James Page said the committee votes were “appropriate and appreciated” and acknowledged the concerns that prompted the bills.

“The heart of those concerns are legitimate,” Page said. “It’s an ongoing dialogue. We do have to keep the lines of communication open.”

Several of the bills would have provided funding for the system, but with requirements to spend the money to restore cuts, for classroom expenses, or for recruiting.

In rejecting the bills, lawmakers said they did not want to micromanage the system.

“I really feel strongly that we are in a position now where we are expecting our higher education institutions to make substantial changes and it is our job to strengthen their position in order to do that,” Rep. Brian Hubbell, D-Bar Harbor. “To me, when we start getting into this at this level, we are losing sight of that mission.”

Kornfield noted that the financial issues at the system have been discussed for years, and that was one reason she didn’t support the bills.

“We are in a financial crisis in higher education,” she said. “We have asked the chancellor to respond to that, to be fiscally responsible, and what that means is he has to reduce the system footprint, it means reducing professors and reducing classes. He has to do it.”

Kornfield and other committee members said they want the university to continue with those cost-cutting measures.

“The university administration has responded to our requests, has a plan and is reducing the system,” she said. “I don’t know how it’s going to turn out, but we as a committee need to allow it to work, to see if it works. If it doesn’t work, maybe we’ll step in.”

Republican Rep. Michael McClellan, R-Raymond, agreed.

“Five years ago I would have jumped on board” to support some of these measures, McClellan said. But he noted that university leaders are working with the legislature.

“Right now, they’re doing what we asked them to do,” McClellan said. “We are hearing what we want to hear at this point. We are seeing the change.”

In addition to LD 17, the committee rejected LDs 18, 42, 794, 99 and 939.

Copy the Story Link