Amid serious practical concerns from the faculty and staff of its constituent universities, the chief governing body of the University of Maine System (UMS) will decide on a major change in the system’s organization today. Among other things, the plan includes merging the University of Maine at Augusta with USM.
The Board of Trustees (BOT) is scheduled to vote on the revised UMaine System Strategic Plan today at the University of Maine in Orono. Faculty union members from each of the state institutions are expected to demonstrate outside the meeting, asking for a postponement of the BOT vote so that a comprehensive review of the Strategic Plan can take place.
Chancellor Joseph Westphal said he is confident faculty and staff are committed to the Strategic Plan.
“I think the faculty of all our universities are going to be engaged at varying levels in varying degrees and varying manners to both discuss and to find ways to implement various aspects of the plan.”Don Anspach, co-chair of the USM branch of the Associated Faculties of the University of Maine (AFUM) disagrees. “There are rumors afoot, given the situation with this plan, that there may be a vote of no confidence in the Chancellor. That would be coming from the faculty senates from each of the seven campuses.”
University of Maine Faculty Senate President Howard Patterson, acknowledged that some members of the staff at the University of Maine want a vote of no confidence. “I think that some people want [a vote of no confidence] but most people want to see the university move together.”
William Steele, a professor of theatre at USM wrote in an email to all of USM’s faculty members, “Although many concerns have been raised by faculty about the Strategic Plan, the final draft fails to respond to most of them, particularly two issues AFUM considers critical-job losses and shared governance,” Steele is also co-chair of USM AFUM
In June, Roxie Black, USM faculty senate chair submitted a memo to Westphal saying: “by not engaging thoughts and ideas from the stakeholders, the Board neglected to take advantage of a significant source of experience and intellectual capital within the system.”