Last March, the chancellor of the University of Maine System and the System’s Board of Trustees presented to the public for its comments their Strategic Draft Plan for the UM System. Some campuses expressed doubts, some expressed fears, and some had very little to say at all.

Those campuses that perceived they have the most to lose if the plan is implemented spoke the loudest and most vehement in opposition. Although there is not complete unanimity among University of Maine at Machias faculty, in early May, an overwhelming majority sent a clear message to the chancellor and Board of Trustees that supported a statement made by the Associated Faculties of the University of Maine (AFUM).

That statement indicated that the plan was irredeemably flawed, that a new plan be developed with the full participation of the university community, and that any attempt to approve and implement the plan be stopped immediately. The UMM faculty went further with their statement: “We embrace change, but we, who are closest to the people we serve, need to be part of the process from the beginning. We join other faculty groups that have made comparable statements, and we call upon the remaining faculties to do similarly.”

So, what’s wrong with the plan from the Machias perspective? If you point your web browser to http://www.maine.edu/spp/, click on the UMS Draft Strategic Plan for Comment icon, then forward to page 21 you will find a description of the new vision for UMM, I mean UNM – the University of Northern Maine.

That is, the Plan would eliminate the name “University of Maine at Machias” as well as “University of Maine at Presque Isle,” and “University of Maine at Fort Kent.” There would be one administration between these three campuses and a single faculty.

The plan also states, “Over time, it is likely that Liberal Arts baccalaureate programs would be focused in one location and professional programs in another.” Let’s examine the proposed name. First, there’s the simple fact that Machias is located in eastern Maine – it is not northern; it is not central; it is not southern. Machias, for those who crafted the plan and need a lesson in geography, is on the Down East coast.

It is 45 minutes from St. Stephen, New Brunswick, Canada, and 90 miles east of Bangor. In addition, it is 226 miles to Fort Kent from Machias and a mere 215 miles to Portland from Machias – does that give you pause to think about the geographic logic of the University of Northern Maine? Second, the University of Maine at Machias has had its present name since the University of Maine System was created in 1968 by the state legislature. From 1909, when it was a normal school, to 1968, when it was a state teacher’s college, UMM had several names – none, however, were imposed under duress.

Third, UMM has built an strong academic reputation, as have the two northern campuses, that distinguishes it from other campuses in the UM System and in the state of Maine. Although changing UMM’s name won’t change its history, there will have to be a tremendous effort put forth just in terms of marketing a new name that seems counterproductive and costly. Fourth, a name change, and most of the other “details” associated with the proposed merger were dealt to this community in much the same way parents decide what’s best for their 10-year olds. That’s fine for parents, but not for the chancellor and Board of Trustees of the University of Maine System.

Fifth, no one has said why a name change must occur. Some believe there should be only one University of Maine, and that would be the flagship campus in Orono – the Land Grant and Sea Grant institution. Some believe there is confusion among the masses who don’t understand the difference, say, between the University of Maine and the University of Maine at Machias. To those who are confused, I would ask if there is any confusion between the University of North Carolina (in Chapel Hill) and the University of North Carolina at Wilmington, or the University of Wisconsin (in Madison) and the University of Wisconsin at Stevens Point?

During his visit to UMM in April, the chancellor was surprised by the animosity and outpouring of discontent for the plan by faculty, students, and the public. He shouldn’t have been if he knew how much people care for and about their institution. Although he touted the plan as one that would strengthen the Machias campus, those who attended the meeting and those that have since discussed it have reached a different, and opposite, conclusion. The University of Maine at Machias undertook its own strategic planning initiative in 2001 – a process that took three years and involved all aspects of the campus from faculty and staff to administration, security, and our physical plant. The process involved the broader community as well. What we developed is an exciting model for UMM’s future success. We redefined our mission and vision and everything we plan to do from our academic programs, new hires, building plans, etc. reflects our unique location.

When people hear the name University of Maine at Machias, they will think of us as a center for Down East coastal studies. Our location serves as a laboratory for students in all of our programs, and our campus serves as a cultural, historic, economic, and research asset for the community. UMM has a unique role to play in the coastal community from entrepreneurship, recreation, and fine arts to marine biology and behavioral studies. We partner with and advocate for local teachers, fishermen, artists, social service providers, and businesses.

What UMM needs are the resources from the University of Maine System to effect the changes that it has already set into motion, not a plan that sweeps under the carpet what we want to do and completely redefines our campus, its programs, and its relationship with students and the community.

The plan is predicated on cost savings, so if this is a real issue and the University of Maine System is in such bad shape fiscally, why does the plan not call for any change in the number of staff in the system and chancellor’s office? In April 2004, there were 136 employees in those offices. None of those employees teaches, conducts research, or performs outreach, yet the annual payroll of those system employees is $6.9 million, which comes from an annual state appropriation. The annual state appropriation for UMM is $4.1 million.

There is something fundamentally wrong with a process that ignores the wishes of the people it purports to help and something fundamentally wrong about a plan that calls for extensive change at these small campuses, but is deliberately silent about the offices that generated the plan.

“What’s in a name?” Shakespeare’s Juliet asked. “That which we call a rose by any other word would smell as sweet.” A rose is a rose, but UMM is not UNM, nor will it ever be.

Brian F. Beal, Ph.D., is a professor of marine ecology at the University of Maine at Machias.