I read with interest former University of Maine Trustees Donald L. McDowell and Wickham Skinner’s op-ed, “A fragile public institution” (BDN, April 20), and we need to set the record straight.

Some 30 years ago, when I was deputy attorney general, I drafted the legislation which created the current University of Maine System by the merger of Maine’s several state colleges. We then placed the existing state colleges into the system, because we had faith the system was one which served all of Maine’s people.

We will remember that the university is a land grant university; its charter was granted by the Maine Legislature; and for a number of years it had operated independently of the state college system. I spent a year implementing the provisions on all of the existing campuses and I have watched the university’s operations and growth since with great interest.

I currently represent the Associated Faculties of the University of Maine who are concerned with certain aspects of the overall plan. I believe the Legislature, on behalf of the people, and as a matter of law, has a real interest in the overall operation of the university, where it locates its campuses, what degrees it grants, and generally how it conducts its business.

We should remember that the Legislature created the University of Maine; it has amended its charter from time to time; it gives substantial funds (in the millions, yearly) to the university; the state, through its officials, appoints the trustees of the University System; and, importantly, it turned over its state college system to the university. It’s beyond reasonable argument that the state has no interest in the university or the state is somehow interfering in university affairs, when it proposes to have the university, a quasi-public agency, engage in some dialog so that the overall state educational policy can be set in a collaborative fashion.

It’s an unfortunate error for editorialists and some of the current university board members to say that the Legislature has no place in making that overall policy. As a matter of history, it has done that; importantly, it has amended the university charter; and effected the merger to which I have referred; it has a real stake in its overall educational future. This is the first time I’ve heard a suggestion that consideration of broad based issues, such as location of campuses, was beyond the action or wisdom of the Legislature.

When we did the overall merger of our state college system into the university there were many issues and strong feelings, but it was a collaborative effort. That should occur here, particularly as the Legislature works through some of the issues suggested by the legislation.

What really occurred here on the university’s side it that the plan was, in fact, put together and then that plan was served up as an essentially accomplished fact. There was no meaningful dialogue with the Legislature or many participants who now would like to have a say.

I think, with respect, the trustees may not have it quite correctly – they are stewards of a public interest; that’s a good thing. It allows them to work with others, not just within their own system, and to utilize the substantial ability of the Legislature to set policy to be brought to bear on our educational system.

I think it’s pretty clear that the Legislature has a right and even a responsibility to work with the university to make sure that this is a plan that fits all of us. That’s best done by the parties working together, not by handing down decisions from on high. Were the system as fragile as the previous writers described, given the amount of public discussion so far, surely they would have been adversely affected and that’s not the case.

The university is a viable, vibrant institution.

Jon R. Doyle is an attorney practicing in Augusta.