AUGUSTA – Higher-education officials gave thumbs down Tuesday to a bill to establish one centralized system of governance for all of the state’s public colleges and universities.

Sponsored by Sen. Elizabeth Mitchell, LD 1661 would create a board of regents as the central policy-making authority for the University of Maine System, the Maine Community College System and Maine Maritime Academy.

Among other things, the 16-member group would develop a master plan for higher education; review mission statements; approve academic programs; establish tuition guidelines; and oversee budgets.

The bill also would establish a coordinating council and an advisory committee to assist the board of regents.

Mitchell, a Democrat from Vassalboro, told the Legislature’s Education Committee during a public hearing that the goal of her bill is to “offer a formal structure for coordination” to prevent the duplication of facilities and programs among the state’s public universities and community colleges.

The University of Maine System, the Maine Community College System and Maine Maritime Academy would continue to have their own systems of governance for daily operations, while the board of regents would set capital planning needs based on the recommendations of the systems, according to her bill.

But Mitchell isn’t calling for passage right away. Noting the “sweeping changes” the measure proposes and the current legislative session’s imminent closure, she suggested that the Education Committee vote to form a study commission to determine the best governance model for Maine.

Meanwhile, higher-education representatives offered stiff resistance to the idea of a board of regents.

They said it would increase administrative costs, create additional layers of bureaucracy, diminish the role of faculty, students and existing boards, and take time away from other priorities.

Charles Johnson, chairman of the University of Maine System board of trustees, said the bill would divert time and resources from implementing that system’s strategic plan and increase the political nature of higher-education governance.

“It ignores the significant amount of collaboration already occurring involving the university system and the community college system,” said Johnson.

He referred specifically to the “Advantage U” program, which guarantees university enrollment to community college graduates, and the Maine Higher Education Partnership, a joint coordinating and planning committee between the two systems.

Joanna Jones, chairman of the Maine Community College System board of trustees, said the bill would “slow our colleges down and reduce our responsiveness” to the needs of Maine employers.

She also was concerned that the community colleges’ needs would “get filtered out when reviewed against all the needs of higher education … ”

The state’s current higher-education system “strikes a healthy balance of state-level coordination and oversight, with a reasonable amount of independence that allows our systems – and the individual colleges – to move and respond quickly to the needs of Maine, of our constituencies, and of our communities,” she said.

Bill Haggett, chairman of the Maine Maritime Academy board of trustees, also voiced his dismay. “To continue to excel, MMA must remain independent of a large bureaucratic structure … ,” he said.

He added, “I can understand why this Legislature wants to gain more control over the chancellor and UMS board actions. But, to effect change, you should continue dealing directly with that organization as you have been doing and not go forward with this concept. This plan will not help higher education in Maine, but could be very harmful.”

But Barry Farber, a professor at the University of Maine at Augusta, said he liked Mitchell’s plan. Each institution now looks to solve its problems according to “its own frame of reference,” he said. “It would be nice to have a coordinated approach.”

The institutions aren’t cooperating as much as they should be, Mitchell contended. The community college system and the university system both developed strategic plans that affect each other, but neither included the other in those discussions, she said.

With the community college system competing for the same resources as the university system, policy-makers must “find a rational way of allocating those resources through planning for new construction as well as expansion or duplication of programs,” Mitchell said. “I emphasize that this proposal is intended to strengthen – not weaken – their role.”

A work session on the bill is scheduled for 1 p.m. today.