Failing UMS oversight

The editorial, “Shareholders’ Revolt” (BDN, June 13), begs a question about the ability of University of Maine System trustees to do effective oversight of the system. Trustees rely on the chancellor to convey the needs and aspirations of the several campuses that are formulated by the presidents and their staffs. Trustees have a diluted, filtered view of campus-by-campus needs and objectives.

In the “olden days,” the trustees of the system would show up in March for a detailed “dog and pony show” of what UMaine was doing, was planning, and why. President Lloyd Elliott stood before an onslaught of tough questions by trustees with long experience of UMaine. Every stone was turned over and over again until satisfaction – or else – was gained by those tough, up-to-speed trustees.

They had power. They knew it. They exercised it aggressively.

It made UMaine work integrally and provingly with the state.

UMS trustees need strengthening to the point where they able and willing to do the kind of hard, detailed work done by those “olden days” trustees.

John Lyman

Steuben