Restructuring off the table
Rutgers, Gov. McGreevey issue joint statement
Archived article from Dec 15, 2003
By Carla Cantor
The controversial proposal to integrate Rutgers, the University of Medicine and Dentistry of New Jersey and the New Jersey Institute of Technology into a single research university will not go forward. The announcement came in a joint statement issued by Gov. James E. McGreevey and the Rutgers Board of Governors Dec. 12.
“It is clear that while we have made good progress, it will not be possible to present a comprehensive plan to the Legislature in time for appropriate consideration in 2004,” said board of governors Chair Gene O’Hara, reading the joint statement. “Collaboration and partnership are ideas we will continue to pursue. However, there are simply too many financial and structural issues for this to be considered by the Legislature at this time.”
The board voted 10-1 to issue the joint statement, with the dissenting vote coming from P. Roy Vagelos, a member of the board of governors and chair of the Review, Planning and Implementation Steering Committee, appointed by Gov. McGreevey in December 2002 to design the blueprint for restructuring public higher education in New Jersey.
President Richard L. McCormick commended the board for the resolution and thanked the university community for its dedication and hard work. “For the past 14 months, the Rutgers community has been deeply and intensely engaged in discussions and analysis of Governor McGreevey’s exciting proposal to restructure New Jersey’s public research universities,” McCormick said. “Our board members, our faculty, our administrators and our students have devoted countless hours and intellectual capital to this vision.” He also thanked Gov. McGreevey for recognizing the importance of strong colleges and universities to New Jersey’s future prosperity.
McCormick said that the restructuring discussions had sparked many rich ideas about the future of Rutgers and its relationship to its partner research universities, especially in the life sciences. He said that he looked forward to closer collaboration among the administrations and faculties of Rutgers, UMDNJ and NJIT.
“There is so much we can do to break down the barriers of collaboration,” McCormick said. “Education, research, health care, service to the people of New Jersey. This is what our research universities are all about. I share the board’s conviction that these goals can be achieved for now in substantial measure without restructuring.”
Board members expressed gratitude to Vagelos for helping to create a blueprint for a research-based economy based in academic excellence. David J. Harris, Jr. said that Vagelos’ steering committee had not only highlighted Rutgers’ need to develop better synergies but had helped identify shortcomings of the existing system, particularly in regard to the Newark and Camden campuses. “While New Brunswick has had the lion’s share of resources,” he said, “Newark and Camden need more resources and independence.”
Vagelos, the former CEO of Merck & Co., said he was “disappointed that the university would pull away from such an opportunity.” But he expressed enthusiasm for the plans that had come out of the university subcommittee reports for the north, central and southern campuses, detailing their individual visions for restructuring. “The most exciting part of the whole exercise was the university committees—the faculty who looked at the universities in Newark, New Brunswick/Piscataway and Camden/Stratford and said, ‘this is exciting’ and wrote reports that transmitted that excitement and passion.”
Speaking on behalf of the students, Jason Redd, student representative to the board of governors, said students were buoyed that the debate had drawn attention to Rutgers’ aspirations to become a top-tier research institution. “If you ask students, they want the university to be the best it can be. I hope this focus and commitment, while not in the form initially proposed, will continue to inspire faculty, students and the governor to work together for the good of the university and the state’s educational system.”
continued...
Page 1 of 2
Next >
|
