USNH Opposes Restructuring Intents of House Bill 1692

Circulating through the House of New Hampshire since the beginning of this month is House Bill 1692, a bill which strives to make changes to the structure of the University System of New Hampshire Board of Trustees, including the elimination of the office of the chancellor, the redistribution of managerial duties, and the reduction of student presence on the Board.

The University System of New Hampshire was designed and created in 1963 by the Legislature to give the institutions that make it up (the University of New Hampshire, Plymouth State University, Keene State College, and Granite State College) significant degrees of individual autonomy, while also ensuring cooperation and collaboration between the four sister schools.

One of the championing aspects of the University system is that it allows the four institutions to come together to share services, including legal services, information technology services, payroll, and the like.

PSU President Sara Jayne Steen says that the University system "has genius to it" for its  methods of cost-effectiveness and economies of scale. Steen says the system demonstrates cost-effectiveness "in its ability to do large-scale purchasing."

The system allows the four institutions the benefits of many of the same services while keeping numbers of employees to a minimum. "If one [provides a service] to all four of us" says Steen, "then four of us don't have to hire the people. That saves students money."

House Bill 1692 looks to reduce the size of the system office by about 60 people, under the assumption that doing so would save several million dollars and return money to the campuses, without the state actually having to provide funds.

NH House Majority Leader D.J. Bettencourt co-sponsored the bill, and believes that "this legislation maps out a plan for other existing parts of the University system to absorb the chancellor's functions … This bill would save the university system millions of dollars."

"I believe that the original intent [of the bill's sponsors] was good," said President Steen, "but they didn't actually understand the fiscal implications."

In four separate testimonies to the bill to the House Education Committee on Jan. 25, 2012, each of the four institutions' presidents addressed the assumptions made by the writers and sponsors.

"The bill's sponsors assume financial savings for the campuses, but there also are costs," said President Steen. "Should the system office be reduced as proposed in this bill, Plymouth State and the other campuses will have to replicate system support and maintain the high level of quality and accountability … that will entail costs and additional employees at a time when our appropriation has been reduced by 48 percent. In some cases the shift is likely to introduce additional costs."

UNH President Mark Huddleston said in his testimony that, although he appreciates "the spirit of this legislation … anything that creates inefficiency or resembles unnecessary bureaucracy will be lethal."

President Huddleston affirmed that the Board of Trustees "have been working to make necessary changes in the University System" that will create the same effects that the bill's sponsors hope to create. 

"Specifically, the board is assessing all Board and USNH policies and procedures with the aim of providing maximal delegation of authority to campus presidents, examining all "shared services" … that represent real and demonstrable economies of scale, and weighing recommendations … that would facilitate meeting the institutions' critical public missions.

"I am optimistic that the board will complete its important work this spring," said Huddleston, "and that the result will be four strong and empowered New Hampshire institutions of public higher education."