Jump to content



UAlbany Athletics- America East-
SOCIAL MEDIA: UAlbany Facebook- UAlbany Instagram- UAlbany Twitter- UAlbany Blog-
MEDIA: Albany Student Press- America East TV- ESPN3- Schenectady Gazette- The Team 104.5 ESPN Radio- The Team 104.5 ESPN Radio Archive interviews- Times Union College Sports- Times Union Sports- WCDB- WOFX 980-
FALL SPORTS LINKS: CAA Football-
WINTER SPORTS LINKS: College Insider- Pomeroy Ratings- Real TimeRPI-
SPRING SPORTS LINKS: Inside Lacrosse- Lax Power Backup Stick-
OTHER FORUMS: America East Forum- Any Given Saturday Forum- Championship Subdivision forum(1-AA Discussion) The Hen House - Siena Forum- Stony Brook Forum- Vermont Forum

UB Lobbying


ATL_DANE
 Share

Recommended Posts

Of course, she really needed to say these things to back up DeFleur. BU is the least research intensive and smallest of the Centers and should be worried about their schools' place in the system hierarchy and their wish for a Law school.

 

Trust me - we're not worried . . . but I suspect some folks in Buffalo will be if we get our law school. :D

 

Buffalo people wouldn't worry, nor would any of the other Centers for that matter. BU really wants the law school and if/when you do, great for the school. My comments on the SUNY hierarchy are something I think is salient. The old 'flagship debate' under Spitzer and The Commission Report never included BU. DeFleur does not want her school's lack of a research-focus (no medical component, few professional programs) to impact it's place among the Centers, per her advocating for inclusion in potential reforms. Zimpher said exactly the right things.

 

Bing is in a tough spot right now.

 

UB and SBU are going to end up very similar but on different ends of the State (e.g. law schools (SBU is buying Touro) and other professional med/dental schools).

 

UAlbany will be the technology center of NYS and the Northeast in just a few years ($5 billion in Nano already) and the business and government schools (Rockefellor, Criminology, etc.) will continue to separate themslves from the other public universities in the Northeast.

 

What does Bing have to offer right now? Liberal arts education like a Colgate? Perhaps but then they'd be competing with other SUNY colleges like Geneseo.

Edited by danefan
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 129
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Of course, she really needed to say these things to back up DeFleur. BU is the least research intensive and smallest of the Centers and should be worried about their schools' place in the system hierarchy and their wish for a Law school.

 

Trust me - we're not worried . . . but I suspect some folks in Buffalo will be if we get our law school. :D

 

Buffalo people wouldn't worry, nor would any of the other Centers for that matter. BU really wants the law school and if/when you do, great for the school. My comments on the SUNY hierarchy are something I think is salient. The old 'flagship debate' under Spitzer and The Commission Report never included BU. DeFleur does not want her school's lack of a research-focus (no medical component, few professional programs) to impact it's place among the Centers, per her advocating for inclusion in potential reforms. Zimpher said exactly the right things.

 

Bing is in a tough spot right now.

 

UB and SBU are going to end up very similar but on different ends of the State (e.g. law schools (SBU is buying Touro) and other professional med/dental schools).

 

UAlbany will be the technology center of NYS and the Northeast in just a few years ($5 billion in Nano already) and the business and government schools (Rockefellor, Criminology, etc.) will continue to separate themslves from the other public universities in the Northeast.

 

What does Bing have to offer right now? Liberal arts education like a Colgate? Perhaps but then they'd be competing with other SUNY colleges like Geneseo.

 

I'm not saying this to be provocative, but for starters - Bing is widely viewed and acknowledged as the most academically competitive of the four SUNY centers, so that's certainly something to offer. On the subject of B-schools, I'd take issue with the suggestion that Albany has separated it's B-Schools from Binghamton's, as I believe Bing has the highest ranked undergraduate B-School program of all of the SUNYs. Lastly, unlike Albany and SBU, and to a lesser extent, we are the primary and sole major economic driver for our city and region - something that carries a ton of weight in the political circles. Given all of these facts, I'm confident Bing won't get left behind.

 

More generally, I agree with many of the Albany posters and share their frustration about the efforts of UB to attempt to secure advantages for themselves, while leaving the other Centers out. It has struck me as incredibly self-centered (no pun) and arrogant - and ultimately unproductive, as it's not as if the rest of the State is going to forget we have 3 other University Centers. Had Buffalo taken a "team approach", I think their efforts would've been much more effective - and ultimately just as beneficial for themselves as their current efforts. This is not a zero sum game (yet). In other words, Buffalo's success does not need to come at the expense of the success of the other Centers.

 

Lastly, just speaking for Bing, we are pretty effective and sophisticated when it comes to lobbying, and we also have the strong support of a major state pol in Sen. Libous. That gives me hope that Bing and the other Centers will eventually get looped in to whatever initiatives are adapted.

 

P.S. - Kudos to the Albany folks on this board. I read the board quite a bit, and haven't found another place where so many people are talking about these sorts of SUNY-specific issues. I really enjoy the comments and the dialogue.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree with much (if not all) of the post by Urban Barrister. Indeed, the theme of Barrister's post was echoed by Chan. Zimpher just earlier this week when she spoke of Binghamton's academic achievements, etc.

 

Moreover, I don't think any one SUNY Center will "fall behind," as I think all 4 Centers should move forward as one "team," so to speak, just as we have been urging all along in the context of the UB S.2020 bill. Bingo is an important component of the City of Binghamton (and SUNY overall), as well as that geographic area in general as Barrister notes.

 

By way of an athletic-based example (for whatever it's worth), just look at how supportive that community has been of its basketball program. Binghamton also doesn't have all of the other universities that our Albany area does, so, to some extent, Univ. of Binghamton plays an even more vital role to the community than the other three SUNY Centers do for their respective communities (not that I can think of an objective and quantifiable way to measure the extent to which these 4 Centers play a "vital" role in their respective communities).

 

 

Binghamton academics are good. Binghamton basketball is bad. Go DANES! ;-)

Edited by UA_MA_2000
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The thing is, can anyone name one public university system where separate university administrations work together as closely as some here have proposed the Center’s do? Which systems require all doctoral institutions reach and maintain an equal level of prominence? Would SUNY Central exert restraint over any Center so it cannot advance toward its goals? My answers would be no, none, and no.

 

Look at other states. Pennsylvania and California have separate Doctoral granting university systems. Penn’s Commonwealth System places Pitt, Penn State, and Temple as ‘state-related’, and operating independently. I know there has been talk here of UC and its research universities being a potential model for SUNY Center equality but only Berkeley is an official flagship. All of the UC research universities are great, and are funded well but Berkeley is placed a step above the rest. No where on the University System of Georgia website does it say UGA or Georgia Tech are any different from Georgia State and Medical College of Georgia, the other two officially designated Research Universities of the System. UGA’s site refers to the school as the flagship, and gets no push-back since it is the largest, most comprehensive, the oldest, and the state’s Land-Grant school. Texas has 6 systems, 2 official flagships, and the state is deciding if Houston, Texas Tech, North Texas, etc. will be declared additional flagships. The point is, it's tough to compare the situation with SUNY with other states (except maybe Massachusetts, where powerful private school interests have held back the UMass system, and its official flagship in Amherst, for decades). We have quite the situation in NY, with 4 flagships and where Cornell holds all of the ‘Grant’ funding status, except for SBU which shares Sea-Grant status. Rockefeller's plan for 4 SUNY Centers built 4 very good universities. He did not fund for great ones.

 

This thread centers upon many topics: The reforms proposed in the Higher Education Report, UB2020, The Buffalo and Stony Brook legislation, and the ‘flagship’ debate. We have to remember that all of these issues are not one and the same. UB2020 does not seek to force the state to declare the school the sole flagship. One overview states the goal is to create “a university that is bigger in size, sharper in both focus and physical appearance, and stronger academically than ever before.” In essence, the goal is to make UB appear more like a mid-western flagship institution. UB does not need to be the official flagship to do this. None of the Centers do. Any of the Centers can plan in such a way to shape a path so they look more like what people imagine a typical flagship should. The ‘SUNY flagships’ flap was born of Spitzer, and yes UB and SBU ran with it because of the opportunities it presented. But the flagship issue is presently dead, again. The issue is too divisive and SUNY will probably remain with four Centers. But if all Centers could gain the benefits proposed in the Higher Education Commission report, then they could all plan to improve at a swift pace.

 

UB happens to be the one that is ready. UB has been planning this for 5 years. Many programmatic components are progressing or are already complete (UB2020 is more than the Physical Plan [which, by the way, is not scheduled to be complete until 2030, not 2020]). The building projects funded for this spring are officially fall within Phase 1 of the Comprehensive Physical Plan. Heck, we already have a Draft GEIS complete with a timeline of when each of the building projects will take place. The point is UB2020 is our roadmap we will follow. There will be no other. The only question is how soon will it take to see it through, 2030 or a few years earlier? No one could succeed in a battle against UB2020; It would be like UB fighting against UA’s “Going Forward Plan” or “Capital Project Plan”. Opponents can only fight against the wishes of UB to have its legislation passed first. The contention that UB was trying to slip this bill through quickly is false; Just look at when this thread began. It has been in Albany since January. The 2020 legislation may not pass this month, but it just delays our pace, leads to no cost-savings for our construction, and will inevitably hurt the progress of the other Centers’ growth as well. The other Centers can find political strength to force inclusion in legislation or draft their own. Then UB's plan will be off and running with the freedoms other research universities possess. The other Centers know it is wise to be included, but will the other Centers be ready with their own long-term plans or will they fight with UB instead? Things would just get uglier. UB proponents can handle being characterized as elitist, self-serving, or uncooperative, just as we can look at the opponents and argue they are jealous, obstructionist, or possess myopic thinking. People on the UB board have expressed such thinking; UB was the first to jump from D-3, advance to AAU status, and to craft a reform bill, but we get little credit for taking such risks to move this System forward. I suppose you could say we've been run by A-holes since long before Simpson was hired, huh?

 

From what I have read in the Binghamton Press of Zimpher’s ideas for her plan for SUNY it will include “charting the university system's impact on the economy by educating the work force, creating jobs and advancing the interests of private industry with academic partnerships”. Sounds bland to me, topics that will be general to SUNY in nature and not focus on individual institutions (and some schools have already made great headway in gaining private investments in research projects, no?).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You seem to either not understand or not want to understand a very simple point. SUNY does not have flagships. Period. We don't want them and all their problems.

 

You are trying to impose flagships after the fact (60 years later). Add to this simple fact that Cornell is the land grant school, not SUNY Buffalo. Another problem is how to define a "flagship"? We all know what SUNY Buffalo wants. They want a lion's share of the SUNY funding. There is 1 pot for SUNY funding. Its all about MONEY. If a SUNY Center gets more funding then it means another got less. So what we have here is a lot of problems for SUNY Buffalo in this attempted power grab.

 

Why your complaints will never convince New Yorkers to make SUNY Buffalo a flagship

1) Trying to impose "flagships" decades after the system was established

2) Cornell is the true land grant system and arguably the best

3) SUNY Buffalo wants this title because it will improve their funding (lower funding for the other 3)

4) SUNY Buffalo needs a better argument then they are the biggest and therefore the flagship.

4a) SUNY Binghamton's undergraduates objectively are far superior to Buffalo

4b) Many of SUNY Buffalo's program are marginal (The law school is terrible)

4c) SUNY Buffalo may be the GM of SUNY but nimbler Bingo (Honda) and tech savvy UAlbany (Ford) are better off. (Big GM is in bankruptcy)

 

SUNY Buffalo's only argument is that we're the biggest. So what? You’re not the best. Coming here to continually argue that the other SUNY Centers should give you a lion's share of the funding because your big and want to get bigger is not a winning argument.

 

Lastly, I've lived and worked in at least a dozen states. When I say I'm from New York, not one time did someone say "Buffalo?" Never. Buffalo does not represent New York and never will.

 

I appreciate your enthusiasm "UB Bulls" but you will never convince me, these board posters or New Yorkers that SUNY Buffalo is deserving of a disproportionate amount of funding or that SUNY Buffalo is the face of New York. No sane student, graduate, administrator or city resident of the other SUNY Centers would be stupid enough to hand SUNY Buffalo this title. SUNY Buffalo knows this title then can be used as leverage for money. I hope Chancellor Zimpher (former UC President) learned this fact when dealing with "The Ohio State University". She probably had to fight Ohio State tooth and nail. We don't need that Sh$t in New York.

 

Let it go. Go back to your own chat board.

Edited by SoCal_Dane
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Of course, she really needed to say these things to back up DeFleur. BU is the least research intensive and smallest of the Centers and should be worried about their schools' place in the system hierarchy and their wish for a Law school.

 

Trust me - we're not worried . . . but I suspect some folks in Buffalo will be if we get our law school. :D

 

Buffalo people wouldn't worry, nor would any of the other Centers for that matter. BU really wants the law school and if/when you do, great for the school. My comments on the SUNY hierarchy are something I think is salient. The old 'flagship debate' under Spitzer and The Commission Report never included BU. DeFleur does not want her school's lack of a research-focus (no medical component, few professional programs) to impact it's place among the Centers, per her advocating for inclusion in potential reforms. Zimpher said exactly the right things.

 

Bing is in a tough spot right now.

 

UB and SBU are going to end up very similar but on different ends of the State (e.g. law schools (SBU is buying Touro) and other professional med/dental schools).

 

UAlbany will be the technology center of NYS and the Northeast in just a few years ($5 billion in Nano already) and the business and government schools (Rockefellor, Criminology, etc.) will continue to separate themslves from the other public universities in the Northeast.

 

What does Bing have to offer right now? Liberal arts education like a Colgate? Perhaps but then they'd be competing with other SUNY colleges like Geneseo.

 

I'm not saying this to be provocative, but for starters - Bing is widely viewed and acknowledged as the most academically competitive of the four SUNY centers, so that's certainly something to offer. On the subject of B-schools, I'd take issue with the suggestion that Albany has separated it's B-Schools from Binghamton's, as I believe Bing has the highest ranked undergraduate B-School program of all of the SUNYs. Lastly, unlike Albany and SBU, and to a lesser extent, we are the primary and sole major economic driver for our city and region - something that carries a ton of weight in the political circles. Given all of these facts, I'm confident Bing won't get left behind.

 

More generally, I agree with many of the Albany posters and share their frustration about the efforts of UB to attempt to secure advantages for themselves, while leaving the other Centers out. It has struck me as incredibly self-centered (no pun) and arrogant - and ultimately unproductive, as it's not as if the rest of the State is going to forget we have 3 other University Centers. Had Buffalo taken a "team approach", I think their efforts would've been much more effective - and ultimately just as beneficial for themselves as their current efforts. This is not a zero sum game (yet). In other words, Buffalo's success does not need to come at the expense of the success of the other Centers.

 

Lastly, just speaking for Bing, we are pretty effective and sophisticated when it comes to lobbying, and we also have the strong support of a major state pol in Sen. Libous. That gives me hope that Bing and the other Centers will eventually get looped in to whatever initiatives are adapted.

 

P.S. - Kudos to the Albany folks on this board. I read the board quite a bit, and haven't found another place where so many people are talking about these sorts of SUNY-specific issues. I really enjoy the comments and the dialogue.

 

 

 

 

 

 

I apologize. I didn't mean to disparage the academics at Bing. They are certainly top notch. My point was what marquee program or degree does Bing have to distinquish itself? Perhaps they don't need one. Perhaps it will be sufficient to have the most selective undergrad programs. The problem is nowadays there are very little high earners that don't have a post-grad degree.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The thing is, can anyone name one public university system where separate university administrations work together as closely as some here have proposed the Center’s do? Which systems require all doctoral institutions reach and maintain an equal level of prominence? Would SUNY Central exert restraint over any Center so it cannot advance toward its goals? My answers would be no, none, and no.

 

Look at other states. Pennsylvania and California have separate Doctoral granting university systems. Penn’s Commonwealth System places Pitt, Penn State, and Temple as ‘state-related’, and operating independently. I know there has been talk here of UC and its research universities being a potential model for SUNY Center equality but only Berkeley is an official flagship. All of the UC research universities are great, and are funded well but Berkeley is placed a step above the rest. No where on the University System of Georgia website does it say UGA or Georgia Tech are any different from Georgia State and Medical College of Georgia, the other two officially designated Research Universities of the System. UGA’s site refers to the school as the flagship, and gets no push-back since it is the largest, most comprehensive, the oldest, and the state’s Land-Grant school. Texas has 6 systems, 2 official flagships, and the state is deciding if Houston, Texas Tech, North Texas, etc. will be declared additional flagships. The point is, it's tough to compare the situation with SUNY with other states (except maybe Massachusetts, where powerful private school interests have held back the UMass system, and its official flagship in Amherst, for decades). We have quite the situation in NY, with 4 flagships and where Cornell holds all of the ‘Grant’ funding status, except for SBU which shares Sea-Grant status. Rockefeller's plan for 4 SUNY Centers built 4 very good universities. He did not fund for great ones.

 

This thread centers upon many topics: The reforms proposed in the Higher Education Report, UB2020, The Buffalo and Stony Brook legislation, and the ‘flagship’ debate. We have to remember that all of these issues are not one and the same. UB2020 does not seek to force the state to declare the school the sole flagship. One overview states the goal is to create “a university that is bigger in size, sharper in both focus and physical appearance, and stronger academically than ever before.” In essence, the goal is to make UB appear more like a mid-western flagship institution. UB does not need to be the official flagship to do this. None of the Centers do. Any of the Centers can plan in such a way to shape a path so they look more like what people imagine a typical flagship should. The ‘SUNY flagships’ flap was born of Spitzer, and yes UB and SBU ran with it because of the opportunities it presented. But the flagship issue is presently dead, again. The issue is too divisive and SUNY will probably remain with four Centers. But if all Centers could gain the benefits proposed in the Higher Education Commission report, then they could all plan to improve at a swift pace.

 

UB happens to be the one that is ready. UB has been planning this for 5 years. Many programmatic components are progressing or are already complete (UB2020 is more than the Physical Plan [which, by the way, is not scheduled to be complete until 2030, not 2020]). The building projects funded for this spring are officially fall within Phase 1 of the Comprehensive Physical Plan. Heck, we already have a Draft GEIS complete with a timeline of when each of the building projects will take place. The point is UB2020 is our roadmap we will follow. There will be no other. The only question is how soon will it take to see it through, 2030 or a few years earlier? No one could succeed in a battle against UB2020; It would be like UB fighting against UA’s “Going Forward Plan” or “Capital Project Plan”. Opponents can only fight against the wishes of UB to have its legislation passed first. The contention that UB was trying to slip this bill through quickly is false; Just look at when this thread began. It has been in Albany since January. The 2020 legislation may not pass this month, but it just delays our pace, leads to no cost-savings for our construction, and will inevitably hurt the progress of the other Centers’ growth as well. The other Centers can find political strength to force inclusion in legislation or draft their own. Then UB's plan will be off and running with the freedoms other research universities possess. The other Centers know it is wise to be included, but will the other Centers be ready with their own long-term plans or will they fight with UB instead? Things would just get uglier. UB proponents can handle being characterized as elitist, self-serving, or uncooperative, just as we can look at the opponents and argue they are jealous, obstructionist, or possess myopic thinking. People on the UB board have expressed such thinking; UB was the first to jump from D-3, advance to AAU status, and to craft a reform bill, but we get little credit for taking such risks to move this System forward. I suppose you could say we've been run by A-holes since long before Simpson was hired, huh?

 

From what I have read in the Binghamton Press of Zimpher’s ideas for her plan for SUNY it will include “charting the university system's impact on the economy by educating the work force, creating jobs and advancing the interests of private industry with academic partnerships”. Sounds bland to me, topics that will be general to SUNY in nature and not focus on individual institutions (and some schools have already made great headway in gaining private investments in research projects, no?).

 

As I was reading this LOOOONNGGG winded post regarding UB I kept thinking....what did UB stand to lose in including the other SUNY Centers into the push for this legislation and what did UB stand to win in going it alone.

 

Had the other SUNY Centers been included, this legislation would have probably passed and UB would have still gotten what they wanted, the flexibility they needed to move in the direction they want to go...larger campus, purchase land for further expansion, negotiate contracts, set tuition etc.. What they would NOT have gotten and something I'm starting to see them wanting more and more is to be considered the clear cut choice as the "flagship" campus of the SUNY system. In their rush to secure the "flagship" designation they left behind their buddy SB, who just like them were pimping themselves all over the state as one of the two "flagship" campuses. I wonder how SB feels right about now. UBBull can try to deny it all he wants, but it's clear....UB made a calculated move and banked that the legislation would pass without the inclusion of the other SUNY centers giving them a significant leg up on the other SUNY centers and it backfired. SoCal, I believe I owe you an apology, it looks more and more that you might have pegged it right from the start.

 

I find the argument that UB needs to be the trailblazer laughable. I've read on this board and the UB board that they are the best equipped to handle the "freedom" while the other SUNY centers are not. The point was used that UB went D1 first and then everyone else followed....they now want the freedom from the shackles of the SUNY bureaucracy and then give the said freedom to everyone else at some point later(undetermined time...maybe never)....the more I think about it the more it sounds like complete BS. Basically keep it the way it is and keep UB a step ahead of everyone else. If UB's sole motivation when crafting this legislation was to get more flexibility then they could have strengthened their position by including the other SUNY Centers, their motivation was clearly the freedom AND to keep putting distance between themselves and the rest of the SUNY centers so at some point they can anoint themselves as THE "flagship" campus and force the hand of the entire system to bestow that recognition on them.

 

All four campuses or KILL the legislation!

 

UBBull, in your opinion what did UB stand to lose by NOT including the other SUNY centers?

Edited by bosiydid
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I just wanted to applaud So_Cal Dane's statement about Cornell being the land-grant institution in New York (which never sat well with me). A lot of this goes back to that very fact! It would not shock me to learn that when SUNY came to be, the private schools lobbied as hard as they could to prevent the very concept that we are discussing herein --- a flagship school.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It would not shock me to learn that when SUNY came to be, the private schools lobbied as hard as they could to prevent the very concept that we are discussing herein --- a flagship school.

I could never find confirmation, but I've heard that the privates would have preferred the state university system never had been established at all. They didn't want competition for donations.

 

A professor of mine once said that when the Morrill Act was passed there was a proposal for a University of Albany with physicist Joseph Henry and geologist Louis Aggasiz on the faculty, but instead they funded a few more regiments for the Civil War. After the war, maneuvers by Ezra Cornell and Andy White brought the land-grant money to Ithaca.

 

Finally, the preference for private colleges goes back at least as far as John Jay, governor more than 200 years ago.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Some more info - it appears that the bill isn't moving anywhere until fall at the earliest:

 

http://artvoice.com/issues/v8n24/news_brie...sing_in_on_2020

 

UB on hold for now

 

While making some phone calls to various representatives of the State University of New York at Buffalo, State Senators and Assemblymembers, I arrived at the bottom line this morning in a conversation with Deborah Glick, the Manhattan Democrat who serves as the chairwoman of the Assembly’s Higher Education Committee. Glick says the bill won’t be going anywhere before the fall, at the earliest.

 

Among the concerns, according to Glick: “Well, the various provisions, and there are numerous ones, some aspects of those have been under discussion. It’s been referred to as SUNY-Flex, they want more flexibility and all of the university centers have asked to be able to do certain things…UB2020 went well beyond what had been under discussion, and what had been under discussion had certain problems of oversight elimination that were of concern to the legislature. The UB 2020 provisions were dramatically more extreme, going so far as to eliminate any role for either the SUNY trustees or the Chancellor in oversight and decision-making. It also would’ve eliminated the review by the State Attorney General or the State Comptroller over contract reviews. And those are things that I think are pretty untenable if you are continuing to expect significant state support.”

 

Among other things, the bill, as it was passed in the Senate, would allow the president of UB to form private entities like not-for-profits and LLCs without state approval, which would then be able to operate beyond the reach of the Freedom of Information and Open Meetings Laws.

 

“In essence the bill created a private university that was still part of the state university,” Glick said. “Some of the issues that have come up repeatedly over time have been the desire of university centers to lease or sell their land without any legislative input, so they could move quickly. Well, some of those restrictions are there because of misdeeds in the past that pointed out the potential problems that that might create.”

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Some more info - it appears that the bill isn't moving anywhere until fall at the earliest:

 

http://artvoice.com/issues/v8n24/news_brie...sing_in_on_2020

 

UB on hold for now

 

While making some phone calls to various representatives of the State University of New York at Buffalo, State Senators and Assemblymembers, I arrived at the bottom line this morning in a conversation with Deborah Glick, the Manhattan Democrat who serves as the chairwoman of the Assembly’s Higher Education Committee. Glick says the bill won’t be going anywhere before the fall, at the earliest.

 

Among the concerns, according to Glick: “Well, the various provisions, and there are numerous ones, some aspects of those have been under discussion. It’s been referred to as SUNY-Flex, they want more flexibility and all of the university centers have asked to be able to do certain things…UB2020 went well beyond what had been under discussion, and what had been under discussion had certain problems of oversight elimination that were of concern to the legislature. The UB 2020 provisions were dramatically more extreme, going so far as to eliminate any role for either the SUNY trustees or the Chancellor in oversight and decision-making. It also would’ve eliminated the review by the State Attorney General or the State Comptroller over contract reviews. And those are things that I think are pretty untenable if you are continuing to expect significant state support.”

 

Among other things, the bill, as it was passed in the Senate, would allow the president of UB to form private entities like not-for-profits and LLCs without state approval, which would then be able to operate beyond the reach of the Freedom of Information and Open Meetings Laws.

 

“In essence the bill created a private university that was still part of the state university,” Glick said. “Some of the issues that have come up repeatedly over time have been the desire of university centers to lease or sell their land without any legislative input, so they could move quickly. Well, some of those restrictions are there because of misdeeds in the past that pointed out the potential problems that that might create.”

 

WOW...give us the money every year but don't dare ask what we do with it and why. UB leadership has some really huge stones!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You seem to either not understand or not want to understand a very simple point. SUNY does not have flagships. Period. We don't want them and all their problems.

The Centers are SUNY flagships. There are statements on every schools' website that they are a flagship campus of SUNY. SUNY named them Centers, the schools refer to themselves as flagships, either as a whole institution or for individual programs;

 

Minutes of a 2006-2007 UAlbany Senate Meeting;

"The [presidential search] process will be slow and deliberate for the reason that there is an uncertainty in state government; there is not great urgency.

The goals are to create UAlbany as a flagship university center."

 

From suny.edu itself;

"UAlbany is SUNY’s flagship campus for research and education in nanoscale science and engineering, atmospheric sciences, criminal justice...."

 

Add to this simple fact that Cornell is the land grant school, not SUNY Buffalo

Alabama A & M and Fort Valley State are land-grants as well. UNC, UVA, and Texas aren't land-grants but are flagships. My point was not land-grant status is exclusive to flagships. Private interests held the public schools back. Cornell is great but can't be a flagship, so why point this as a negative against UB? It harms all the Centers.

 

4) SUNY Buffalo needs a better argument then they are the biggest and therefore the flagship.

Now that you mention it, being the biggest school is a good precedent. Many people on here have argued UA should be the flagship since it is in the State Capital, and many states have flagships in capital cities. Well, only 33% of states (NY excluded) have flagship campuses in their capital cities...while among 92% of the states the largest, public research university is a flagship campus. In addition, pointing out undergraduate rankings does not counter the fact that UB is an AAU member.

 

I find the argument that UB needs to be the trailblazer laughable.

Ok, but, when have any of the other Centers taken such bold steps to change SUNY?

 

UBBull, in your opinion what did UB stand to lose by NOT including the other SUNY centers?

UB would lose time in their process. UB has a plan that is underway. The other Centers do not have similar plans, so would that negatively effect the pace of UB's plan? UB's admins could be A-holes, but the other presidents could act like a-holes too and try to slow or halt UB's progress while their school can keep pace.

 

Again, when do separate university administrations work so closely, within SUNY or in any other system? If there is no precedent why would UB's administration, or any of the Center's, be inclined to draft legislation that effects the development of other independent campuses? SUNY Central would never bring about the changes the Centers require. The only hope for change comes from legislative action.

 

IF the schools were going to work together on things such as this, then why haven't they? Why did Simpson and Strum only meet and draft an op-ed piece while the iron of Spitzer's 'Flagship" mess was hot? Why didn't they work together to craft legislation for their schools? After Spitzer stepped down, why didn't Strum or DeFleur work with their legislators to get the ball rolling for their own schools or try to work with the other Centers? And then only after UB's bill was out there did SBU praise the UB Bill and ask for inclusion, but ended up with SBU's legilative reps crafting a bill solely for SBU?

 

Things just don't work that way in NY. Based on the recent history, each school crafting it's own legislation is the way things go.

 

WOW...give us the money every year but don't dare ask what we do with it and why. UB leadership has some really huge stones!

LOL, agreed. It needs refining. But, there are public universities in other states that operate under many of the rules SUNY has failed to enact for the sake of the Centers.

Edited by UBBulls
Link to comment
Share on other sites

"UB Bulls" has done nothing but made me a supporter of Bingo's law school. Way to go... In fact, I'll support any campus that isn't SUNY Buffalo. I'll donate to Florida A&M before I say anything positive about SUNY Buffalo. All because of you and your small egomaniac of a president that has driven a wedge between the SUNY Centers.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

All I know is when UB recruited me in 1991, they told my dad word for word: "We will be the UCLA of the EAST."

 

Hand to the big person upstairs.

 

I have stayed out of this thread because I just scoff at the whole notion of UB....however, some entity has a case of trying to make up for a small..................

 

....you know.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

All I know is when UB recruited me in 1991, they told my dad word for word: "We will be the UCLA of the EAST."

 

Hand to the big person upstairs.

 

I have stayed out of this thread because I just scoff at the whole notion of UB....however, some entity has a case of trying to make up for a small..................

 

....you know.

 

Oh come on...we'd love to hear what you have to say on this subject...you have been far to quiet!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share


×
×
  • Create New...