Yesterday a joint higher education committee met at Rowan University (ironically the place that will be least affected by the proposed takeover of Rutgers Camden by Rowan) for another round of testimony on the merger plan.
There were reportedly over 50 speakers and nearly all were against the plan that Governor Christie and George Norcross continue to push for. In fact, today Governor Christie told the media that the two schools are going to “merge” and that he is “not in favor of any type of hybrid consortium . . . “ This of course was only a day after Senator Sweeney said he would be open to alternative plans. No wonder Rowan is hiring a PR firm to help push a better message in favor of the plan, it does not seem that any of its proponents can stay on the same page!
Anyway, Wendell Pritchett, the outspoken Chancellor of Rutgers Camden gave a lengthy, but well prepared, testimony to the joint committee yesterday (which is reprinted completely if you click ‘Continue Reading’).
Chancellor Pritchett makes it clear that he is against the takeover and discussed how it would affect the region and its families. He relies on concepts like competition and collaboration to show that there could be a better way forward than the undetailed and costly Barer Commission plan.
Thank you for the opportunity to speak with you today.
There’s been a lot of discussion related to the proposal the UMDNJ Committee, but let me state that there is far more upon which we all agree than disagree. We all agree that southern New Jersey’s fine colleges and universities need real investment in order to grow and thrive. We all agree that we can find new and better ways to collaborate. We agree that southern New Jersey should have more resources to expand the number of higher education seats in the region. And we agree that the expansion of research capacity in southern New Jersey is crucial to the region’s future.
We agree on 98 percent of everything. We disagree on the mechanism for achieving these goals.
I have stated publicly, and will do so again here, that I am opposed to the proposal to eliminate Rutgers–Camden. I am opposed to the removal of the opportunity for South Jersey residents to earn a Rutgers degree here in southern New Jersey.
Let me be clear: I am not here to denigrate our friends and colleagues at Rowan. Rowan University is a fine institution and I will argue with anyone who suggests otherwise. Rutgers–Camden is a fine institution. Both universities serve their students and their communities. New Jersey has every reason to be proud of Rutgers–Camden and to be proud of Rowan.
While we are both strong universities, we’re also different universities. I’m not saying that one is better than the other; we’re simply different, and the differences in our institutional DNAs are profound. Rowan is distinguished as a teaching faculty. Rutgers–Camden has a powerful reputation built by its research faculty. While both institutions are committed to advancing the growth of South Jersey, Rutgers–Camden has a unique focus on urban civic engagement, while Rowan helps to fuel growth in suburban and rural areas.
The forced merger of two sharply different cultures poses extraordinary challenges. The cost implications for the proposal set forth by the UMDNJ Advisory Committee are tremendous. As a point of comparison, similar proposals made by the Vagelos Commission in 2003 held, at that time, a 10-year price tag of $1.3 billion for the merger alone. While the UMDNJ Advisory Committee’s proposal is not on the same statewide scope as their Vagelos counterparts, there clearly is a very, very significant amount of money that will be required from New Jersey taxpayers to implement this idea.
There are other costs. The loss of Rutgers research professors and the elimination of Rutgers–Camden will exacerbate, not improve, our current challenge with the departure of bright graduate and undergraduate students from our region. This flight will, in turn, deplete the availability of knowledge-driven workers to advance South Jersey businesses and organizations. Many of Rutgers-Camden’s innovative and effective service programs are funded by federal agencies and foundations that are willing to invest in the Rutgers brand. That funding, and those services for thousands of South Jersey citizens, will disappear with the elimination of Rutgers-Camden.
And perhaps most worrisome is the cost to South Jersey’s working families. Right now, South Jersey families have choice. Some families will choose the Rowan experience, and all that it entails. Some families want the Rutgers degree, which offers a global reputation and the brand promise of learning from world-class research professors. Many of our families at Rutgers-Camden cannot afford to send their children to New Brunswick. Many of our students have personal and work obligations that keep them well rooted here in South Jersey. These are students who made a deliberate choice when they enrolled at Rutgers-Camden. These are students who will be solicited aggressively by Philadelphia colleges and universities, and by the University of Delaware. They will not, automatically, accept the loss of options in favor of a Rowan monopoly. Many will find alternatives, with many of those taking them out of New Jersey.
Competition is good. It’s healthy. And so is collaboration. Rutgers-Camden and Rowan already collaborate in our host city of Camden, where Rutgers provides library services to Rowan’s Camden students, and we both – along with Camden County College – share a University District Bookstore.
There’s far more than we can do, together. Rowan and Rutgers-Camden, partnering with Cooper Medical School and the Coriell Institute, have the framework in place to develop an institute for genomic research that would redefine our region as a global center for the biosciences. Working together, our institutions can compete for, and achieve, the federal grant resources that will serve all institutions well. And we can do this at a fraction of the cost of forcing an inorganic merger between two very different institutions.
There are other opportunities. As partners, Rutgers and Rowan can, and should, enter into formal agreements to allow our students to cross-register. The Rowan student earning her master’s in engineering could, at the same time, work to earn her Rutgers law degree, graduating with two highly desirable degrees at the same time.
That’s just one example. Working together, collaboratively, we can develop so very many more, allowing both Rutgers-Camden and Rowan to retain their unique identities and missions while also offering new opportunities for the families of our region, all without forcing an extraordinary price tag on the citizens of our region.
As I said at the onset, we agree on 98 percent of the issues here. Maintaining the status quo is not an option. At the same time, removing opportunity and options from our region, and forcing the dissolution of Rutgers-Camden into Rowan, will set these plans back by decades. The people of South Jersey don’t deserve that. They demand choices, and they want progress now. Rutgers and Rowan, working as partners, can deliver that promise. We at Rutgers-Camden stand ready to collaborate, and we look forward to working with all of you to advance this agenda.
Thank you.
This is a big mistake by a big mistake. Christie does not know the wrath he will face if this merger goes through. Three Questions 1. WHO CAME UP WITH THE IDEA TO MERGE THE TWO SCHOOLS? 2. HOW MUCH WILL IT COST?
3. WHAT IS THE DEAL THAT WAS MADE BETWEEN CHRISTIE, SWEENEY, AND NORCROSS?
This all seems to boil down to Rowan getting a lot of private funding, and Rutgers-Camden being in the way of expansion.
Jeez, I hope my neighbor doesn't get rich or I will get merged out too!
WHO CAME UP WITH THE IDEA TO MERGE THE TWO SCHOOLS?
Why do you ask question of which you already know the answer?
WHO?
IMPEACH CHRISTIE if this takeover goes through.