Another inside job

Provost-in-waiting Morehead promises to improve University’s academics

Well, we guessed it.

Jere Morehead, vice president for instruction, was the one of four finalists to be named provost and vice president for academic affairs.

We’ve heard the rumblings of his name as the next choice since University President Michael Adams first announced that Provost Arnett Mace was retiring this coming January.

Given Adams’ past of internal hires, we were a bit hesitant to see money fly out the door to bring three other candidates to campus if they weren’t going to be chosen anyway.

We won’t argue it shouldn’t have happened. We know the provost search committee and finalist interviews are legally necessary and that the other three candidates were extremely qualified for consideration.

We’re not surprised that Morehead was the choice. But we are surprised, however, by what he said during his question and answer session in the Chapel.

His main priority: academics. Hiring faculty, attracting top-notch graduate students and bringing back quality to the classrooms is key. If he had $1 million to put toward the budget, he’d send it right to hiring professors.

That’s what we thought, too.

In an institutional editorial after the sessions were completed, we chose Morehead as our next provost based on what he said. As an editorial board, we find his goals aligned with ours as students.

We’re interested to see what he does – both leading up to January and for the beginning of 2010.

We want to know what Mace will teach him and how he’ll create his own persona and go in a different direction.

We want to know where he’ll travel, who he’ll visit and what advice he’ll take from other provosts to make it his own.

We want to know what he’ll do with the academic affairs part of his title, and we hope he’ll increase his interaction with students.

Morehead: we hope you’re able to follow your word, and we hope you’ll include us students in your thought process.

- Carolyn Crist for the editorial board

Now is not the time

Passing student fee for Office of Sustainability fiscally irresponsible

In the long run, another $3 student fee a semester isn’t a lot of money.

In this financial crisis, which has seen the University implement mandatory staff-wide furloughs, a hiring freeze, a reduction of classes and academic journals and changes in graduate student benefits.

We, The Red & Black’s editorial board, would not be opposed to a $3 per semester fee in an attempt to alleviate the financial woes of our cash-strapped University.

We do, however, oppose the fee if it is going towards a nonexistant Office of Sustainability.

As reported by The Red & Black today, the Go Green Alliance is in the process of submitting a proposal to University President Michael Adams and the Board of Regents to implement the fee – as early as fall of 2010 – and to hire a director to propose ways for the University to become more sustainable.

While the Alliance’s cause is a noble one, now is not the time to discuss it. In the current state of the economy and ever-dwindling budget, allowing this to pass is fiscally irresponsible.

And regardless of the economy, the students should not foot the bill.

According to the proposal, the fee would amass $180,000 annually to pay the director’s salary, with only $50,000 going towards campus projects.

Begging your pardon, but the salary of the director of the Office of Sustainabilty ($130,000) should not be equivalent to the average UGA professor’s salary ($132,000 after benefits).

It should be at least half that, regardless of the economic climate.

We should not have to pay the University to develop a sustainable campus – something it should already have established.

And if professors and graduate assistants head to other institutions because of better pay, there won’t be much of a campus to sustain.

- Michael Fitzpatrick for the editorial board