Update November 16, 2019
-- Writing Keeps Me Busy in Jefferson
I have been sorting and editing my father's newspaper columns for about a year. One of the earliest columns in the collection was about the controversy surrounding the UMass Medical School being sited in Worcester. Dad sought to "calm" the nervous citizens of Worcester by applying his assessment of where the board of trustees would finally land.
Published Monday, July 12, 1965
Medical
School
Vote on Site Should Stand
By Dick Wright
Worcester is much
too nervous about losing the state medical school. Its inferiority complex is
showing and for no really good reason.
The trustees of the
The University of Massachusetts, who voted to locate the state school in Worcester,
did so after nearly two years of investigation, discussion, and study. To change
their minds at this point would do great harm to themselves and the university.
At their meeting in
Boston last Wednesday, the trustees agreed to listen to any and all persons who
have something to say about the decision, but the trustees did not say they
would vote to reconsider their decision, let alone agree to change it.
The wording of the resolution adopted was very
studied. It said the board would hear four groups, two opposed to Worcester and
two favoring Worcester, and then the board said it "will take whatever
action is necessary."
The latent opposition to the decision to locate the
school in Worcester came to light only after the choice was made because most
of the pro-Amherst group believed the trustees would vote for Amherst in the
beginning. When the decision went to Worcester, it came as a complete shock to
a great many—including many of those in Worcester who had been working to get
the school here.
The consulting firm of Booz, Allen & Hamilton,
Inc., had recommended Amherst primarily because they accepted the premise that
any medical school of this kind should be located on the campus of the parent
university. All their evaluations of the sites were drawn on that premise, even
though they did say that a medical school could be established at any of the
proposed sites. The report was biased in favor of Amherst.
Talked With
Officials
The trustees traveled to several communities, met
with local chambers of commerce and government officials. They worked with the
consulting firm and other educational agencies. The study period covered a long
period of time. It just does not seem reasonable to believe that after all that
effort, the trustees could, at this point, decide they had not done the job
properly and thoroughly.
The debate resolved itself to one major argument:
whether the medical school would best serve the needs of medical education on
the campus at Amherst or in an urban community. The debate centered on the
availability of numbers and “mix” of patients, related medical facilities, and
organizations. The decision was that it should be an urban location, and the
best urban location was Worcester.
Once the decision was announced, those who had
thought that Amherst had the school sewed up suddenly sprang into vocal action,
with the result that several ad hoc committees have been formed and pressures
brought to bear. Those who said the decision was “political” are now attempting
to use political pressure to change the decision.
Pertinent
Information
George L. Pumphret of Dorchester told a reporter that
he did not believe any of the protesting groups could find any pertinent
information the trustees had not already considered.
Hugh Thompson of Milton was more direct: “No one
would dare tell us we didn’t know what was in that report (Booz, Allen &
Hamilton’s evaluation study) or that we didn’t know what we were voting for.” Bishop
Christopher J. Weldon of Springfield put it this way: “A lot of those clamoring
do not know as much about the various sites as we do, and they certainly haven’t
had the same materials or had the question before them as long as we have.” The
bishop added: “We will listen with open minds to what they have to say.”
It is, therefore, apparent that the trustees
themselves are confident the decision was made properly and in good faith. The
debate concerning the sites covered many months and was extensive in scope.
Urban
Community
Nine of the trustees favored Amherst and did not
change their vote at the meeting in Amherst. One trustee who had voted for a
different site switched to Amherst, but the other 12 went for Worcester.
Primarily because they believed the medical school should be located in an
urban community with all the necessary medical facilities and patients readily
available.
How, then, can the trustees change the decision? To
so so would lend credence to the charge that politics played a big part in the
choice.
If the trustees should change the decision at this
point, they will cast doubt on the ability of the board to make objective
judgments on any questions pertaining to the operation of the university. This would
severely damage the image and reputation of the board of trustees itself. The
trustees can hardly be expected to take such action against themselves.
On this basis, Worcester, while remaining “alert,”
as City Manager McGrath phrased it, should be a bit less nervous. The state
medical school belongs in Worcester, and if the trustees are the responsible
persons they have shown themselves to be in the past, the school will come to
Worcester.
Editor’s Notes
The UMass Medical School was charted in 1960 but did not open
until 1970. This article appeared five years before it opened and addressed the
continuing struggle that the City of Worcester had getting a full commitment
from the state, specifically the school board of trustees, to site the school
at Worcester. This column originally appeared in the Worcester Evening Gazette.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
