Yet there is evidence that MATEP made sense atthe time it was built: rather than construction ahalf dozen plants, the University decided to buildone and reap the benefits of the economics ofscale.
"It was obviously from a monetary point of viewa bad idea," Landes says.
"Not particularly in advance of the plan, butin view of the political complications," he adds.
MATEP ended up consuming all of Harvard'stax-free bond allowances from the state, Landessays, resulting in a "financial disaster."
MATEP's decade-long hearings and petition toproduce diesel electric energy caused it to losemoney for a protracted period of time, but theplant may eventually pay for itself, given enoughtime.
"You reckon about 20 years for a power plant topay itself back," Yeaple says.
Landes takes greatest issue with the fact thatHarvard's Central Administration--not the Medical,Dental and Public Health schools--paid for MATEP.
"The Faculty of Arts and Sciences gets nothingfrom MATEP," Landes said. "Yet we paid the mostfor it."
Landes lists MATEP along with the constructionof the Harvard Inn and the high rental fees theCentral Administration pays for Holyoke Center asprime examples of the administration paying forprojects without consulting its faculties.
Dean of the Faculty Jeremy R. Knowles recentlyestablished the Committee on University Resources,a group of FAS professors charged with examiningany large-budget projects that the CentralAdministration or FAS may undertake.