University of Hawaii President David Lassner’s decision to fire Manoa Chancellor Tom Apple barely a month after his own appointment has raised the frustration of UH critics to a fever pitch.

It’s understandable after two years that have seen the Wonder Blunder, acrimonious legislative hearings, the clumsy departure of former President M.R.C. Greenwood and the tangled process that led to Lassner’s selection.

But now that we’ve had a good venting, it’s time to cool the temperature and give Lassner and a reconstituted Board of Regents led by respected new Chairman Randy Moore a fair chance to tackle pressing budget and infrastructure issues and move UH forward.

Some legislators might be tempted to heed the call of UH students for an investigation of Apple’s ouster only two years into his five-year term, but it would serve no useful purpose.

The only result would be to extend the chaos and poisonous politics that have dragged down our state university.

Irate students and faculty have thrown around overheated words like "incompetent"and "corrupt" to describe Lassner’s move against Apple.

It’s way too early in his presidency for such harsh judgments.

Lassner didn’t feel Apple was on top of Manoa’s budget problems and didn’t feel they could work together. It was his call to make, supported by the regents.

Students and faculty are off base when they complain about the Apple decision being made without their "active input."

With their rising tuition covering an increasing share of the university budget, students certainly deserve to be heard on UH policy, but they don’t get a vote on high-level personnel decisions.

The state Constitution leaves such matters to the regents and the president they hire, out of a recognition that the University of Hawaii serves much broader state interests than the desires of the current crop of students and faculty.

After two years of endless carping from the sidelines, we need a break from the vitriol to give the regents and Lassner a fair chance to do their jobs.

One change they should consider is whether the position of Manoa chancellor is really needed.

Until a decade ago the UH president served also as Manoa chancellor; since it became two jobs, the two $400,000-a-year chancellors hired have both been forced out before their contracts were up, and both remain on the payroll as $300,000-a-year tenured faculty.

Obviously, this system has created competing centers of power and isn’t working.

Kenneth Mortimer, the last president to do both jobs, was paid less than $200,000.

The salaries of Lassner, plus a new chancellor, plus the two ousted chancellors still being carried as faculty would be about $1.3 million.

Can anybody seriously argue that the university runs more smoothly now than during Mortimer’s time?

Reach David Shapiro at volcanicash@gmail.com or blog.volcanicash.net.