make sense to me because they would be constructed to fit within the context of achieving this goal. I believe we do have a goal to increase enrollment on the Fayette campus. I am surprised that the strategic plan does not address achieving this goal. Likewise, I am literally shocked that the strategic plan says absolutely nothing about the mandate to add two new centers per year. This is very bold (some might argue so bold that it will not happen). It will certainly require resources. Where are those resources going to come from? I do not find a wish list to be strategic, particularly when it looks at one unit outside of the scope of the rest of the university. I can appreciate the concept of “dreaming big”. However, spending over $40 million over the next five years is not dreaming big, it is hallucinating. I can not get past the idea that it is just absurd. And it is absurd not just because of the dollar amount. It is absurd because if the university received $40 million dollars tomorrow, we would not spend it all on the items listed in the strategic plan. We would certainly spend some, but what percentage? Another aspect of a strategic plan (in my opinion) is that it should guide the investment of resources, and I do not believe we would use these reports as the guide to how we would spend this money. To reiterate, my expectations of a strategic plan are that it sets goals the university wants to achieve, and then develops a plan to achieve those goals. The allocation of resources would then be based on the strategic plan. I am willing to accept criticism that my expectations are either unreasonable or do not fit within the strategic planning process adopted by the university. I do think that the reports presented lack cohesiveness because while some clearly operate according to my expectation (such as producing a seamless university), others appear to me to be nothing more than a wish list. This last point begs the question – why did some units produce a wish list while other units did not? I find it difficult to avoid coming away with the impression that these are the units that will be favored with available resources.
Comment 3: Some thoughts on the process
Anyone remember the movie Casablanca? The scene where the French police chief is pocketing his share of the take in Rick’s gambling parlor, as he says, loudly, “I’m shocked and appalled that there is gambling going on here.” Well, I’m shocked and appalled.” First, not only do I have to agree with Rick Klann’s long missive; I also have to agree with my wife. What next? The administration? I’m also shocked and appalled that Klann and I are shocked and appalled by a $40 million dollar wish list, that doesn’t include academics. And $40 million is not the price tag, there are “extra’s.” 1) Salaries: those are EVERY YEAR. Thus, for instance, Marcom’s new person is $35,000; add benefits! That is another $12,000, for a total of 47,000, plus the $15,000 for expenses, for a total of $64,000 a year. Over the three years of the discussion about branding, the cost is not $137,500; it’s more like $265,500, if you consider that new position over the final two years of the process. 2) Infrastructural extras: Salaries mean people; people need things, like office space, furniture, computers, phones, etc. Also there may be other hiddens. Take the football field, what events will we attract? They have to be in the daylight! HS games are at night! We’re not taking the final games away from the UNI- Dome! Is the next thing, lights? Or even for the baseball field (where we could get HS