process in support of the most recent strategic plan developed in 2004. The development of annual operating plans as described here has been a practice in place at the Vice President’s level for the last two years.
In addition to the response of the subcommittee to Comment 2, the subcommittee acknowledges that some types of reoccurring expenses (found an annual operating budgets) are incremental. This is especially true for personnel as it relates to salaries and benefits. Over the last three years base salaries for faculty and staff positions have been increased by 14%, this represents somewhere in the neighborhood of a $750,000.00 to the expenditure bottom line on RU positions only. The subcommittee agrees that such costs must be built into planning efforts. Towards this end, the University has an appropriate financial planning instrument that will provide these projections.
As the comment’s author points out, there are many perceived needs surfacing as part of this strategic planning process that represents millions of dollars worth of expenditures. The subcommittee wishes to point out that this is not a conclusive list, nor has there been any prioritization done to ensure the most strategic and productive use of resources. The process has not gotten that far yet. It is clear that not all additional resources needed in support of some of the strategies identified thus far have been quantified and articulated in written form. Nor are needed resources accounted for that represent strategies that have not been included thus far (see related response to Comment 10 and 12 ). Finally, once most of the needed resources have been accounted for, these needs will have to be prioritized within categories representing most likely sources of funding (i.e., annual operating budgets, fundraising efforts, cash reserves, grants, borrowing, etc.). The subcommittee strongly agrees that the allocation of resources should be tied to a strategic plan (as they generally have been over the last several years). Finally, the subcommittee acknowledges that there may be a number of reasons as this planning process continues that there may not be enough resources to fund all initiatives, needs, and/or wants.
This subcommittee wishes to refer the author of this comment to its response to Comment 1 regarding the meaning of “global citizens”.
Comment 4: 03 October 2007
While I would like to “engage in a campus-wide dialog” as requested by Dr. Walker, I note that these pages are accessible to the general public.
Although we have nothing to hide, this dialogue may prove to be more dynamic and effective if taken off-line. While the general public can be privy to the process itself, would it not better serve the university to keep the content at this point within the university community?