TO: CFR RCEP Review Committee

Thank you for meeting with me last week to listen to my views on the Provost's proposed RCEP for our College. In this brief memo I wish to further comment on one point.

I believe that the Provost's RCEP proposal to eliminate our College and to reconstitute it as a school in the College of the Environment fails to satisfy the minimum conditions outlined in the Faculty Handbook, Section 26-41 C.

First, I do not believe that the Provost's proposal was predicated on either a "budget reduction or a reallocation of resources" as required in #1 of Section 26-41 C (reproduced below). In fact, in their joint letter of February 9, 2009 the Provost and President state, "To maintain disciplinary strength, resources currently allocated to the existing units that move into the College of the Environment will not be selectively withdrawn to support new initiatives within the College." Additionally, I can find no reference in the CFR RCEP that posits that the elimination of CFR is predicated on a budget reduction. "In fact, in their letter to the CFR Visiting Committee in June 2008, the President and Provost state that, "We totally agree that continued and increasing support of forestry research and education are absolutely critical for the state of Washington and beyond. It is our desire that the University's position in these areas be strengthened, and we welcome continuing discussions as to just how we can best meet the needs of the forestry community."

Second, my reading of the RCEP leads me to conclude that the required review of alternatives was neither conducted nor documented in the Provost's RCEP as is stipulated in #2 of Section 26-41 C. At a minimum, one would expect a comparison of the status quo with the proposed elimination alternative. Given the paucity of details in the proposal for eliminating our College, I find the proposed RCEP plan inadequate to justify elimination of our College.