In setting forth the mission of HUC, Wise self-consciously rejected the model of the traditional yeshiva curriculum as insular, and he established the course of instruction at the Hebrew Union College in accord with the canons of contemporary western scholarship. At the same time, he acknowledged – as Heraclitus observed – that change is constant. Therefore, Wise recognized that the content of the initial curriculum he framed as well as the specific schools and programs he established would require constant review and modification if the demands and needs of the Jewish people for leadership were to be served in a world marked by evolution as well as continuity.

As we now embark on our own Strategic Planning Process for Hebrew Union College-Jewish Institute of Religion at the outset of a new century, I want to state that I share the sense of mission Rabbi Wise articulated 129 years ago, and I regard the concerns and frameworks Rabbi Wise identified as relevant today as when he first stated them. Of course, the context that informed Wise is not our own. He served an exclusively immigrant Jewish population and their first-generation descendants who were anxious to adapt and acculturate into a novel American setting. In contrast, we serve a predominantly (with notable exceptions of which we must be mindful) fourth and fifth generation American Jewish community that is comfortably ensconced in every facet of American life. The vectors of modern Jewish life therefore move in a different direction today than they did a century ago or more.

In addition, Rabbi Wise was concerned only with the education of rabbis, and he had only one campus on which to focus– Cincinnati. The College-Institute has since expanded exponentially – in terms of sites, schools, and programs. Nevertheless, the fundamental task of the College-Institute remains the instruction and formation of religious-intellectual leadership for the modern Jewish community. The vision of our founder is an enduring one that should guide us as we go forth to meet the demands of our own era.

The Dimensions of Our Tasks and the Scope of the College-Institute Today

As we begin thinking about a strategic planning process, I would note that our overarching task is to define and assign priority to those programs and offerings at the College-Institute that are central to our mission and do so in a way that takes account of the financial situation of our institution. In other words, this entire process presents an opportunity to coordinate the vision of HUC-JIR with the costs of running the school, and the process should allow for a broad discussion among Faculty, Administration, Staff, Students, and Board. This is an educational task that should permit all to recognize the challenges as well the possibilities confronting the College-Institute as HUC-JIR seeks to serve the Jewish religion and the Jewish people.

One word of caution -- in view of the ongoing budgetary constraints that face the College-Institute, there is a natural inclination to approach this process in an overly urgent way. I understand such judgments, and consider them quite reasoned. However, the financial situation of the College-Institute should not be viewed as dire. The budget deficits – while remaining real and troublesome -- have been cut considerably in recent years. Our fund raising efforts have yielded positive results during these past two years, and there is good reason to believe that results will be even more positive during the next two. Finally, the economy itself has improved during this past year, and this has had a salutary impact on our endowment funds. None of this is to diminish the seriousness with which we must approach the fiscal problems of our academy. To do so would be a betrayal of our fiduciary responsibility. Nevertheless, we should acknowledge there are positive elements that mark the economic state of the College-Institute today, and the economic pressures of this exact moment should not cause us to make hasty decisions concerning the programs and directions of the College-Institute that we might well later regret. Instead, I would recommend once again that we – Governors, Overseers, Faculty, Administration, Staff, and Students -- now embark upon our strategic planning process in a calm and deliberate manner.

We should all acknowledge that the parameters that we must confront as we engage in this process of strategic planning are surely vast. Yet, these parameters must be defined in a rational and comprehensive way if the culture of our academy is to be changed and if a rational plan for planning and prioritization is to emerge. What I am offering here today is my own tentative outline of what I regard as some of the major areas we must address as we begin this process, and it is my hope that this outline will stimulate your own thoughts and suggestions as we begin to struggle with the issues that will occupy our attention as we engage in such planning.

The areas I would identify for preliminary consideration are as follows:

I. Faculty – During the previous administration, the Board wisely decided to offer significant pay raises to the faculty. Such raises have permitted the College-Institute to attract many of the finest young Judaica scholars in the world today to the College-Institute. They have also allowed us to reward our more senior faculty with the pay they deserve. Inasmuch as the faculty stands at the center of this institution, it is clearly desirable that we maintain this upward trajectory in faculty salaries as we move towards the future. In reflecting upon this need, we should simultaneously recognize that rising medical costs have resulted in decreased benefits for faculty and this has eroded some of the financial gains that emerged as a result of the pay raises themselves.

At the same time, we should acknowledge that while the College-Institute has positioned itself quite well to attract persons at the outset of their academic careers, we have not positioned ourselves similarly to retain these persons as they attain greater prominence in the academic world. In the secular academy, pay increases are frequently determined on the basis of merit, not longevity, and there are considerable salary differences that distinguish faculty members in departments of the Humanities. Senior scholars who are “stars” commonly make more than $150,000 per annum, and their salaries are often supplemented by individual discretionary funds of $25,000 or more. HUC-JIR is simply not in a position to address this challenge at the current moment, but a strategic planning process should take these matters into account.

II. Pension – This is surely one of the most serious problems that confronts the College-Institute today. The decline in our Pension Endowment Funds during the past three years has added enormous costs to our yearly budget. As a result, it is sometimes suggested that the solution is to move away from a Defined Benefits Plan. This is surely a possibility. However, before we do so we should consider that for years the College-Institute paid nothing in this regard, as the Pension Endowment Funds completely covered these costs. Should these funds increase sufficiently in the future, it might be that the College-Institute would be in this position once again. In this case, it would seemingly be wise to put money away in “good years” in anticipation that there would be “bad ones.” On the other hand, it might be that the College-Institute, like many other comparable institutions, should simply turn to a Defined Contribution Plan. Should we do this, we should recognize that as a Jewish institution we are obligated in two ways – to preserve the fiscal solvency of the school itself and to provide a dignified retirement for our faculty, administration, and staff. This is a pressing matter of highest priority for the school, and we should move ahead with discussions of this issue during the current fiscal year, recognizing that decisions we make in this area will undoubtedly have an impact on other areas and programs of the school.

III. Programs and Museums – There are numerous programs and museums at the College-Institute today. They include – but are not limited to -- ECE, DeLeT, Kollel, and various adult education offerings. Some of these are funded by outside grants apart from the budget. Others are financed by the annual budget. These programs should be examined and evaluated as part of the planning process and in light of the mission of the College-Institute.

IV. Centers – There are the Center for Holocaust and Humanity Education and the HUC-UC Ethics Center that are housed in Cincinnati, and the Kalsman Institute on Judaism and Health is located on our Los Angeles campus. In New York, there is Blaustein Institute for Pastoral Counseling. Each of these centers clearly enriches the life of our institution, and each allows us to serve the larger public. Each of them should be examined, and discussion should center on issues of funding and future direction and purpose. Possible future centers should be considered in relationship to the mission of the College.

V. Schools – All our schools – Cantorial, Communal Service, Education in both Los Angeles and New York, Graduate, and Rabbinical – should be examined in terms of costs and enrollment. The strategic planning process should also allow for a reexamination of the rationales that inform each school, and questions about direction and relationship to the mission of the College-Institute should be raised. The presence of the Klau Library and the American Jewish Archives should certainly be taken into account as should the impact of current Judaica programs in American secular universities in discussions concerning the Graduate School,

VI. Buildings – It is apparent that there are building and maintenance needs on each campus, and they should be discussed. New York and Los Angeles are already overcrowded. Deferred maintenance has clearly proved costly here in Cincinnati.

VII. Israel – Our Jerusalem campus must be made a full partner of HUC-JIR in every sense. The growth of the Israeli rabbinical program and the expressed need for a fulltime M.A. program in Education under Reform auspices means that we must begin to consider the addition of more full-time faculty lines, so that the direction and character of HUC-Jerusalem as an intellectual-religious force on the Israeli scene can be realized.

VIII. Library – The Klau Library is one of the great cultural-intellectual treasures of the Jewish people. The building is currently woefully inadequate and in need of renovation and expansion. The College-Institute must address this problem, for the library stands at the academic-cultural heart of HUC-JIR. In New York and Los Angeles, each library is badly in need of more space.

IX. Recruitment – This is surely a priority need of the College-Institute. We simply need more talented and qualified students, and a continuing increase in enrollment is required at all our sites. After all, the education and graduation of these students for their lives of service is our raison d’etre.

X. Technology – No academic institution in our day can ignore this area, and this is especially true of HUC-JIR. We can only capitalize upon the talents of our full faculty for our students if this area continues to be strengthened. Plans for a Mechina (Preparatory) Program as well as alumni and congregational educational needs that we can serve are dependent upon our technological capabilities, as is our ability to disseminate the resources of our libraries, museums, and archives with the world.

XI. Governance – The Committee on Governance of the Board of Governors should work closely with the Strategic Planning Committee so that appropriate oversight and roles can be established for lay and professional leadership of the College-Institute as we move ahead. To this end, I would also hope – in light of this process and in view of the many new Board members who have become Governors during the last two years – that there be a retreat for the Governors this summer where governance and the issues of planning and orientation can be addressed in an adequate and focused way.

XII. New Initiatives – The planning process must consider all the items mentioned above. At the same time, the process must reflect upon future dreams and visions. The great strength of the College-Institute throughout our history has been the ability to respond creatively to the demands of the hour. We must be proactive as well if we are to exercise the leadership position that is ours.

Concluding Very Unscientific Epiloguet

These statements has been intended to stimulate discussion as well as provide an overarching view of the areas I believe we must address as we begin this planning process. As we engage in this process, I have no doubt that priorities will be assigned that will guide us and I am confident that consensus will emerge as to the directions the College-Institute ought to take as we fulfill the ongoing mission that Isaac Mayer Wise defined 130 years ago. Some parts of the College as it now stands will surely be constricted as we move ahead. Others will just as surely be expanded, and still others will be created.

As we consider the process that lies ahead, the words of Pirkei Avot, “Hamalakhah m’ruba – the tasks are many,” ought to ring in our ears. Yet, I suspect that the second part of that famous mishna, “V’hapoalim atzeilim -- the workers are lazy,” does not characterize us. For we recognize that “Ba’al ha-bayit dohek – the Master is pressing.” My administration and I look forward to working together with you as shutafin (partners) as we enter this exciting as well as daunting new chapter in our history of service to God, the Jewish people, and humankind.