05/17/1990

 

UCCSN Board of Regents' Meeting Minutes
May 17-18, 1990








05-17-1990

Pages 35-86



BOARD OF REGENTS

UNIVERSITY OF NEVADA SYSTEM

May 17-18, 1990



The Board of Regents met on the above date in the Pine Auditori-

um, Jot Travis Student Union, University of Nevada, Reno.



Members present: Mrs. Dorothy S. Gallagher, Chairman

Mrs. Shelley Berkley

Dr. Jill Derby

Dr. James Eardley

Mr. Joseph M. Foley

Dr. Lonnie Hammargren

Dr. Daniel J. Klaich

Mrs. Carolyn M. Sparks

Mrs. June F. Whitley



Others present: Chancellor Mark H Dawson

President Anthony Calabro, WNCC

President Joseph Crowley, UNR

President John Gwaltney, TMCC

President Robert Maxson, UNLV

President Paul Meacham, CCCC

President James Taranik, DRI

Dean Charles Greenhaw, NNCC

Mr. Don Klasic, General Counsel

Dr. Warren Fox, Vice Chancellor

Mr. Ron Sparks, Vice Chancellor

Ms. Mary Lou Moser, Secretary



Also present were Faculty Senate Chairmen Alan Balboni (CCCC),

Richard Brown (UNR), Don Carlson (WNCC), Isabelle Emerson (UNLV),

Paula Funkhouser (TMCC), Louis Grandieri (Unit), Michael Mc Far-

lane (NNCC), and Steve Mizell (DRI), and Student Association

Officers.



Chairman Dorothy Gallagher called the meeting to order at 9:30

A.M., Thursday, May 17, 1990.



1. Approved the Consent Agenda



Approved the Consent Agenda (identified as Ref. A, filed

with permanent minutes) containing the following:



(1) Approved the minutes of the regular meeting held

April 12-13, 1990.



(2) Approved the gifts, grants and contracts, listed in

Ref. C-1, filed with permanent minutes.



(3) Approved granting emeritus status at UNLV for the

following, to be effective June 30, 1990:



Harold H. J. Erickson, Librarian Emeritus

Paul Loveday, Emeritus Professor of Management



(4) Approved granting emeritus status at CCCC for Dru

Raney, Community College Professor Emeritus, to be

effective upon her retirement.



(5) Approved granting emeritus status at UNR for the fol-

lowing, to be effective July 1, 1990:



John G. Folkes, College of Arts & Science, Department

of History

Robert C. Horton, Mackay School of Mines



(6) Approved the waiver of the one-year notification for

early retirement for Lawrence M. Kirk, Extension

Editor, Department of Agricultural Education and

Communications, College of Agriculture at UNR. The

requested early retirement is to be effective July 1,

1990.



(7) Approved a two-year leave of absence (1990-91 through

1991-92) for Martina Young, Assistant Professor of

Dance at UNR. The leave will be used to complete a

Master of Fine Arts degree at Arizona State Univer-

sity.



(8) Approved the following appointments to the UNLV En-

gineering Advisory Council:



Full Membership - William Yates, replaces Jim Lowman



Associate Membership - Dan Stewart, Las Vegas

Dudley Sondeno, Las Vegas



(9) Approved the following appointment to the UNR College

of Business Administration Advisory Board:



Gary Simmons, Sparks



(10) Approved the formation of an Advisory Board for the

Orvis School of Nursing at UNR.



(11) Approved the following interlocal agreements:



A. UNS Board of Regents/UNLV and the State Department

of Education (Interlocal Contract)



Effective: July 1 through December 15, 1990

Amount : $2,336 to UNLV

Purpose : UNLV to arrange for participation in

Governor's Institute for Gifted and

Talented Students in Las Vegas.



B. UNS Board of Regents/UNR and the State Department

of Education (Interlocal Contract)



Effective: May 1 through August 25, 1990

Amount : $3,375 to UNR

Purpose : UNLV to arrange for participation in

Governor's Institute for Gifted and

Talented Students in Las Vegas.



C. UNS Board of Regents/UNR and Nevada Department of

Human Resources/Mental Hygiene and Mental Retar-

dation Division (Interlocal Contract)



Effective: Date approved by Board

Amount : None

Purpose : Mental Health Institute to make its

facilities available to UNR's Orvis

School of Nursing for purpose of pro-

viding clinical experience and train-

ing to Nursing students.



D. UNS Board of Regents/UNR and State Department of

Education (Interlocal Contract)



Effective: April 1 through November 30, 1990

Amount : $50,000 maximum to UNR

Purpose : UNR to disseminate four $10,000 grants

for initiating innovative programs re-

garding: Homeless Outreach; Community

Services Agency; Clark County School

District; Children's Cabinet, Inc.



E. UNS Board of Regents/School of Medicine and Nevada

Department of Prisons (Interlocal Contract)



Effective: May 18, 1990

Amount : $11,250 to School of Medicine

Purpose : Primary care health manpower for the

Nevada State Prison System.



F. UNS Board of Regents/UNR and State of Nevada 125th

Anniversary Commission (Interlocal Contract)



Effective: January 1 through June 30, 1990

Amount : $15,455 to UNR

Purpose : Will James Film/Video Project



G. UNS Board of Regents and Sierra Pacific Power

Company/WESTPAC UTILITIES



Effective: Date approved by Board

Amount : $1.00 (One Dollar) to Board

Purpose : Grant of Easement for gas distribu-

tion at UNR Motor Pool facility



Mrs. Sparks moved adoption of the Consent Agenda and approv-

al of the prepared agenda with the authority to change the

order of items as specified throughout the meeting. Dr.

Hammargren seconded. Motion carried.



Mrs. Shelley Berkley and Mr. Joseph Foley entered the meeting.



2. Introductions



President Meacham introduced newly elected CCCC Faculty

Senate Chairman Alan Balboni.



President Taranik introduced outgoing DRI Faculty Senate

Chairman Alan Gertler and newly elected DRI Faculty Senate

Chairman Steve Mizell.



President Gwaltney introduced ASTM Senator Ronald Mc Guire

and newly re-elected TMCC Faculty Senate Chairman Paula

Funkhouser.



President Maxson introduced outgoing UNLV Faculty Senate

Chairman Nancy Master and newly elected UNLV Faculty Senate

Chairman Isabelle Emerson.



President Crowley introduced newly elected UNR Faculty

Senate Chairman Richard Brown.



Mr. Daniel J. Klaich entered the meeting.



3. Chancellor's Report



Chancellor Dawson reported that the gifts received by the

Campuses have been substantial and he commended the efforts

of the Institutions.



He announced that the UNR Foundation had recently announced

plans to launch the largest fund-raising drive in Nevada

history -- a six-year capital campaign expected to attract

more than $105 million in private gifts to Nevada's land-

grant University. Chancellor Dawson wished UNR success in

this endeavor.



Chancellor Dawson reported that the System Compensation

Committee is developing a salary package to be presented

to the Board of Regents in June.



At its meeting in March, the Joint Professional Compensation

Committee recommended that UNS move toward "Transferability"

which would allow adding alternative pension providers to

the existing retirement program. This necessitates UNS pro-

ducing a very detailed RFP. Pension Plans are a highly

specialized field, and the Committee feels that UNS does

not have the expertise in-house required to develop a high

quality RFP and has therefore advised the Chancellor to

seek an outside consultant to assist existing personnel

in its development.



This is a very important issue with the faculty as employ-

ees want the option to be able to transfer their retirement

funds to other plans. It has been estimated that the cost

will be approximately $20,000 to $40,000.



Chancellor Dawson gave an update report on the ad hoc Com-

mittee on Community College Faculty Relations' recommenda-

tions which were accepted at the December, 1989 meeting, as

contained in Ref. H, filed in the Regents' Office.



RECOMMENDATION 1 - A System Officer position should be es-

tablished in the Chancellor's Office to represent exclusive-

ly the interests of Community Colleges. The Chancellor will

develop a recommended job description for the Board's con-

sideration. -- The Community College Presidents reviewed

the information collected by President Calabro on responsi-

bilities of Community College facilitators in other states.

After review and discussion, it was determined that 1) if

this position cannot be called the "Vice Chancellor of

Community Colleges", it was not wanted, and 2) with all of

the other priorities for new positions in the Chancellor's

Office, it was felt that this position was not a top pri-

ority. The Presidents felt that a facilities planner and

an Institution Research Analyst to handle Community College

needs would be better choices and would aid Community Col-

leges more at this time. The Community College Presidents

acknowledge the fact that there is a need for a Community

College facilitator "presence" in the Chancellor's Office.



RECOMMENDATION 2 - The Board of Regents shall meet on each

Community College Campus not less than once every other

year, during which time workshops will be conducted focus-

ing on Community College matters. (This results in two

Board meetings held on a Community College Campus each year.

Two such meetings had been scheduled for 1990 -- April at

CCCC, September at NNCC.) -- A Board meeting was held at

CCCC on April 12-13, 1990 and another is scheduled at NNCC

on October 11-12, 1990. The 1991 and 1992 calendars will

schedule meetings on two Community College Campuses per

year.



RECOMMENDATION 3 - Alternatives for recognizing the Commu-

nity Colleges' presence in the name of the University of

Nevada System should be explored. -- This recommendation

is currently being explored.



RECOMMENDATION 4 - The UNS Director of Public Information

should develop a system newsletter to facilitate internal

communications. It should include a system calendar which

includes information about meetings, deadlines and events.

-- The first newsletter has been completed and mailed.



RECOMMENDATION 5 - Additional avenues of communication be-

tween faculty and Regents should be cultivated to enhance

the Board's awareness about faculty concerns. -- Chancellor

Dawson had recommended that when the Board of Regents' meet-

ings are scheduled at the Community Colleges an informal

forum be held to air concerns. The Community College Presi-

dents agreed and suggested that the Faculty Senate Chairmen,

the President from the respective Campus, and a Regent or-

ganize the forum.



Some of the Regents expressed their concern in making the

Board of Regents' meeting a three-day meeting. Dr. Derby

suggested that a breakfast meeting be scheduled during the

two-day meeting for this forum. Mr. Klaich stated that if

the Board should hold forums for the Community Colleges,

the Universities should also be given the same opportunity.



RECOMMENDATION 6 - The Board of Regents should be encouraged

to reemphasize that articulation is a high priority. Con-

sideration of the impact University-level curriculum changes

have upon Community Colleges should similarly be emphasized.

Timelines for completing articulation agreements should be

established between Universities and Community Colleges.

-- The Articulation Board has underway a major statewide

study of articulation. The draft of this study is nearly

complete. Vice Chancellor Fox will be presenting a report

of the Articulation Board activities at each Board of

Regents' meeting following an Articulation Board meeting.

The Presidents have expressed a concern regarding the num-

ber of Community College representatives on the Articula-

tion Board. They felt that there should be a faculty and

an Administrator from each Campus. The number of repre-

sentatives will be discussed at the Council of Presidents'

meeting in June.



RECOMMENDATION 7 - A Community College Compensation Com-

mittee should be established which reports to the Board of

Regents. Among the Committee's immediate charges will be

to recommend ways to: correct salary inequities during

the 1991-93 budget process, and improve part-time salaries

for Community College Instructors. -- The Committee has

been established and reports to the Chancellor. The Com-

mittee is working on salary inequities and part-time sal-

aries among many other issues.



RECOMMENDATION 8 - Careful review of the system budget

should be undertaken to address funding inequities that

lessen the ability of Community Colleges to carry out their

mission. Equitable funding must take into account the dif-

ferences between Universities and the Community Colleges,

and the diversity among the Community Colleges. -- Con-

siderable progress has been made in this area as budgets

are developed.



RECOMMENDATION 9 - Staff development opportunities and re-

sources should be expanded to allow faculty opportunities

to enhance their knowledge and skills, and to interact

with fellow professionals. -- The Community College Com-

pensation Committee is developing a proposal to conduct

a statewide Community College Conference to be held in Reno

and in August, 1990 during the week prior to the beginning

of classes. The Community College Faculty Senates will be

asked to appoint someone from each College to work during

the Summer on a workshop planning sub-committee.



RECOMMENDATION 10 - The Community Colleges should, individ-

ually and collectively, assess themselves against "The

Futures Commission" recommendations prior to the next leg-

islative session in order to provide clear communication

to all constituencies on how Nevada's students, citizens,

and industries will be served by our Community Colleges.

-- President Calabro has established a committee at WNCC

which is analyzing the 36 recommendations from the Futures

Commission report to see which most closely fit the needs of

the Campus. President Calabro has agreed to have his com-

mittee meet with committees from each Community College Cam-

pus so the Campus committees can then be working together.

President Calabro reported that progress is being made on

this recommendation.



RECOMMENDATION 11 - The Board of Regents should direct the

Presidents to provide the Board with Campus governance flow

charts reflecting current governance arrangements on each

Campus. Within three months the Presidents, in consultation

with their faculties, should provide the Board with modified

flow charts reflecting appropriate changes in Campus govern-

ance structures which address the faculty concerns identi-

fied by the Community College Faculty Relations Committee.

(Modifications should include faculty involvement in the

evaluation of Administrators and the budget process.) --

Campus governance flow charts were previously submitted to

the Board. The Presidents felt that they have made progress

in this area and that the faculty has endorsed the changes

which allow greater involvement in the budget process. It

is anticipated that the Presidents will report to the Board

in June with their governance flow chart modifications, but

need to stress that in some cases the flow charts may not

change.



Mr. Klaich stated that the flow charts which were presented

in January to the Board were very complex and that he could

not point out any discrepancies, if any, and that he had to

rely on others. He requested the Faculty Senate Chairmen to

aid the Board in denoting discrepancies. Dr. Derby suggest-

ed that at the June meeting clarification be made to the

flow charts and a progress report be made.



RECOMMENDATION 12 - The Board of Regents shall request that

the Chancellor provide a follow-up evaluation in January

1991 to determine the progress made in resolving problems

identified by the Community College Faculty Relations Com-

mittee, and in implementing the recommendations proposed by

the Committee. -- Chancellor Dawson will make follow-up

reports, such as this one, periodically throughout the year.



4. Budget and Finance Committee



The Budget and Finance Committee, meeting as a committee of

the whole under the Chairmanship of Regent Eardley, acted

as follows:



(1) Approved the following expenditures:



A. Approved the expenditure of Capital Improvement

Fee Funds in the amount of $110,500 for the fol-

lowing projects at WNCC:



1) Remodel Administrative and Business $ 43,000

Office areas to provide more space

for the Business Office



2) Local Area Network - Phase III ex- 26,500

pansion



3) Additional remodeling projects include: 41,000

Printing and Graphic Arts, storage for

Nursing, student lounge, miscellaneous

equipment, upgrade phone system, auto-

welding shop improvements



Mrs. Sparks moved approval of the expenditure of

Capital Improvement Fee Funds at WNCC in the

amount of $110,500 as noted above. Dr. Derby

seconded. Motion carried.



B. Approved the expenditure of Capital Improvement

Fee Funds in the amount of $54,100 for the fol-

lowing projects at TMCC:



1) Elevator Controller be replaced $ 8,000

with new modern microprocessor

controller



2) Remodeling to provide space for six 19,100

new faculty who will be arriving in

the Fall and replacement of railings

outside the north entrance to make

them continuous for the handicapped



3) Entrance sign for the Campus with a 15,000

message board that can be changed for

upcoming events



Dr. Derby moved approval of the expenditure of

Capital Improvement Fee Funds at TMCC in the

amount of $54,100 as noted above. Dr. Hammargren

seconded. Motion carried.



C. The Committee of the Whole recommended approval of

approval of expenditure of Capital Improvement Fee

Funds in the amount of $20,000 for the following

project at UNLV:



1) Landscaping from the Dorms to the $ 20,000

Thomas and Mack Center landscaping

already in place



As provided by Board of Regents' policy, President

Maxson reported the authorization to use up to

$20,000 of Capital Improvement Fee Funds for a

project which provided landscaping from the Dorms

to the Thomas and Mack Center.



Mrs. Sparks moved approval of the expenditure of

Capital Improvements Fee Funds at UNLV in the

amount of $20,000 as noted above. Mrs. Berkley

seconded. Motion carried.



(2) Approved the following changes:



A. Approved the changes to the Handbook, Title 4,

Chapter 10, Section 12.5, Distribution of the

Registration Fee, Continuing Education, Community

Service, and Off-Campus Programs, as follows:



Section 12. Distribution of the Registration Fee



5. Continuing Education, Community Service, and

Off-Campus Programs. Entire fee to be dedi-

cated to program budget for instruction.



At UNLV and UNR, the per credit fee for credit

courses offered by continuing education during

the Fall or Spring term shall be the same as

the per credit fee charged for other credit

courses offered during the same time period.

During the Summer, the fees for continuing

education courses shall be the same as the

fees charged for Summer Sessions courses.



B. Approved the table of fees in Title 4, Chapter 17,

Section 10, Student Fees will change as follows.

This is a reflection of the above changes to the

Handbook, Title 4, Chapter 10, Section 12.5.



Section 10. Student Fees



Continuing Education, Off-Campus,

per credit:

UNR UNLV



for undergraduate courses 40 40

for graduate courses 50 50



Continuing Education, Summer,

per credit:



for undergraduate courses 44 41

for graduate courses 54 50



Mr. Klaich moved approval of the Handbook changes

regarding the distribution of the registration

fee and the student fees for Continuing Education

at UNLV and UNR. Mrs. Sparks seconded. Motion

carried.



Mrs. Whitley entered the meeting.



(3) In December, 1989, the Board approved a change in

Summer Session Fees at UNLV in Title 4, Chapter 17,

Section 10:



Undergraduate from $36 to $41

Graduate from $41 to $50



Inadvertently, the distribution of those fees was not

changed. The Committee of the Whole recommended ap-

proval of changes to the Handbook, Title 4, Chapter

10, Section 12.4, Distribution of the Registration

Fee, Summer Programs, as follows:



Section 12. Distribution of the Registration Fee



4. Summer Programs - (except Community Service) per

credit:

UNLV



Per Undergraduate Credit:

Instructional Programs $38.40

Student Union 2.00

Student Union Capital Improvement NA

Summer Activity Program .35

Health Service .25

$41.00



Per Graduate Credit:

Instructional Programs $47.40

Student Union 2.00

Student Union Capital Improvement NA

Summer Activity Program .35

Health Service .25

$50.00



Mrs. Sparks moved approval of the Handbook changes

regarding Distribution of Registration Fees, Summer

Programs at UNLV. Dr. Derby seconded. Motion

carried.



(4) Approved the changes to the Handbook, Title 4, Chap-

ter 17, Section 8.2, Refund Policy, UNLV, as follows:



a. Resident Fees (Does not apply to credit courses

offered by the Summer Term or the Division of

Continuing Education.)



(1) One hundred percent (100%) of resident fees

shall be refunded for net credit load re-

ductions completed within two weeks of the

beginning of instruction. No refund of

registration fees shall be granted for

courses dropped after two weeks from the

beginning of instruction.



(2) One hundred percent (100%) of resident fees

shall be refunded for withdrawal from the

University completed within two weeks of

the beginning of instruction. For with-

drawals within two weeks of the beginning of

instruction and prior to the end of the sixth

calendar week of instruction, a fifty percent

(50%) refund of fees shall be granted. No

refund shall be granted thereafter.



b. Nonresident Tuition (Does not apply to credit

courses offered by the Summer Term or the Divi-

sion of Continuing Education.)



(1) One hundred percent (100%) of nonresident

tuition shall be refunded for net credit

reduction to six credits or less or with-

drawal from the University after two weeks

of the beginning of instruction.



(2) No refund of nonresident tuition shall be

granted for courses dropped after two weeks

from the beginning of instruction.



(3) A fifty percent (50%) refund of nonresident

tuition shall be granted for withdrawals

made from the University after two weeks

of the beginning of instruction but prior

to the end of the sixth calendar week of

instruction. No refund shall be granted

thereafter.



(subsections c., d., and e. require no change)



f. Summer Term and the Division of Continuing

Education



A one hundred percent (100%) refund of registra-

tion fees may be authorized to a student offi-

cially dropping a course before the day instruc-

tion for that course begins. A fifty percent

(50%) refund of registration fees may be author-

ized to a student officially dropping a course

during the first twenty percent (20%) of the

course. Thereafter, no refund will be made.



For non-credit courses, or for credit courses

taught as part of a conference or institute, or

for some short intensive courses, the refund

policy will be described in the publicity materi-

al for the course and may vary from course to

course depending upon the circumstances.



Mr. Klaich moved approval of the Handbook changes re-

garding the Refund Policy at UNLV. Mrs. Whitley

seconded. Motion carried.



(5) Approved the changes to the Handbook, Title 4, Chapter

17, Section 10, Student Fees, UNR and UNLV, as fol-

lows:

UNR UNLV



Section 10. Student Fees



Independent Study (correspondence) $46 $--

Placement Office Registration Fee 10 10

Placement Office Computer Access Fee 15 15



Note: The $1.00 fee for the enrollment certification

at UNR which appeared on the agenda was withdrawn.



Mrs. Whitley move approval of the Handbook changes re-

garding student Fees at UNR and UNLV. Mrs. Sparks

seconded. Motion carried.



(6) Approved the changes to the Handbook, Title 4, Chapter

17, Section 13, Residence Hall and Food Service Rates,

UNLV, as follows:



Section 13. Residence Hall and Food Service Rates,

UNLV



Tonopah Hall

Room, Board and Phone $1791.00 with 19 meal plan

$1748.00 with 15 meal plan

$1684.00 with 12 meal plan

Plus refundable damage $ 100.00 per semester

deposit



Gym Road and Gym Road South Halls

Room, Board and Phone $2219.00 with 19 meal plan

$2176.00 with 15 meal plan

$2112.00 with 12 meal plan

Plus refundable damage $ 100.00 per semester

deposit



Breakdown of Room and Board Fees:



Tonopah Hall Room $ 951.00 per semester

Gym Road & Gym Road So. Room $1446.00 per semester

Board 19 Meals per week $ 772.47 per semester

15 Meals per week $ 729.47 per semester

12 Meals per week $ 665.21 per semester



Private room supplement $ 300.00 per semester



Summer Session (room only) $ 280.00/5 wk semester

Refundable damage deposit $ 100.00 per semester



Summer Session (private room

supplement) $ 30.00 per session



Graduate Housing Fee: Room $ 342.00 per month +

Board $ 181.75 19 meal plan

or $ 171.15 15 meal plan

or $ 156.75 12 meal plan



December Recess Room and 19 meals $523.00

Room and 15 meals $513.00

Room and 12 meals $498.00



These changes will be effective Summer, 1990.



Dr. Derby moved approval of the Handbook changes re-

garding Residence Hall and Food Service Rates at

UNLV. Mrs. Berkley seconded. Motion carried.



(7) Approved the changes to the Handbook, Title 4, Chap-

ter 17, Section 15, Residence Hall and Food Service

Rates, UNR, as contained in Ref. B-7, filed in the

Regents' Office.



President Crowley explained that in order to have

quality food service, there needs to be an increase

in the number served, therefore UNR is requesting a

mandatory meal plan for all residence hall occupants.

The proposal decreases the cost of the meal plan per

individual, but will increase the total collected for

the meal plan if the proposal becomes mandatory for

all residence hall occupants.



Mr. Clint Hosford, concerned student, informed the

Committee, that a petition was taken at the entrance

to the Dining Commons on May 7, 1990. A total of 361

persons were asked if they would like to sign the

petition; 331 signed the petition (91%). He stated

that students are not in favor of the mandatory meal

plan. The students have not had enough time to

financially plan for this proposal.



Upon questioning, President Crowley informed the Com-

mittee that last year there were 328 non-Freshman

students living in the residence halls; 105 of these

students purchased the meal plan; and 160 returning

students have made a down payment for Dormitory

space with full knowledge of the mandatory meal plan

for next year. He stated that a mandatory meal plan

is in effect at the College Inn and at most institu-

tions across the country. UNLV has always had a

mandatory meal plan and CSUN President Joe Bunin in-

dicated that there has been no opposition to this

requirement.



UNR Associate Dean of Student Life, John Marschall,

explained in greater detail how the volume of the

meal plan will affect the quality of the food service.

He stated that UNR Residential Life and Housing bud-

gets were based on 90% occupancy rate for the year.

During this past Fall semester the residence halls

were 100% occupied and 94% occupied during the Spring

semester. The Professional Food Management (current

food service company at UNR) has indicated that they

could provide better mels if the numbers were in-

creased.



President Crowley distributed an additional option

for this first year of inclusive room and board which

would spread the annual cost over six payments (filed

in the Regents' Office).



Mr. Klaich and Mrs. Sparks suggested a grandfathering

approach to this mandatory meal plan. Dr. Marschall

indicated that this would have a minimal impact. He

did indicated that exceptions to the policy will be

made for students as they have in the past.



Mr. Foley moved approval of the Handbook changes re-

garding Residence Hall and Food Service Rates and the

optional payment plan for the meal plan at UNR. Dr.

Derby seconded. Mr. Klaich and Mrs. Whitley opposed.

Motion carried.



(8) Approved the changes to the Handbook, Title 4, Chapter

17, Section 17.1, Apartment Rentals, UNR, as follows:



Section 17. Apartment Rentals, UNR



1. University Village apartments shall rent for

$250 per month (effective 7/1/90) with a rental

agreement requiring two weeks notice of intent

to vacate. Rent shall be payable one month in

advance. Before moving in, the tenant shall

pay the first and last month's rent (partial

month pro-rated), plus a $100 cleaning and damage

deposit, and a $15.00 key deposit. The $115.00

key, damage and cleaning deposit shall be refund-

ed in whole or in part upon the termination of

the rental agreement and the peaceful surrender

of the rented premises with the premises left in

a clean and habitable condition (ordinary wear

excepted) and with a complete inventory of furn-

ishings. Inspection will be made by an authorized

agent of the University.



Rent not received by 5:00 P.M. on the eleventh

(11th) day of the month will be considered delin-

quent and will be subject to a five dollar ($5.00)

late charge. Rent or other charges not paid by

the twenty-fifty (25th) of the month when due will

result in termination of the rental agreement on

the last day of the month when due.



UNR Associate Dean for Student Life, John Marschall,

explained that the 40-unit self-supporting University

Village is in severe need of renovation and replace-

ment, but in order to do this, there needs to be an

increase in revenue to begin a reserve for the costs

which will be incurred. With the proposed increase,

$40,000 will be generated in the first year which will

allow for only one major improvement. Some additional

improvements will include windows, storage units,

furnaces, bathrooms and fire safety. The increased

rate will begin when the remodeling begins. Sierra

Pacific Power Company's audit indicated that with

the improvements made, the tenants could realize a 50%

savings on their power statements. Dr. Marschall in-

dicated that there are no reserves to take care of a

debt source for a bond loan such as the residence

halls have for their renovation projects.



Mrs. Chrisy Masoudi, University Village tenant, stated

that a 55% increase is unrealistic for married stu-

dents living at University Village. She is concerned

that if this increase is approved, then the married

students will be subject to future increases which

they could not financially handle.



Mr. Klaich questioned if there would be assurances

that future increases would be used for future reno-

vation projects. President Crowley informed the Com-

mittee that the University Village was built in 1960

and has not implemented a scheduled rental increase

during the past years. The University Village has

not been maintained as it should over the past years,

and now it is in desperate need of repairs. He ad-

mitted that this was a tough decision to make, but

one that must be realized. He gave his word that

such increases would not occur every year in the

future.



Mrs. Sparks stated that UNR needs to provide a proper

quality of life for the students who live in the resi-

dence halls and rental properties, and if this cannot

be obtained, then the properties should be abandoned.



ASUN President Jason Geddes informed the Committee

that out of the last $4 student fee increase, $1 was

directed to the renovation of the residence halls, but

it was his understanding that nothing was directed to

married student housing. He suggested that married

student housing receive a portion of this fee. Mr.

Marschall corrected Mr. Geddes by stating that a

pro-rated amount of the $1 fee is directed to married

student housing.



Mr. Klaich moved approval of the Handbook change re-

garding Apartment Rentals at UNR upon the condition

that all of the increase be allocated to the improve-

ments in married student housing so long as the in-

crease is considered necessary by UNR and that UNR

will provide the Changellor with verification of this

process. Dr. Hammargren seconded. Motion carried.



(9) Approved the changes to the Handbook, Title 4, Chapter

17, Section 18, The College Inn, UNR, as contained in

Ref. B-9, filed in the Regents' Office.



Mr. Klaich moved approval of the Handbook changes re-

garding The College Inn at UNR. Mrs. Sparks seconded.

Motion carried.



(10) Approved the changes to the Handbook, Title 4, Chapter

3, Section 19.1, Summer Session Salary Schedules, UNLV

as follows:



Section 19. Summer Session Salary Schedules



Salary schedules for Summer Session faculty at UNR

and UNLV shall be approved annually by the Board of

Regents. The following schedules are effective for

the 1990 Summer Session:



1. University of Nevada, Las Vegas



UNLV Faculty

Professor $1035 per credit hour

Associate Professor 1009 per credit hour

Assistant Professor 983 per credit hour

Lecturer 880 per credit hour



Visting Faculty

Professor $ 950 per credit hour

Associate Professor 900 per credit hour

Assistant Professor 850 per credit hour

Lecturer 750-850 per credit hour

Lab Assistant 750 per credit hour



Professor Emeritus: Depends upon rank at time of

retirement.



The per-credit-hour salary is understood to be a

maximum allowable salary. A lower per-credit sal-

ary, when necessitated by low enrollment, and when

agreed to by the Instructor, is not precluded.



Mrs. Sparks moved approval of the Handbook changes re-

garding Summer Session Salary Schedules at UNLV. Mrs.

Whitley seconded. Motion carried.



(11) Approved the changes to the Handbook, Title 4, Chapter

3, Section 20.2, Part-Time Salary Schedules, UNLV, as

follows:



Section 20. Part-Time Salary Schedules



Salary schedules for part-time instructional staff

shall be subject to approval of the Board of Regents.

The following schedules shall be implemented in Sum-

mer, 1990 and shall remain effective until changed

by action of the Board of Regents:



2. University of Nevada, Las Vegas



Minimum of $500 per credit hour



Mrs. Sparks moved approval of the Handbook changes

regarding Part-Time Salary Schedules at UNLV. Dr.

Derby seconded. Motion carried.



The open meeting recessed at 10:05 A.M. and reconvened in a

Closed Personnel Session at 12:20 P.M., Thursday, May 17, 1990,

with all Regents present.



5. Personnel Session



Upon motion by Mr. Klaich, seconded by Mrs. Whitley, the

Board moved to a closed personnel session for the purpose

of discussing the character, alleged misconduct, profes-

sional competence or physical or mental health of a person

in accordance with NRS 241.030.



Upon motion by Dr. Eardley, seconded by Mrs. Sparks, the

Board moved to open session. Motion carried.



The open meeting reconvened at 2:45 P.M., Thursday, May 17, 1990,

with all Regents present.



6. Approved Resolution, UNLV Jazz Band



Approved the following resolution in recognition of the UNLV

Jazz Ensemble:



RESOLUTION #90-5



WHEREAS, the University of Nevada, Las Vegas Jazz Ensemble

has demonstrated an outstanding record of success over the

last twelve years, recording eight commercial albums and

traveling extensively around the world; and



WHEREAS, the UNLV Jazz ensemble has well represented its

University, the University System, the City of Las Vegas,

and the entire State of Nevada; and



WHEREAS, the UNLV Jazz Ensemble out-performed College and

University big bands from throughtout the country in 1990

during regional and national competition; and



WHEREAS, the UNLV Jazz Ensemble was declared national

champion over seven other finalists at the fourth annual

Music Fest USA competition at the 1990 National Finals

sponsored by "Down Beat" magazine in Oakland, California;

and



WHEREAS, the Board of Regents and the University of Nevada

System are proud of the ensemble, its director, staff, and

supporters; now, therefore, be it



RESOLVED, by the Board of Regents of the University of

Nevada System that in honor of the Jazz Ensemble's National

Championship, today, May 17, 1990, be declared "UNLV Jazz

Ensemble Day" throughout the University System, and further,

be it



RESOLVED, that the University of Nevada, Las Vegas be highly

commended for bringing such a great honor to the State of

Nevada, and praised for finishing "NUMBER ONE".



Dr. John Unrue, Senior Vice President and Provost, intro-

duced Mr. Grank Gagliardi, Director of Jazz Studies at UNLV.

Mr. Gagliardi has been on staff at UNLV for twelve years and

was commended for his service. Mr. Gagliardi thanked the

Board of Regents for their recognition and distributed a

UNLV Jazz Ensemble cassette tape to each Board member.



Dr. Eardley moved approval of the resolution which recog-

nizes the UNLV Jazz Ensemble. Dr. Hammargren seconded.

Motion carried.



7. Report and Recommendations of the Investment Committee



A report and recommendations of the Investment Committee

meeting, held May 17, 1990, were made by Regent Daniel

Klaich, Chairman.



The Committee recommended approval of the ratification

of a contract to Security Pacific Bank Corporation for

custodial banking services.



Mr. Klaich introduced Ms. Janet Mac Donald, UNS Deputy

Treasurer, and Mr. Art Lenon, Director of Purchasing,

Business Center North. Ms. Mac Donald explained that

several months ago an RFP was prepared with the assist-

ance of Cambridge and Associates. The RFP was sent to

all banks doing business in the State of Nevada. A

sub-committee, consisting of representatives from UNLV,

UNR, DRI, TMCC and the Deputy Treasurer's Office, was

formed to evaluate the proposals received.



Ms. Mac Donald stated that some 13 factors were used to

evaluate the banks which had responded to the RFP:



The Custodial organization of the bank;



The resources of the bank's Trust Department, in-

cluding the number of trust accounts, the type of

trust accounts and the insurance coverage of the

bank;



The Cash Management Services available at the bank.

Daily cash receipts of UNS trust accounts are

"swept" by the bank into an investment account so

that interest may be earned. This historical earn-

ings of the "sweep" accounts was taken into consid-

eration;



Available Settlement facilities of the bank, which

is their use of central depositories, and their

membership in DTC, the Federal Service System,

Eurodollars, etc.;



The Data Processing and Accounting systems. UNS is

very interested in upgrading the current computer

systems, i. e., to down-load statements into the

PC's in the Deputy Treasurer's Office; the ability

to monitor the Regent Investment Guidelines; re-

ceipt of statements on trade date and settlement

date; on-line access with ability to manipulate data

once it is transferred from the bank;



Failed trades and how dividends and interest pay-

ments would be made were considered. Sample reports

were reviewed and compared looking at portfolio

analysis. Banks were questioned about the availa-

bility of custom reports for UNS;



Security lending abilities which allows portfolio

instruments to be loaned thereby adding up to a

possibility of 30 basis points to total performance;



Option accounting and future accounting capabili-

ties.



Fees.



Ms. Mac Donald stated that all Committee members attend-

ed on-site visits to the banks and that references were

checked.



Based on the careful review of the above, the Committee

unanimously recommended to the Investment Committee that

Security Pacific Bank be appointed as the UNS Custodial

Bank.



Mrs. Sparks questioned whether the Investment Committee

members should not have received copies of the RFP and

bids. Ms. Mac Donald replied that, no, that is not the

general practice on bids. Mr. Art Lenon agreed. Mrs.

Sparks then questioned whether this was the lowest bid

of those submitted; whether this was the best financial

arrangement for the System provided in the RFP's. Ms.

Mac Donald replied that it was the best "we could get".

Further questioning by Mr. Klaich revealed that Security

Pacific offered the services for $65,000 and First In-

terstate of Nevada offered $68,000. Ms. Mac Donald ex-

plained that the fees were only one of the 13 criteria

used to evaluate the proposals.



Mrs. Sparks then questioned whether there were only two

bids, with Ms. Mac Donald replying in the affirmative.

Mr. Lenon, referring to his memorandum dated May 17,

1990 to the Board of Regents, (filed with the permanent

minutes), stated that each member of the Evaluation Com-

mittee individually ranked the proposals.



Mr. Klaich asked who held the current custodial contract

and Ms. Mac Donald replied that it was Valley Bank. He

then asked whether she felt the bid from Security Pacif-

ic Bank as recommended was superior to the Valley Bank

contract currently in effect. Ms. Mac Donald replied

that it was and she was the only one who could answer

that question because the Evaluation Committee did not

consider Valley Bank since they were not a part of the

process. In response to Mrs. Sparks' query of why they

were not, Ms. Mac Donald stated that she wished to state

publicly that Valley Bank has been a great friend to

UNS, that they were most cooperative in assisting with

every service when they were asked, but that she would

not change the recommendation to the Board.



Mr. Klaich again pressed that he wanted to assure him-

self that Ms. Mac Donald was stating that the Evaluation

Committee's recommendation of Security Pacific Bank was

indeed superior to the current contract UNS has with

Valley Bank of Nevada. Ms. Mac donald replied that it

was. He then asked whether she was measuring that a-

gainst the contract that was submitted on or about

April 9, 1990 (from Valley Bank), or the contract that

was in force with Valley Bank prior to that date? Ms.

Mac Donald replied that it was her conclusion that

Security Pacific Bank was superior applied to both

contracts of Valley Bank.



Mr. Klaich asked whether Ms. Mac Donald has compared

this detailed evaluation and ranking (that was presented

to the Investment Committee in the memo of May 17, 1990,

page 4) with respect to the Valley Bank contract that

was submitted on or about April 9, 1990. Ms. Mac Donald

replied that she had personally, but the Evaluation Sub-

Committee members had not. Mr. Klaich again pressed

whether on the basis of Ms. Mac Donald's personal eval-

uation of the Security Pacific Bank bid verses the

Valley Bank contract that was submitted about April 9,

when the biding closed, the Security Pacific Bank con-

tract was superior in her opinion. She stated that it

was.



He then questioned what the fees of Valley Bank would be

under the April 9, 1990 contract? Ms. Mac Donald re-

plied that she estimated them to be about half of what

they are currently, or about $35,000. Mr. Klaich ques-

tioned that, focusing on only one item of the 13 of

which the bids were evaluated, Valley Bank would be

proposing to continue as Custodial Bank with UNS at a

cost of about $35,000 and two other banks had responded

to an RFP with substantially similar intent and yet

their estimated fees were about double that figure. Ms.

Mac Donald replied that was true, the other two banks

were closer to the current fees charged by Valley Bank.



Mr. Klaich then questioned how to account for Valley

Bank stating that they could do the job for half the

price, or alternately, why would Ms. Mac Donald recom-

mend to the Board that UNS should pay twice as much in

fees to Security Pacific Bank that Valley Bank would do

for half that amount. Ms. Mac Donald replied that the

fees were not the only item taken into account when mak-

ing the recommendation. Further, she stated that in the

area of security lending UNS would be able to obtain a

superior advantage if they went with Security Pacific

Bank because of the opportunity to currently lend out

some of the securities held in the portfolio and any

difference in fees could be made up many times over.

Mr. Klaich questioned whether UNS had the capability

with Valley Bank. Ms. Mac Donald stated she did not

believe UNS would have that capability nearly to the

extent that it would have at Security Pacific Bank.



Ms. Mac Donald stated she hoped that she was not being

"pitted against Valley" and added that she felt Valley

Bank had done a good job for the University.



Mr. Klaich continued that he was focusing on the sen-

tence on page 2 of the May 17, 1990 memorandum under

"Chronological Outline", which states, "4/10/90 Valley

requested, via letter, UNS approve a contract modifi-

cation in the form of a fee schedule reduction. UNS

took no action pending the outcome of the open procure-

ment. UNS deemed it inappropriate to consider or make

a contract change during the legal procurement process."

He questioned how UNS could recommend that custodial

services be changed without measuring against the cur-

rent contract, which he deemed to be amended. Ms. Mac

Donald stated that there was the option throughout the

process not to accept either bid and stay with Valley

Bank. Mr. Klaich replied that he wanted to be assured

that in exercising that judgment, that it was exercised

vis-a-vis the revised contract.



Ms. Mac Donald stated that in her mind it was. Further,

she stated that she had been advised by the Purchasing

Department that Valley could not participate for legal

reasons, so the evaluation sub-committee did not look at

the revised fees from Valley, but that she had. She

stated she would still not change the recommendation.



Dr. Eardley stated that he had received only one phone

call on this matter prior to the meeting and that he

had not had the background information available to the

Evaluation Sub-Committee. He asked why the April 10,

1990 contract amendment from Valley Bank could not be

accepted and whether there was a rule concerning a

conference.



Mr. Lenon stated the purpose of the pre-bid conference

was to make certain that all banks interested in res-

ponding to the RFP were in attenance at the conference

and that there was a fair exchange of information be-

tween the organizations. He related that under Board of

Regents policy, and under the procedurement guidlines of

good and accepted purchasing practices, that once a pro-

curement process is started, the parameters are not

changed, because the courts in Nevada and nation-wide

have ruled that the established mechanism must be fol-

lowed.



Mr. Lenon continued that he had met with the Valley Bank

people because of the disqualification. He related to

them at the meeting that his decisions were subject to

judicial review. It was at that meeting that Valley

Bank asked UNS permission to petition the other two

banks for reinstatement to the process, which those

banks denied. He added that it is Business Center

North's principal objective to seek competition. He

added that based on the discussions with Valley Bank,

that he does not believe there was a technical over-

sight on the part of Valley Bank and they did not pay

attention to the details on the proposal.



Mr. Foley questioned whether the purpose of the pre-pro-

posal conference was for those who wished to make a bid

to gather information, with Mr. Lenon replying in the

affirmative. Mr. Foley stated he could not understand

why not attending the pre-proposal conference would be

grounds for disqualification. Mr. Lenon replied that

during an open competitive procedurement process even

the incumbent contractor is considered a proposer and

information shared at a pre-proposal conference is im-

portant to the process. Also, he added that they are

very careful in procedure processes of this kind, that

no proposer, regardless of whether they are incumbent,

is allowed to take unilateral exceptions to the guide-

lines that have been established without first communi-

cating with his office so that all proposers are treat-

ed the same. He agreed that it was a technical point,

but it is one that BCN is obligated to follow to main-

tain compliance with Board policy and accepted public

purchasing practices.



Mr. Foley argued that the objective of the process is to

obtain the best services at the best price for the Sys-

tem and that to disqualify someone for a technical part

of the program has nothing to do with the final bid to

give anyone an advantage one way or the other. He stat-

ed he felt UNS rules are a disservice in eliminating a

competitor.



Mr. Lenon stated he understood Mr. Foley's argument, but

there were no provisions in the guidelines under which

he operates that would allow him to deviate from the

procedures. He related that he felt comfortable in de-

fending the recommendation of the Sub-Committee because

they had followed the guidelines to the letter and all

other proposers had complied. He stated he felt that

any deviation could be cause for the other proposers to

question the integrity of the process.



Mr. Klaich stated for the record that he felt Ms. Mac

Donald was neutral and objective in her evaluation of

the services for UNS. He also added that he had no in-

formation concerning the bids prior to this meeting, and

that his concern was only for the best services for the

best price, which is not necessarily the lowest price.



In answer to Mrs. Sparks' question of why Regents had

not received copies of the bids, Ms. Mac Donald stated

that the bids are very technical and expertise in the

field is needed to properly evaluate them.



Mr. Klaich asked the length of time it might take to

have the other Sub-Committee members give recomenda-

tions to the Committee or the Board. Mr. Lenon replied

that four of the six members were presently in the meet-

ting room. Mr. Klaich questioned whether they had ana-

lyzed the three bids as Janet had. Ms. Mac Donald re-

plied they had not, that she was the only one to have

seen the fees. Chancellor Dawson stated that a tele-

conference could be set up and the Committee could have

an answer for the next day.



Mr. Klasic, General Counsel, noted that his recommenda-

tion was that the Sub-Committee not review the three

bids because he felt that it could place the entire

procurement process in jeopardy. He added that by

Valley Bank not attending the pre-proposal conference

constituted disqualification. Mr. Klaich related that

when asked to approve a Custodial Bank for UNS, he

wanted to have full assurances of the people reviewing

the two qualifying bids that it was more satisfactory

to accept one of the bids than to remain with the cur-

rent bank. Mr. Klasic reminded the Committee of the

chronology of facts before them that on April 9, 1990

Purchasing opened and distributed the responses from

Security Pacific and First Interstate Banks. A day

later, April 10, 1990, Valley Bank requested a contract

modification that was half the current fee. Mr. Klaich

stated he understood that documentation was received by

Valley Bank on April 9, 1990 and that a letter was re-

ceived a day later.



Mrs. Sparks again questioned why the Investment Commit-

tee had not been informed prior to this meeting that

Valley Bank had not been given consideration. Ms. Mac

Donald replied that the Committee was keeping the rec-

ommendation confidential until the meeting, and added

that this was the first rigorous RFP in which she had

participated and she was following the guidelines. Mrs.

Whitley added that this was the first time for the pro-

cedure, with Mr. Klaich stating the procedure was adopt-

ed because of the unfortunate happenings the first time

around (referring to the awarding of the contract in

1984).



Dr. Eardley asked about the regulation on when custodial

bids are to be made, with the reply being that it was

every five years. Ms. Mac Donald explained that in the

past the contract had been for three years, but that it

was too difficult for the Campuses to change banks that

often. She related that UNS started with $20 million

in custodial accounts six years ago, and, with the

changes made in the endowment system at that time, the

amount is now nearly triple that amount at $60 million.



Mr. Foley stated he understood that the RFP was designed

by the Purchasing Department at Business Center North,

and questioned whether that had been in consultation

with Ms. Mac Donald's Office, to which she replied that

it had.



Mrs. Berkley questioned why Valley Bank would not be

considered in the bid process since the account has

grown since being placed with them. Ms. Mac Donald

related that Valley Bank was a part of the growth, but

there were other factors as well.



Dr. Hammargren questioned why the Security Pacific bid

was considered better even though their bid might be

be twice as much as another bid. Ms. Mac Donald replied

that there is more involved in the services than the

fees, and cited on-line access to computers and security

lending. She explained that UNS holds a lot of U. S.

Treasury Notes, and money is made by lending such UNS

securities. This requires high tech systems to be in-

volved in the process and the size of the bank makes a

difference. Security Pacific is the fifth largest bank

in the country and they have their own central bank

operations in New York.



Mr. Mark Bouchard, Vice President with Valley Bank of

Nevada, stated that it had been an oversight on the part

of the bank in not realizing they had missed the pre-bid

conference. He commended Janet Mac Donald stating she

had been very supportive over the five-year relation-

ship with UNS. Mr. Bouchard stated that they had gone

to First Interstate and Security Pacific Banks to ask to

be allowed to bid, and when refused, Valley Bank had

determined they would prepare a bid contract in terms

of fees based on the RFP as though they were a part of

the process. At that point they had sent a letter to

the University System's Office indicating they were

lowering their fee to a figure of approximately $35,000

because they had wanted their fee known. He agreed

with Ms. Mac Donald that the "gray area" of the sit-

uation is Valley Bank's systems ability, the on-line

capability, and a securities lending program which are

not part of the current contract. He stated they have

a Custody Services Department that encompasses 26

people, and they handle other State funds including

the State of Nevada, the Insurance System, Washoe and

Clark Counties, the City of Las Vegas, the City of

Reno and Douglas County.



Mr. Bouchard continued, relating that he believed Valley

Bank could be very competitive in the technology arena

and also very competitive financially in the securities

lending area. He stressed that over the five years of

new contract they would be $175,000 under the Security

Pacific Bid. He explained that Valley does have some

on-line technology and they are involved in lending cur-

rently with the State Industrial Insurance System and

other clients. He stated he felt Valley Bank's proposed

fee should be measured against a custody fee, and that

the securities lending and the on-line ability should

be removed. He related they would have been more than

willing to provide on-line access for the same fee and

in the securities lending arena they would have paid

for custody in their arena as well.



Mr. Tom Collins, Vice President with Security Pacific

Bank, stated that the cover letter that accompanied the

RFP very clearly stated there was a mandatory pre-pro-

posal bid meeting prior to responding to the bid, and

that he found it disconcerting to have this issue de-

bated at this point in the bid process. He related

that Security Pacific provides services to PERS here

in Nevada.



Chairman Klaich announced that Item 26 of the Board of

Regents agenda allows review of the Committee recom-

mendations, where all members of the Board would have

an opportunity to address the question.



Mr. Klaich moved approval of the report and recommendations

of the Investment Committee. Dr. Eardley seconded.



Mr. Klaich, Chairman of the Investment Committee, reported

there had been one item on the Committee agenda to approve

a bid for custodial banking services pursuant to an RFP

which was published and bids which were received.



Mr. Klaich moved to award the bid for UNS Custodial Banking

Services to Security Pacific Bank Corporation. Mr. Eardley

seconded.



Mrs. Gallagher stated for the record that she is a Director

of the Board at Security Pacific Bank and because of this

conflict of interest she would be taking no part in the

discussion nor in the vote.



Mr. Peter Thomas, President of Valley Bank, commented that

his company does not stand to make a great deal of money

from this contract, but that he felt the issue was one of

saving UNS $150,000 over a five-year period vs. the value

to UNS to follow absolutely its guidelines in its purchas-

ing procedure which has prevented Valley Bank from bidding.

He stated he felt there were three options open to UNS:

1) to approve the contract as recommended; 2) to continue

with a modified contract to Valley Bank at $30,000 per year

less than that of the recommended contract, and 3) go out

to bid once again.



Mr. Thomas explained that the $30,000 fee would be for all

services as required by the RFP including new services for

automation, new services for handling securities and lend-

ing the securities. He stated their interest in the con-

tract is for the best interest of the University. He ex-

plained that two days after the oversight of missing the

pre-proposal conference was discovered, Valley Bank con-

tacted the University and the other banks. He stated that

the current contract allows for modifications at any time,

providing both parties so choose, and Valley Bank has of-

fered a modification (to change the cost from $70,000 to

$35,000 per year).



Mr. Thomas continued, stating that he was confident Valley

Bank could provide all 12 of the other services required

in the RFP. He urged the Board to strongly consider the

$150,000 "hit" it would be taking by awarding the contract

to one of the other banks.



Mr. Tom Collins, Vice President of Security Pacific Bank,

declined to comment, stating he did not want to get into

a rebuttal situation with another bank at this time.



Mr. Klaich questioned Ms. Mac Donald about comparing the

bids received. He stated he understood there were bids

from Security Pacific and First Interstate Bank. Mr.

Thomas had just informed the Board that Valley Bank had

submitted a bid and he questioned whether that bid does in

fact conform to the services and specifications requested

in the RFP. Ms. Mac Donald replied that she understood

the Presisdent of Valley Bank to be saying that the serv-

ices they would provide to UNS would be much greater than

what is being provided under the current contract. Further,

she stated that she did not feel Valley Bank has the capa-

bility to accomplish what UNS has asked for, and what,

through the bid and site visit, the Security Pacific Bank

can provide. She also stated it was her understanding that

Mr. Thomas was saying Valley Bank could give UNS services

they are not now performing and for half the price. She

added that even if she accepted that statement as actual

fact, she would stand by her recommendation that in view

of all her experience with the banks and seeing what they

do, that Security Pacific Bank can best serve UNS.



Mr. Klaich continued with Ms. Mac Donald stating that he

had, this morning, asked whether she had carefully reviewed

the two qualifying responses to the RFP and had compared

those, using the same criterion to the offer received from

Valley Bank, and had asked her opinion whether or not of

those three Security Pacific was the best bid for the UNS,

and she had replied that she had done the review and that

Security Pacific was the best of the three. Ms. Mac Donald

stated that was correct, she had made and meant that state-

ment.



Dr. Eardley asked Mrs. Mac Donald whether Valley Bank did

not meet certain guidelines or rules and that she had made

her judgment basically on that and nothing else. Ms. Mac

Donald stated she was not focusing on the procurement pro-

cedures; that she was focusing on the service that UNS

needs for the $200 million involved. Dr. Eardley then asked

whether she had focused on the $30-35,000 difference in cost

to UNS. Ms. Mac Donald replied that it was part of her con-

sideration, but she would still recommend Security Pacific.



Ms. Mac Donald stated that there wasn't a representative

present from First National Bank and she was unaware of

what their feelings would be in this situation. She men-

tioned that First Interstate Bank had just given a $1 mil-

lion gift to the UNS. Mr. Klaich stated for the record

that any other relationship between any of these institu-

tions and the UNS would have absolutely no bearing on any

decision he might make in this matter, that his decision

would be based solely upon a comparison of the three con-

tracts regardless of what was anticipated or what had

happened in the past.



Dr. Derby asked for a clarification of the comparison of

the three contracts by Ms. Mac Donald, who replied that she

just has the word of the President and Mr. Mark Bouchard

(Valley Bank) that they are going to provide new services,

which they are not doing now. She stated that in the five

years she has worked with them, she has not received or

heard of any of these new Valley Bank services. She stated

Valley Bank has supported the University and her Office for

five years, she was worked with them on a daily basis, she

talks with their Trust Department and has had a lot of ex-

perience in dealing with them and they are a very good bank,

but she did not feel they could provide the services UNS

is asking in the RFP.



Mrs. Sparks related her concern with the lack of procedure

in that she felt the members of the Investment Committee

should have been involved from the beginning. She stated

she had only received the information at the Committee

meeting earlier in the day and felt they should have been

informed that the current custodial bank was not a part of

the process.



Mr. Thomas stated that in defense of Ms. Mac Donald, she

was not able to compare Valley Bank on the same basis inas-

much as they were not allowed to bid. He related they were

doing those kinds of services every day for companies all

over the nation. He again stated he felt Valley Bank should

be allowed to bid and should not be kept from bidding for

a purely technical matter that was an oversight.



Mr. Klaich related that on a historical note, the last time

the Board considered banking services, the process was ir-

regular and the result was unusual and there had been a

substantial amount of criticism. He stated he felt that if

the staff is to be criticized for anything this time around,

they would have to be criticized for listening to the Board

and to taking the Board at its word and face value, to set

out procedures, and then following those procedures. He

reiterated that the staff had done nothing wrong; that

Valley Bank had missed a meeting, which had been one of the

requirements. He continued that he was not saying whether

the Board should "hang" someone on that technicality, but

that he had the utmost respect for the staff, and regard-

less of the decision, he was not casting aspersions on the

staff because they had listened to what the Board had said

five years ago.



Mrs. Gallagher asked Mr. Klaich, as Chairman of the Commit-

tee, whether the members of that Committee were satisfied

that the UNS procedures were followed. Mr. Klaich replied

that the Investment Committee had three meetings on the

matter. They had met awhile back and determined that it was

appropriate to bid. They had directed Ms. Mac Donald to

generate an RFP. They knew she was generating an RFP.



Mr. Foley questioned the procedure of involving the Business

Center of UNS, stating that Business Center North Purchasing

Department is an adjunct to UNR, just as the Business Center

south is an adjunct to UNLV, with Mr. Ashok Dhingra, the

Chief Financial Officer at UNR in charge in the north, and

his counterpart, Mr. Harry Neel, in charge at UNLV. He

further questioned why President Crowley was setting cri-

teria for acceptance of bids for banking for the entire

System. President Crowley explained that Business Center

North provides services to all of the institutions in north-

ern Nevada, including the Chancellor's Office, which it was

doing in this instance.



Mr. Foley stated he understood how that happens and ques-

tioned why the Chancellor was not involved in this proce-

dure and that if the Board wanted to justify it on the basis

of "because it's been done that way for years", that he did

not believe in compounding the confusion. President Crowley

stated he just wanted it made clear that this was not a

recommendation of UNR, that they had played no role in it.



Dr. Derby stated she was apprehensive about this situation

in that she depended upon the Investment Committee to bring

forward a recommendation to the Board members, and she felt

the Committee was giving a "very clear cut indecision", and

questioned whether more time could be allowed in order that

the Board might have more information. Mr. Klaich and Dr.

Hammargren called for the vote.



The motion failed. Regents Berkley, Foley, Hammargren,

Sparks and Whitley voted no. Regents Klaich and Eardley

voted yes. Regents Gallagher and Derby abstained.



Mr. Foley moved to extend on a temporary basis, the con-

tract presently in force, that the current bids be rejected,

and that these services be put out to bid once again with

the bidding procedure formulated or approved by the Chancel-

lor's Office. Dr. Hammargren seconded.



Mr. Klaich stated he would vote against the motion because

he was concerned prior to the meeting, based on what he had

heard, that fair treatment was being extended to the insti-

tutions. He stated he had tried, as carefully as he could,

to give credence to the statements of Mr. Thomas, Mr.

Bouchard and Mr. Collins, realizing that it was very dif-

ficult because they were making oral representations about

very technical contracts. Further, he stated he had ques-

tioned Mr. Lenon and Ms. Mac Donald very carefully regard-

ing their comparison of the bids received, the existing

contract as modified, and on the basis of Ms. Mac Donald's

representation that she believed of the three, which she

had fairly compared, that Security Pacific was the best

contract for the University of System System, he would vote

in support of the recommendation and against the motion on

the floor.



Mrs. Sparks and Dr. Derby questioned the time frame in-

volved. Ms. Mac Donald stated that to change banks by

July 1, a new contract would need to be awarded at this

meeting, that it would take six weeks for a changeover.



Mr. Collins stated that Security Pacific Bank had presented

a comprehensive bid, the staff had evaluated that bid,

knowing the current capabilities of Valley Bank's services

as well as the other competition, and that they felt they

had won the recommendation to this point on a true compari-

son. In addition, he stated that now that the bids have

been opened and made public, a rebidding would put both

Security Pacific and First Interstate Bank in a very un-

fair position.



Dr. Eardley stated he felt he was violently opposed to the

treatment of the staff, that it was a disservice to the

staff, who are the experts for the Board, to disregard

their recommendations and make changes after they had fol-

lowed the guidelines and policies adopted by the Board.

Mrs. Berkley stated she did not think it was necessarily a

disservice to the staff, but that Regents looked at things

a little bit differently than the staff and bring a differ-

ent perspective to their votes. She added that she was un-

comfortable with making a determination on a technicality

and questioned why Valley Bank was not allowed by the other

two bidders to participate in the process. Mr. Collins

responded that Valley had violated requirements and had

not followed the RFP and he had not wanted to go against

the staff.



Upon roll call vote, the motion passed: Regents Berkley,

Foley, Hammargren, Sparks and Whitley voted yes. Regents

Klaich and Eardley voted no. Regents Derby and Gallagher

abstained.



Mr. Collins asked for a time frame and the specific reasons

for the rejection. Mr. Klaich replied that the record of

discussion should speak for itself, and suggested contin-

uing with the meeting.



8. Approved UNS Capital Improvement



Plans for two UNS Capital Improvement projects authorized

by the 1989 Nevada State Legislature were presented for

review. (Note: The CCCC Health Education Center, Phase II

Capital Improvement project will be presented at the June

meeting.)



A. President Gwaltney introduced Mr. Brad Van Woert,

Sheehan-Van Woert Architects, who presented the plans

for TMCC's Phase V Addition. The Phase V Addition will

be a separate 50,000 square foot building, which will

house a Child Development Center, Academic Center,

Developmental Math and English Center, Computer Center,

and faculty offices. The addition will have adequate

parking facilities.



Mrs. Whitley moved approval of the architectural plans

for TMCC's Phase V addition. Dr. Eardley seconded.

Motion carried.



B. President Meacham introduced Domingo Cambiero, Domingo

Cambiero Corporation, who presented the plans for the

CCCC Henderson Campus, Phase II. Phase II will consist

of 38,400 square feet; 30,000 square feet will be the

actual building and 8,400 square feet will be a shell.

The two-story building will consist of 24 classrooms,

mechanical/technical rooms, computer labs, and faculty

offices. The completion date has been slated for

January, 1991.



Mrs. Sparks moved approval of the architectural plans

for CCCC's Henderson Campus, Phase II. Mr. Foley

seconded. Motion carried.



9. Approved Use of Capital Improvement Funds, TMCC



President Gwaltney discussed the increase in vehicular traf-

fic on Dandini Boulevard as a result of the continued con-

struction of new classrooms and facilities at TMCC. Ap-

proved the utilization of funds in UNS Capital Improvement

Project No. 5 for the development of schematic and constuc-

tion drawings for the Technology Center at 115,000 square

feet and the construction of an access road to mitigate

traffic problems at TMCC and DRI. This request will not

change the prioritization or the proposed funding for the

UNS Capital Improvement Project.



President Taranik stated that DRI is in partnership with

this concept and is hopeful that DRI and TMCC can work

with the Nevada State Highway Department in meeting the

demands of the traffic situation for both entities.



Dr. Eardley moved approval to use funds in UNS Capital

Improvement Project No. 5 for the development of schematic

and construction drawings for the Technology Center at

115,000 square feet and the construction of an access road

to mitigate traffic problems at TMCC and DRI. Dr. Derby

seconded. Motion carried.



10. Approved Recommendations for Promotion or Assignment to Rank



Approved the following recommendations for promotion or

assignment to rank for Board consideration:



A. University of Nevada, Reno



President Crowley recommended the following promotions,

effective July 1, 1990:



*Miriella Melara to Associate Professor of French, De-

partment of Foreign Languages and Literatures, Arts &

Science.



*Alexander Kumjian to Associate Professor of Mathe-

matics, Arts & Science.



*Previously recommended for tenture to be effective,

July 1, 1990.



Mr. Foley moved approval of the recommendations for promo-

tion or assignment to rank at UNR. Mrs. Sparks seconded.

Motion carried.



11. Approved Recommendations for Award of Tenure



Approved the following recommendations for tenure forwarded

for Board consideration:



A. University of Nevada, Reno



President Crowley recommended the following awards of

tenure, effective July 1, 1990:



Yunus Cengel, Assistant Professor of Mechanical Engi-

neering, Engineering.



Keith Priestley, Professor of Geophysics, Mackay School

of Mines.



Mr. Foley moved approval of the recommendations for tenure

at UNR. Dr. Derby seconded. Motion carried.



12. Approved Community College Technical Education Report



At the Board of Regents' Workshop held on April 12, 1990,

presentations and discussions were held on the report

"Technical Education at Nevada's Community Colleges". Sev-

eral recommendations were presented at that time. Chancel-

lor Dawson requested acceptance of this report. Ref. B,

filed in the Regents' Office, contains the recommendations

from the report.



Dr. Eardley moved approval to accept the report on Commu-

nity College technical education and to adopt the recom-

mendations from the report, "Technical Education at Nevada's

Community Colleges". Dr. Derby seconded. Motion carried.



Dr. Derby requested a follow-up report on the progress that

the Community Colleges achieve in technical education.

Chairman Gallagher directed Vice Chancellor Fox to report

back to the Board.



13. Approved Bill Draft, UNR



Approved a UNR bill draft as contained in Ref. F, filed in

the Regents' Office. The bill draft's intent is to allow

contributions and retirement benefits to be based on total

earnings of a member of the Public Employees Retirement

System.



Dr. Eardley moved approval of the UNR bill draft. Mr. Foley

seconded. Motion carried.



14. Approved Bylaws, CCCC



Approved the Clark County Community College Bylaws, filed

in the Regents' Office.



Mrs. Sparks moved approval of the CCCC Bylaws. Dr. Derby

seconded. Motion carried.



15. Accepted Donation of Building, UNLV



Accepted a gift of a 4500 square foot building from Mr.

Claude I. Howard. The building, valued at approximately

$150,000, has been designed to house the UNLV Soccor Team

and will also have bathrooms and concession stands. There

will be no cost to the University.



Mr. Foley moved to accept the gift of the 4500 square foot

building from Mr. Claude I. Howard to house the UNLV Soccer

Team. Mrs. Berkley seconded. Motion carried.



Mr. Foley extended his appreciation for Mr. Howard's gener-

osity to the University of Nevada System.



The open meeting recessed at 4:20 P.M. and reconvened at 8:10

A.M., Friday, May 18, 1990, with all Regents present.



16. Approved Presidential Evaluation Procedures



Approved the Presidential Evaluation Procedures Policy as

contained in Ref. C, filed in the Regents' Office, with

amendments to the policy. The amendments are 1) Title 4,

Chapter 2, Section 3, paragraph 2A should include all mem-

bers of the Board of Regents, instead of two members, to

participate on the resource and review team, and 2) the

Business Community to be involved in the process and to be

added in the appropriate places.



Mr. Klaich moved approval of the Presidential Evaluation

Procedures Policy as amended. Mrs. Whitley seconded.

Motion carried.



17. Information Only: Area Health Education Center Project



Representatives of the School of Medicine and the Area

Health Education Center (AHEC) presented a progress report

on the AHEC project, which included a review of the proj-

ect's initiation, its development to date and future plans

and funding requirements.



Mr. Jim Johnson, Chairman of the Board of Trustees of

Northeastern AHEC, stated that Northeastern AHEC provides

educational resources for rural health providers. He em-

phasized the need for State funding to replace the Federal

funds which are being phased out.



Dr. Robert Daugherty, Dean of the School of Medicine, stated

that in 1986 Nevada received a three-year grant which 1)

recruited young people from the rural areas, 2) trained

students and health professional students to work together,

and 3) provided continuing education in the health profes-

sion in the rural areas. In 1987, two AHEC centers were

opened, one in Reno and the other in Elko. In 1989, another

three-year grant was awarded which opened a center in south-

ern Nevada. Dr. Daugherty stated that after 1992 there will

no longer be Federal funding for the northeastern AHEC pro-

gram.



Dr. Daugherty introduced several AHEC staff members who

described their specific programs to the Board of Regents.

Ms. Nancy Rody, Deputy Director, gave an overall review of

Nevada AHEC; Ms. Jamie Anderson reported on several student

programs; Ms. Yvonne Chaves reported on the Northeastern

AHEC in Elko; and Ms. Gayle Cluck reported on the newly es-

tablished AHEC in southern Nevada.



President Crowley stated that budgeting for the Nevada AHEC

program should be statewide because it effects several dif-

ferent Campuses. Dr. Daugherty suggested that the funding

be shared between NNCC and the School of Medicine, and that

the funding flow to the University and then to the non-

profit organization of AHEC.



18. Information Only: Report on Cooperative Extension Service

Center Visits



Dean Bernard Jones, College of Agriculture at UNR, presented

a report on the visitation to the Cooperative Extension

Service Centers recently conducted for UNS Administrators.

He reported that there are 17 Cooperative Extension Service

offices throughout the State and there were six meetings

scheduled between April 16-30 for the UNS Administrators

to attend.



Dr. Jones stated the five priority programs throughout the

nation -- 1) water quantity and quality, 2) youth at risk,

3) human nutrition, 4) agriculture propagation, and 5) rural

revitalization. The UNR Cooperative Extension Service Cen-

ters provide service in the first four priorities in its

program by working with other agencies throughout the State.

He informed the Board that the UNR Cooperative Extension

Service has received national awards and has been recog-

nized as one of the top cooperative extension programs in

the country.



19. Approved Policy on Tuition and Fees



Approved the Tuition and Fee Policy as contained in Ref. D,

filed with the permanent minutes.



At the April, 1990 meeting, Chancellor Dawson discussed with

the Board a proposed Tuition and Fee policy. Presidents re-

quested additional time to fully discuss the proposal with

their students and faculty. Ref. E, filed in the Regents'

Office, is a schedule of the manner in which the Campuses

will expend these funds. Vice Chancellor Sparks announced

some corrections to Ref. E. The UNS total revenue expected

is $4,893,560.



Chancellor Dawson explained that there should be an annual

review of fees in order to bring the fees in line with the

average of the WICHE States, which is used as a base for

comparison. The Campuses need to generate additional fund-

ing if they are to accomplish the goals and needs, and

raising the fees will aid the Campuses in this effort.



Mr. Foley questioned why UNS uses WICHE data for comparison

when there are economically poorer States than Nevada be-

longing to WICHE, and it was explained that UNS uses WICHE

data averages when making comparisons. President Crowley

stated that if UNS was to use a national comparison, Nevada

would be even lower than with the WICHE comparison. WICHE

is credible and the Legislature is familiar with WICHE data

and has used such data for comparison purposes in the past.



CSUN President Joe Bunin stated that, on behalf of the stu-

dent government officers, WICHE data should not be used for

Nevada. He was disappointed that this item was being dis-

cussed at such a late date (end of school year) and sug-

gested that fees increases should be discussed during the

school year in order for students to be more aware and more

involved in the discussion. He requested a postponement of

the issue on student fees until the student government of-

ficers have discussed the proposed policy with the Chancel-

lor and his staff.



ASUN President Jason Geddes stated that UNR Administration

has discussed the issue with ASUN, but he disagreed with the

timeframe in which to develop the proposed long-term policy

and he, too, requested additional time to discuss this with

the Chancellor.



Mr. Klaich stated that the WICHE index may increase or de-

crease over the years, therefore UNS should have a long-

term policy to address fee increases on a regular basis to

eliminate major increases.



Mr. Klaich moved approval of the policy using the WICHE sur-

vey as a primary guide and to include consumer price index

for this region, the increase in State funding, and other

indices as appropriate. Mrs. Whitley seconded. Motion

carried.



Mr. Mark Evans, UNR Graduate Student Association President,

stated the GSA supports a policy in order to know what

increases can be expected, but objects to the substantial

initial increase for graduate students that are proposed at

this time.



NNCC Faculty Senate Chairman Mike Mc Farlane stated that

when the committee was devising this policy they looked at

what was needed to fund the Institution, then a comparison

study was made against the WICHE data. He emphasized that

WICHE data was not the basis of their decision.



Mr. Klaich amended the motion by adding that a needs assess-

ment of the respective Institutions be a priority in deter-

mining the fee increase. Mrs. Whitley seconded.



President Maxson stated that UNLV has discussed the issue

with the students and where the increase would be distribut-

ed if approved. He stated that the WICHE data and the Chan-

cellor's recommendation are good for the System. He ques-

tioned whether the motion allowed for student input to

reach the Chancellor after the first of the year, and was

informed that it would.



Mrs. Berkley questioned whether the policy needed to be

adopted at this meeting, and Chancellor Dawson stated that

it was his recommendation that it be adopted at this time

so as Vice Chancellor Sparks could build it into the Bien-

nial Budget.



General Counsel Klasic submitted the following new language

in accordance with the above discussion:



The Board of Regents shall establish tuition rates for

students who are not residents of Nevada, and registra-

tion and other fees to be assessed all students. In

establishing such rates and fees, the Board will use

as a guide charges at peer Institutions as defined in

the annual Western Interstate Commission for Higher

Education (WICHE) calculation of the average tuition

and fees of member States. Beginning Fall, 1990, the

Board will use the WICHE average of the previous year

as the primary guide to establish tuition and fee rates

for UNS students. The Chancellor will also provide to

the Board information pertaining to consumer prices in

the WICHE region, the increase in State funding over

the biennium, a needs assessment of the UNS Institutions

and other appropriate indices and information, to deter-

mine if these tuition and fee rates are appropriate.

Tuition and fees may be changed by the Board at any

time; however, to assist students in planning their

educational expenditures, and for continuity in Univer-

sity planning, tuition and fees will be reviewed on an

annual basis and every effort will be made to adjust

these charges, if necessary, at the beginning of each

fiscal year.



In establishing such rates and fees, the Board recog-

nized that both the students of the UNS Institutions

and the citizens of the State of Nevada share in the

benefits of higher education, and therefore both stu-

dents and the State should contribute appropriately

to support high quality instructional programs. Fur-

ther, the Board reaffirms its commitment to equal

access to UNS programs regardless of students finan-

cial circumstances, and therefore shall establish

tuition rates and fees at such a level to encourage

participation in higher education. In addition,

financial aid programs should be responsive to changes

in tuition and fees.



Motion carried.



Chancellor Dawson explained the proposed tuition and fees,

Ref. D, page 2. The resident undergraduate fees at the

Universities are proposed at $46 per credit and the Com-

munity Colleges are proposed at $24 per credit; resident

graduate fees are proposed at $60; and the nonresident

tuition at the Universities are proposed at $3300 and the

Community Colleges will be held constant at $3000 until

the WICHE average catches up with them. (WICHE average is

$2147.)



Vice Chancellor Sparks reviewed the proposed expenditures

of tuition and fee increases for fiscal 1991, as found in

Ref. E. If approved, Vice Chancellor Sparks requested

permission to approach the Interim Finance Committee for

its approval.



Mr. Foley questioned these expenditures which are based on

the WICHE averages prior to the revised policy which was

just adopted. Vice Chancellor Sparks explained that the

biennial budget will be presented to the Governor on

September 1 and that there is a great need to finalize the

budget. He further explained that based on the average

movement of WICHE fees over the last five years, the Uni-

versity fees have increased by an average of 5.7% and the

Community College fees have increased by an average of

5.5%. These averages have been built into the 1991-93

biennial budgets.



Chairman Gallagher stated that the last time UNS proposed

an increase, the Legislature automatically implemented an

increase. She emphasized the need to develop an average

and requested the Chancellor to review the WICHE averages

along with the needs assessment at each Campus over the

last several months.



Vice Chancellor Sparks stated that UNS' needs are far from

what is being proposed. If the proposed fees are adopted,

the current fee support is 16%, 17% next year, with the

national average at 25%.



Vice Chancellor Sparks proceeded to explain the support

services formulas for FY 1990-91 estimated funding status

handout. The handout indicates the shortfall for UNS total

is $11,743,402.



Mr. Klaich moved approval of the requested fee increase

provided that the portion of the increase dedicated to the

General Improvement Fee Fund shall be separately budgeted

annually and provided further that this budget shall be

devoted to goods and services that directly enhance the

students' educational experience. Dr. Eardley seconded.



Mr. Klaich explained that certain General Improvement Fee

Funds should not be included in the proposed expenditures,

such as property acquisition at UNR, telephone/communica-

tion system at NNCC, and fund raising at WNCC.



President Crowley explained that UNR's first priority in

developing this list was for a Capital Improvement Fee

Fund category, but compromised with other Presidents to

include it under one fee, the General Improvement Fee Fund.

He stated that he would be agreeable to change the category

title to Capital Improvement Fee Fund for such requests as

property acquisitions. He stated that UNR has gone before

the Legislature to request funding for property acquisition,

but has been denied funding. He did emphasize that the

General Improvement Fee Fund is reported annually to the

Board of Regents. Mr. Klaich stressed the importance of

his motion in that the fee increase would directly enhance

the students' educational experience. They agreed for UNR

to place $1 into the Capital Improvement Fee Fund.



President Calabro explained that the fund raising category

under WNCC General Improvement Fee Fund is for soliciting

out-of-state funds for scholarships. Mr. Klaich felt that

this should be considered an indirect expenditure to the

students' education experience.



Mr. Klaich amended the motion with the following exceptions:

UNR - $1 placed under Capital Improvement Fee Fund for prop-

erty acquisition/lab remodel; NNCC - acquisition for tele-

phone/communication system to be withdrawn; and WNCC - fund

raising to be withdrawn. Dr. Eardley seconded.



President Maxson clarified that the General Improvement Fee

Fund is to go directly to the student services and, as Pres-

ident, he will speak with the students each year to deter-

mine their particular needs. The Presidents' Discretionary

Fund has been expended on special needs that arise through-

out the year. Mr. Klaich stated that if current latitudes

are used, it is permissible to continue using the discre-

tionary funds with the same guidelines.



Motion carried.



20. Approved the 1990-91 UNS Operating Budget



Approved the 1990-91 UNS Operating Budget as authorized by

the Nevadea State Legislature during its 1989 session.



The budget was presented at the meeting by Vice Chancellor

Sparks. He stated that this budget is only temporary until

1) the student tuition and registration fee increases, which

were just approved, and 2) the salary increases that might

be provided as a result of the salary trigger for the class-

ified and professional employees, are incorporated into the

budget.



The total State Supported Operating Budget is $190.6 mil-

lion. This compares to $179.4 million for the 1989-90

fiscal year and represents a 6.3% increase.



State appropriations for fiscal year 1991 amount to $156.6

million, representing 82.2% of the State Supported Operat-

ing Budget. This compares to $146.6 million for the 1990

fiscal year and represents a 6.8% increase.



Other revenue sources budgeted in the State Supporting

Operating Budget total $34 million, representing 17.8% of

the State Supported Operating Budget. This compares to

$32.7 million for the 1990 fiscal year and represents a

3.9% increase. Student fees represent approximately 13.0%

of total revenue budgeted in the Operating Budget.



Vice Chancellor Sparks summarized the schedules included in

the 1990-91 UNS Operating Budget. The document also pro-

vides comparisons with the 1990 Operating Budget along with

detailed budgets for each appropriation area.



Dr. Eardley moved approval of the 1990-91 UNS Operating

Budget. Mrs. Whitley seconded. Mrs. Berkley abstained.

Motion carried.



21. Approved Student Judicial Code, UNR



Approved the Student Judicial Code at UNR, as contained in

Ref. G, filed in the Regents' Office.



Dr. Eardley moved approval of the UNR Student Judicial

Code. Mrs. Sparks seconded. Motion carried.



22. Accepted the Donation of Building, TMCC



President Gwaltney discussed the concept of a donated 16,000

square foot building to house the TMCC Culinary Arts program

which has been recommended by the Culinary Arts Advisory

Committee.



Dr. Eardley moved approval to proceed with discussions for

the donation of a 16,000 square foot building to house the

TMCC Culinary Arts program and should it materialize to

report back to the Board. Mrs. Sparks seconded. Motion

carried.



23. Information Only: Outstanding Faculty Recognition



At the request of the Board of Regents, each Faculty Senate

Chairman or representative reported on the outstanding fac-

ulty achievements from their respective Institutions.



University of Nevada, Reno - Faculty Senate Chairman Richard

Brown announced the following outstanding faculty:



Wendy Kiehn, Chairwoman, Academic Standards Committee,

1989-90



Dr. Randall Reid, Chairman, Bylaws and Code Committee,

1989-90



Dr. R. Thomas King, Chairman, Campus Affairs Committee,

1989-90



Dr. Terry Woodin, Chairwoman, Institutional Budgets,

1989-90



Carl Parkhurst, Chairwoman, Salary and Benefits Commit-

tee, 1989-90, Senate Executive Board, 1989-90



Dr. Deborah Ballard-Reisch, Senator 1987-90, Executive

Board, 1988-89, Faculty Senate Chair, 1989-90



Dr. Robert Mead, Senator, 1987-90, Executive Board,

1987-90, Faculty Senate Chair, 1988-89



Dr. Viktoria Hertling, Senator, 1988-90



Dr. Robert Winzeler, Senator, 1988-90



Dr. Bruce Moran, Senator, 1988-90



Richard Post, Senator, 1987-90



Dr. Paul Tueller, Senator, 1987-90



Dr. Colleen Murray, Senator, 1989-90, and School of Home

Economics Senator, 1987-89



Dr. Tom Watterson, Senator, 1989-90



Dr. Lois Parker, Senator, 1987-90, Senate Executive

Board, 1989-90



Dr. Pete Perriera, Senator, 1987-90



Dr. Taryn Melkus, Senator, 1989-90



Desert Research Institute - Faculty Senate Chairman Steve

Mizell announded the following outstanding faculty:



Mr. Greg Henton, Assistant Research Archaeologist in the

Quaternary Sciences Center, has made major contributions

that are critical to the Center's operations which re-

quired efforts beyond his normal duties. He assumed

responsibility for directing the Institute's Southern

Nevada Archaeology Program while the normal Director

filled an interim administrative position. The Program

conducted over a million dollars worth of research into

southern Nevada's history and prehistory under his

leadership. Mr. Henton also chaired a reorganization

of the Center's support staff and was instrumental in

design and development of additional office and labor-

atory space during this same period.



University of Nevada, Las Vegas - Faculty Senate Chairman

Isabelle Emerson announced the following outstanding

faculty:



Frank Gagliardi for his service to UNLV.



Nancy Master for her service to UNLV.



Vincent Eade for his service to UNLV.



James Abbey for his service to UNLV.



Patti Shock for her service to UNLV.



Kazem Taghua for his service to UNLV.



Paul Jones for his service to UNLV.



Lawrence Golding for his service to UNLV.



Ray Goldsworthy for his service to UNLV.



Northern Nevada Community College - Faculty Senate Chair-

man Mike Mc Farlane announced the following outstanding

faculty:



Ed Martin for his recent accomplishment in passing the

American Welding Society Certifier Test. This makes

him the only person between Reno and Salt Lake City

who can inspect and certify welders to AWS standards.

In a region with growing industrial needs, this makes

Mr. Martin invaluable to NNCC and its growing indus-

trial programs. In his first year at NNCC, he has

also demonstrated himself as a dedicated instructor.

He often has eight hours per day of contact time with

students, as well as being involved in evening classes.



24. Information Only: Outstanding Student Recognition



At the request of the Board of Regents, each Student Govern-

ment Officer or representative reported on the outstanding

student achievements from their respective Institutions.



University of Nevada, Reno - ASUN President Jason Geddes

announced the following outstanding students:



Gary Mc Coy for his achievement in winning the National

Championship in Boxing.



Rick Hsu for his organizing efforts for the faculty/

author appreciation reception.



Patty Moen for her organizational skills for the Earth

Day celebration, as well as the UNR recycling program.



University of Nevada, Las Vegas - President Robert Maxson

announced the following outstanding students:



1990 Graduation Class



Desert Research Institute - Faculty Senate Chairman Steve

Mizell announced the following outstanding student:



Sandy Haws as an outstanding student researcher. Last

month she was named recipient of the 1990 George B.

Maxey and Jane C. Maxey Award for her outstanding stu-

dent research paper entitled, "Cross-Sectional Finite

Element Model of Saturated Ground-Water Flow in the

Yucca Mountain Area". Ms. Haws has recently completed

her Master of Science degree though the UNLV Department

of Geosciences and the DRI Water Resources Center under

the direction of Dr. Tom Brikowski.



Truckee Meadows Community College - President John Gwaltney

announced the following outstanding students:



Officers of Phi Theta Kappa



Kathy Stepina, President

Rose Taylor, Vice President

Linda Harrison, Secretary

Carolee Haitt, Treasurer

Kay Adair, Public Relations Secretary



Northern Nevada Community College - Faculty Senate Chairman

Mike Mc Farlane announced following outstanding students:



Marilyn Hazel for her accomplishments in completing her

third semester as an Art student and her first semester

as an Art scholarship student.



Paul Butcher for his selection as NNCC's Valedictorian

for the class of 1990. He received all "A's" except

for one "B" in his four-year pursuit of an Associate

of Science degree on part-time basis. He works full-

time in an assay lab at a mining company, which, with

travel time, makes for very long days. Even with his

family obligation, he has managed to complete two or

three courses every semester with a high quality of

work. He is also a very fine, unassuming individual.



Patricia Rowley has been an outstanding Nursing stu-

dent. She came to NNCC from Ely, where the William

B. Ririe Hospital awarded her a full scholarship to

attend NNCC. While attending classes in Elko, she

also worked part-time at Elko General Hospital. She

has been President of the Student Nurses, given the

Outstanding Nursing Award for 1989-90, and was given

the NNCC Outstanding Academic Award for 1989-90. She

will be returning to Ely to apply her skills there

where they are truly needed.



25. Approved Statement of Affirmation on the Role of Faculty

Senate Chair



Approved the following affirmation statement:



The Board of Regents in its constitutionally mandated

responsibility for the governance of the University of

Nevada System publically reaffirms the critical role

that Faculty Senate Chairs play in system governance.

As duly elected Campus representatives, the Faculty

Senate Chairs share with the Board the views of the

Campus faculty they represent. The perspective of

the faculty is essential to the Board in its policy

deliberations.



It is the will of the Board of Regents that the posi-

tion and function of the University of Nevada System

Faculty Senate Chair be recognized as essential to

system governance, and that accommodation be made to

the time and activity requirements the position en-

tails at all levels of Campus and system administration.



Dr. Derby moved approval of the statement of affirmation on

the role of Faculty Senate Chair. Mr. Foley seconded.

Motion carried.



26. Academic Affairs Committee



The Academic Affairs Committee, meeting as a committee of

the whole under the Chairmanship of Regent Foley, acted as

follows:



(1) Approved the name change of the Department of Hospi-

tality Administration and Tourism to the Department

of Tourism and Convention Administration at UNLV.

It was felt by the Department and the College that

the name change would reflect more accurately the

focus on conventional management and tourism studies.



Mr. Klaich moved approval of the name change of the

Department of Hospitality Administration and Tourism

to the Department of Tourism and Convention Administra-

tion at UNLV. Mrs. Sparks seconded. Motion carried.



(2) Approved the name changes of two Departments in the

College of Engineering. The changes are as follows:

the Department of Electrical Engineering changed to

Electrical and Computer Engineering, the Department

of Civil Engineering changed to Civil and Environmental

Engineering at UNLV.



Dr. Derby moved approval of the name change of two

Departments in the College of Engineering at UNLV.

Mrs. Berkley seconded. Motion carried.



27. Ad Hoc Committee on Athletic Policy



The ad hoc Committee on Athletic Policy, meeting as a com-

mittee of the whole under the Chairmanship of Regent Hammar-

gren, acted as follows:



(1) At its April, 1990 meeting, the committee discussed

the general policies for Intercollegiate Athletics as

contained in the Handbook, Chapter 10, Section 17.

The policy was referred to the two Universities for

review by their Athletic Departments. Ref. AP-1 is

filed in the Regents' Office.



Mr. Bradley Booke, Assistant General Counsel, explain-

ed he had been asked to assist the review of the poli-

cies because of his work with UNLV and their NCAA in-

vestigation which has required a comprehensive review

of NCAA rules and regulations.



Dr. Hammargren offered the changes suggested by the

two Universities:



2. Academic and Athletic Standards. Insert the

following at the end of the 2nd sentence:

"Each Institution must establish policies con-

cerning class time, assignments, tests, and

final examinations which are missed by student

athletes due to participation in officially

sponsored intercollegiate athletic events".



Under 4.c insert the phrase: "by the Institution"

in the third sentence after the word "found" and

before the phrase "to have committed violations".

And, change the last sentence to read "Contracts

shall also provide that all Coaches, full time

and part time, must report annually to the Insti-

tution all athletically related income."



Mrs. Whitley questioned why, if Coaches are required

to report annually their athletically related income,

all other faculty should not report academically re-

lated income. Mr. Booke replied that an Institution

must require their Coaches to report athletically

related income in order to belong to the NCAA. Pres-

ident Maxson added that including this in a UNS policy

would avoid violations and that it is a self-protec-

tion rule. Mr. Klasic stated that this would not be

discriminatory inasmuch as NCAA does make it a con-

dition of belonging to their organization.



Dr. Maxson offered that there are policies in place

which cover outside consulting, etc. of academic

faculty.



(2) In April, 1990 the committee reviewed a proposed

Statement of Student Athlete Responsibilities which

would be distributed to all UNS student athletes and

would become a part of the Handbook, Title 4, Chapter

10, as contained in Ref. AP-2, filed in the Regents'

Office. Dr. Hammargren reported that the two Univer-

sities were in agreement with the statement.



(3) As a result of an Audit Committee review, the two Uni-

versities were requested to develop policies pertain-

ing to tradeouts and complimentary tickets. Those

policies, as contained in Ref. AP-3, filed in the

Regents' Office, will be placed in the Handbook, Title

4, Chapter 10.



Dr. Hammargren moved to approve items 1 as amended, 2 and 3.

Mr. Klaich seconded. Motion carried.



(4) Information Only: Dr. Hammargren reported that Presi-

dent Crowley will be the coordinator for the 1990 UNS

Athletic Symposium which will be held in June.



Dr. Hammargren commended Mr. Booke for his efforts.



28. New Business



Dr. Dennis Brown, Vice President for Academic Affairs at

UNR, distributed copies of an advertisement that will be

featured in the June issue of the Forbes magazine. The

advertisement highlights UNLV and UNR.



Mrs. Berkley and Dr. Derby commended Chancellor Dawson and

Public Information Director Pamela Galloway for the in-

formative System newsletter.



Mrs. Berkley suggested that the Board of Regents acknowledge

past Regent Sig Rogich for his service on the Board.



Dr. Hammargren requested a future agenda item for the ad hoc

Committee on Health Care to discuss the School of Medicine's

residence program, AHEC coordination throughout the State.



Mrs. Sparks informed the Board that the Supercomputer has

been installed at UNLV and is up and running. She commended

President Maxson for his efforts in obtaining this computer.



The meeting adjourned at 2:35 P.M.



Mary Lou Moser

Secretary of the Board

05-17-1990