05/18/1994

UCCSN Board of Regents' Meeting Minutes
May 18-19, 1994








05-18-1994

Pages 1-41



BOARD OF REGENTS

UNIVERSITY AND COMMUNITY COLLEGE SYSTEM OF NEVADA

May 18-20, 1994



The Board of Regents met on May 18, 1994 in the Conference Room,

System Administration Office in Reno and on May 19-20, 1994 in

the Pine Auditorium, Jot Travis Student Union, University of

Nevada, Reno.



Members present: Dr. James Eardley, Chairman

Mrs. Shelley Berkley

Dr. Jill Derby

Mrs. Dorothy S. Gallagher

Mr. Madison Graves, II

Dr. Lonnie Hammargren

Mr. Daniel J. Klaich

Mrs. Nancy Price

Mrs. Carolyn Sparks

Mrs. June F. Whitley



Members absent: Mr. Joseph M. Foley



Others present: Interim Chancellor John Richardson

President Anthony Calabro, WNCC

President Joseph Crowley, UNR

Interim President Kenny Guinn, UNLV

President John Gwaltney, TMCC

President Paul Meacham, CCSN

President Ronald Remington, NNCC

President James Taranik, DRI

Dr. Donald Klasic, General Counsel

Mr. Ron Sparks, Vice Chancellor

Mrs. Karen Steinberg, Interim Vice Chancellor

Ms. Mary Lou Moser, Secretary



Also present were Faculty Senate Chairmen Richard Finn (WNCC),

Chris Gaub (unit), Scott Hawkins (NNCC), Dan Mc Clure (TMCC),

Barbara Nelson (CCSN), Marsha Read (UNR), James Stivers (UNLV),

and John Sagebiel (DRI), and Student Association Officers.



Chairman Eardley called the meeting to order at 1:05 P.M. Wednes-

day, May 18, 1994, with all Regents present except Regents Foley,

Hammargren and Klaich.



Chairman Eardley stated that this meeting was called for the

Regents to have time to talk with the Presidents and have ques-

tions answered concerning the administration of their institu-

tions. He stressed that this is not the formal evaluation of the

President, as discussed a year or so ago. A permanent Chancellor

needs to be in place, and have developed an evaluation tool,

evaluating the President over the period of a year, and then

bring that process to the Board of Regents. The Board would

then review that evaluation with the President and Chancellor.

Chairman Eardley stated that the Presidents currently are con-

cerned with some of the Board actions and need some clarifica-

tion.



Mrs. Sparks related that the past method used where an outside

consultant was brought in had been a positive, constructive

method of evaluation. Mrs. Whitley stated she felt this had been

the best method used for evaluation during her time, and hoped

that the Board would use that in the future. Chairman Eardley

replied that the job description of the Chancellor has been

changed to include evaluation of the Presidents with input from

the Board of Regents.



Mrs. Price stated that she felt the meeting was very irrespon-

sible because there is no structure to it and is apt to be like

the last evaluation meeting, which in her opinion just went into

a "bitch" session. She continued that if there was a complaint

about someone, it should be taken to the Chancellor immediately,

and the individual be given an opportunity to reply and make

changes. Annual evaluations should have structure and criteria,

and the individual should be aware of any complaints, etc. the

Board might have.



Mrs. Whitley cautioned that certain Regents have a "pet peeve"

and may approach a President or Chancellor with that, but it is

only one member of an 11 member Board.



Dr. Derby stated that she felt an information session has value,

but urged that a formal evaluation should be reinstated as soon

as possible. She reminded the group that in the past there were

informal sessions with Presidents which centered around goals,

Campus matters, etc. They were also used as a feedback tool for

the Regents.



Mrs. Gallagher agreed, adding that the Board does not communi-

cate enough with its Presidents, or vice versa, and that time

never seems to be set aside for discussion at a Board meeting.

She continued that this session should be an informal, helpful

session to let the Presidents know the Board is concerned, and

how Regents might assist in an effort to improve the Campus.



General Counsel Klasic reviewed matters that could be discussed

in closed session and reminded the members of the change in the

law wherein an elected official may not be discussed in closed

session, but only in an open session. Concerns can be raised

only insofar as they relate to or impact upon the character,

alleged misconduct, professional competence, or physical or

mental health of a specific individual or individuals.



Mr. Graves stated that he believed in formal evaluations, but

felt that interaction with the Presidents is very positive.

Chairman Eardley stated that in this instance the Presidents

welcome the opportunity for a discussion with the Board as a

group.



1. Closed Session



Upon motion by Mrs. Sparks, seconded by Mrs. Gallagher, the

Board moved to a closed session at 1:25 P.M. for the dis-

cussion of the character, alleged misconduct, professional

competence, or physical or mental health of an employee(s)

of the UCCSN, in accordance with NRS 241.030.



The Board reconvened in open session at 4:55 P.M. on Wednesday,

May 18, 1994, with Regents Eardley, Berkley, Derby, Gallagher,

Hammargren, Price, Sparks and Whitley present.



Chairman Eardley stated that calling a closed session is always

difficult; however, there are times when they are necessary, and

managing the Board is a democratic process; therefore, he asked

for guidance from the members. Mrs. Whitley stated that the

questions which had been asked were excellent. Mrs. Berkley

stated that the closed session was outstanding; that they should

be done regularly at every meeting. She continued that this kind

of session can be very energizing, but at the same time frustrat-

ing for there are major policy issues to be confronted which are

critical to the System but there never seems to be an opportunity

to address them.



Chairman Eardley stated that the Handbook and the UCCSN Code

should be reviewed for possible updating, and cited several in-

stances he felt where changes should be made. Mrs. Berkley asked

to be briefed on a number of items. Discussion ensued on the

Chancellor/Board relationships and communications among Board

members. Dr. Derby stated that while a formal evaluation of

System Officers is necessary, these informal discussions are also

very important and helpful.



Dr. Derby left the meeting.



It was suggested that a new Chancellor should address the evalu-

ation process as soon as possible. The Board asked that Dr.

Richardson be available to the new Chancellor for consultation

on the System Office and issues. Dr. Richardson stated that a

new Chancellor has two primary areas of concern this Fall: pre-

paring for the legislative session and becoming known around the

State.



The meeting recessed at 5:15 P.M. This session was continued on

Thursday, May 19, 1994, in the Student Senate Chambers, Jot

Travis Student Union, University of Nevada, Reno. (See entry

after item 15.)



The open meeting reconvened at 9:51 A.M. Thursday, May 19, 1994,

with all Regents present except Regents Foley, Graves, Hammargren

and Klaich.



2. Introductions



Chairman Eardley introduced Dr. Kenny Guinn, Interim Presi-

dent at UNLV.



President Gwaltney introduced newly elected ASTM President

Toni Horne.



President Meacham introduced newly elected ASCCSN President

David Hernandez. Mr. Hernandez then introduced Barbara

Mc Millan, Vice President, Dave Duarte, Treasurer, Alicia

Davis, Senator, Felix Saha, Senator, Roy Hayes, Chairperson

of the Election Committee, and Autumn Keyes-Ita, Student

Government Advisor.



President Calabro introduced newly elected USA President

Jeanine Powers, and newly elected Faculty Senate Chairman

Richard Finn.



President Taranik announced that John Watson has been newly

elected to serve as the Faculty Senate Chairman, but was

unable to attend the meeting. President Taranik introduced

Dr. John Sagebiel, Research Assistant, who will be in at-

tendance in Dr. Watson's stead.



President Crowley introduced newly elected Faculty Senate

Chairman Marsha Read, and announced that Jason Frierson has

been newly elected to serve as ASUN President, but was not

in attendance at this time.



President Meacham introduced newly elected Faculty Senate

Chairman Barbara Nelson.



Interim Vice Chancellor Karen Steinberg introduced newly

elected UNLV GSA President Micki Winsett.



Additional introductions were made throughout the meeting.



3. Chairman's Report



Chairman Eardley announced that since CCSN President Paul

Meacham was absent during the last Board of Regents' meeting

he wished to acknowledge President Meacham for receiving the

title "President Emeritus" and the Regents' Professorship

effective July 1, 1994. Chairman Eardley stated, on behalf

of the Board, President Meacham was very much appreciated

for all the work he has done for CCSN over the past several

years and wished him well.



President Meacham thanked the Board members for the emeritus

status and the Regents' Professor, and stated that as he

leaves his Presidency at CCSN, he will be leaving with a

good feeling and it has been a privilege to serve CCSN.

The professorship is something that he wishes to pursue and

although there is some sadness in the fact that he will be

leaving his Presidency, he is looking forward to this new

endeavor at UNLV.



Mrs. Sparks reported that President Meacham was the Com-

mencement speaker for WNCC this year, and was called back

for an encore after his speech. He did a superb job.



Chairman Eardley stated that he was excited to have Dr.

Guinn on board. Dr. Guinn has been very responsive to the

budget situation and will be seeking a good process for

UNLV. He welcomed him to the UCCSN family.



Mr. Guinn stated that this has provided him an opportunity

to step out of retirement and get back into the work force

and he is looking forward to serving UNLV in this capacity.



Mr. Graves entered the meeting.



Chairman Eardley stated that there are three searches being

conducted by the Board of Regents at this time, and he

wished to express his appreciation for all the time and

effort of the Board members in working on these searches.



4. Chancellor's Report



Interim Chancellor Richardson reported that Regents Eardley,

Graves and Gallagher, Mr. Doug Burris and himself attended

the accreditation visit at NNCC. The preliminary report

from the accreditation association has been forwarded to his

office and has been very laudatory. The issues mentioned in

the report centered around NNCC's fiscal problems, which was

expected since fiscal problems are being faced throughout

the System. In discussing the accreditation report with

various people, several have suggested NNCC's self-study

report serve as a model report throughout the northwest.

This is a very good compliment to NNCC and they should be

acknowledged for this report and their efforts during the

accreditation team's visit. Interim Chancellor Richardson

wished to publicly compliment President Remington and his

staff and faculty for a very successful accreditation effort

that has been reflected in the accreditation team's report.



Interim Chancellor Richardson announced that Research

Analyst Glen Krutz has been in the Chancellor's Office

since 1991 and will be leaving Nevada this Fall to accept

a Regents' fellowship at Texas A & M University to seek a

Ph. D. in political science. Mr. Krutz also had received

offers from Ohio State University and University of Iowa.

Dr. Richardson wished him well in his endeavors.



Chairman Eardley introduced Mr. Mark Alden, candidate for the

Board of Regents.



5. Approved Emeritus Status



Approved the following recommendations to Emeritus Status:



A. Desert Research Institute - Emeritus status has been

recommended for Harold Klieforth, Associate Research

Meteorologist, Emeritus.



B. Western Nevada Community College - Emeritus status has

been recommended for the following WNCC faculty,

effective June 30, 1994:



Donald L. Mc Daniel, Financial Aid Counselor

Claude B. Peden, Automotive/Diesel Mechanics Instructor



C. University of Nevada, Las Vegas - Emeritus status has

been recommended for the following UNLV faculty, ef-

fective June 30, 1994:



Frank D. Borsenik, Emeritus Professor of Hotel

Administration

Lyell E. Metcalf, Emeritus Associate Professor of

Hotel Administration

Boyce W. Phillips, Emeritus Associate Professor of

Hotel Administration

Edward H. Goodin, Emeritus Professor of Management



D. Community College of Southern Nevada - Emeritus status

has been recommended for Robert Fagen, Emeritus Profes-

sor Computing and Information Technologies, effective

June 30, 1994.



E. System Administration - Emeritus status has been recom-

mended for Nick Cady, Editor in Chief Emeritus, effec-

tive June 30, 1994.



Mrs. Gallagher moved approval of the Emeritus Status at

DRI, WNCC, UNLV, CCSN and the System Administration. Mrs.

Whitley seconded. Motion carried.



6. Approved Terms of Appointment, Interim President, UNLV



Interim Chancellor Richardson presented a recommendation

for the terms of appointment for Dr. Kenny Guinn, Interim

President at UNLV. The "Contract for Consulting Services"

is filed in the Regents' Office. Dr. Guinn has accepted

the terms of the contract.



Mr. Graves moved approval of the Contract for Consulting

Services for Interim UNLV President Kenny Guinn. Mrs.

Sparks seconded. Motion carried.



7. Approved Appointment of Interim Vice President, UNLV



Approved the appointment of Dr. Norval Pohl as Interim Vice

President for Finance and Administration at UNLV, effective

June 20, 1994. Mr. Buster Neel, the current Vice President,

will be leaving UNLV.



Mrs. Gallagher moved approval of the appointment of Dr.

Norval Pohl as Interim Vice President for Finance and

Administration at UNLV, effective June 20, 1994. Mrs.

Berkley seconded.



Interim President Guinn stated that he has spoken to Dr.

Pohl, Mr. Neel and Dr. John Unrue. All have been working

through the various transitions at UNLV. In selecting a

permanent Vice President, Dr. Guinn stated that he hopes

to set forth compliance rules to assure women and minori-

ties are considered for the position.



Mrs. Berkley stated that Vice President Buster Neel has

performed an extraordinary job at UNLV.



Motion carried.



8. Information Only: Outstanding Faculty Recognition



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

Chairman reported on the outstanding faculty achievement

for the institution. Ref. B is filed in the Regents' Of-

fice.



University of Nevada, Reno



Brian J. Whalen



Truckee Meadows Community College



Deborah Baker

Linda Stetter

Mata-Marie (Madge) Cooney



Northern Nevada Community College



Edgar Nickel



Western Nevada Community College



Richard J. Kale



Mrs. Whitley left the meeting.



9. Information Only: Outstanding Student Recognition



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

ment Officer reported on the outstanding student achievement

from the institution. Ref. C is filed in the Regents' Of-

fice.



Truckee Meadows Community College



Coni (Cornelia) Taylor



Northern Nevada Community College



Jennifer Benedict

Jennifer Mahlberg



Mr. Klaich entered the meeting.



10. Information Only: Outstanding Classified Employee

Recognition



At the request of the Board of Regents, each President re-

ported on the outstanding classified employee achievement

from the institution. Ref. D is filed in the Regents' Of-

fice.



System Administration



Sandy Coltharp



Truckee Meadows Community College



Emily Grable

Creel Snider



Western Nevada Community College



Rosanna (Zanna) De Busk



The open meeting recessed at 10:30 A.M. to move into the Status

of Women Committee meeting, and reconvened at 11:20 A.M. Thurs-

day, May 19, 1994, with all Regents present except Regent Foley.



11. Information Only: Report on Teaching, UNLV



The UNLV Faculty Senate has completed a Study on Teaching.

Dr. John Swetnam, former Faculty Senate Chairman, presented

the report, as contained in Ref. E, filed in the Regents'

Office.



Any proposal contained in this report which requires fund-

ing will either have to be funded out of UNLV's existing

funding level or will have to be proposed as a program

improvement request in the new budget proposal and placed

in priority with other institutional requests.



Dr. Swetnam introduced newly elected Faculty Senate Chairman

James Stivers.



Dr. Swetnam stated that he was hopeful that this endeavor

would be continued and that the Regents would consider the

recommendations for the entire UCCSN. He reported that Dr.

Richard Jensen, UNLV Professor of Communications, Chaired

the committee that developed this report on teaching.

Several other people were selected to serve on this com-

mittee and several meetings were held with frank and open

discussions.



Dr. Jensen stated that the committee attempted to focus on

teaching and research, although the committee did feel that

service was an integral part to the mission of the Univer-

sity. Teaching is a sharing of information and it was de-

termined that although UNLV has excellent teachers, there is

need for improvement.



Dr. Jensen continued by highlighting the recommendations

that would help in changing the climate of teaching at UNLV.

The committee recommends that a center be created with staff

to deal with the recommendations. In order to create a

center, the committee suggests that consultants be brought

to UNLV to show the committee how to set up such a center.



Upon questioning, it was learned that this committee is a

subcommittee of the Faculty Senate.



Mr. Klaich stated that he will be interested in what happens

with this report and recommendations. Teaching is an art

and also a learned skill that can be continually polished.

Teaching is the essence of what higher education is all

about. He stated that he liked the report because it dares

to tread upon sacred ground of tenure, and granting and

evaluating merit increases. He stated that if this report

does not come back to the Board of Regents, he would be

very disappointed and he commended Dr. Swetnam for instigat-

ing this process and report, and commended Dr. Jensen for

Chairing the committee.



Mrs. Gallagher commended the committee and their report.

She questioned whether the proposed centers would be es-

tablished in connection with the College of Education, and

Dr. Jensen responded that the centers would be connected

with the different Colleges on Campus and operated by good

teachers within that College.



Mrs. Sparks questioned whether the advising center which

will be located in the new classroom building will have

space for faculty to conduct advising sessions with students

and fellow teachers. Dr. Swetnam explained that student

advising for incoming Freshmen should be located in the

advising center; however, as the students move along their

tracks their advisors should be located within different

Departments throughout the Campus to allow for a more per-

sonal experience.



In the case of faculty advising, Dr. Swetnam suggested that

it should not be within the same Department, but somewhere

within the College framework.



Mrs. Sparks stated that UNR has been conducting tours for

the members of the Board and demonstrated a program that

trains teachers on how to teach other teachers. She

questioned whether UNLV is aware of UNR's program and sug-

gested that they contact Dr. Dick Davies at UNR for further

information.



Mr. Graves commended the report and questioned whether there

is a goal to establish a teaching center, and if so, is

there a dollar amount associated with this endeavor. Dr.

Jensen responded that the committee does recommend the es-

tablishment of a teaching center and the start-up costs

have been estimated to be $125,000. He was not aware of

the on-going costs to operate such a center. Mr. Graves

indicated that he would be interested in helping fund a

teaching center at UNLV.



Mrs. Gallagher questioned what the time constraint would be

on the advisors, and Dr. Jensen responded that the desig-

nated advisor would have a reduced teaching workload and

granted release time. The costs would be built into each

Department budget.



Chairman Eardley thanked the UNLV Faculty Senate committee

for a fine report.



Dr. Guinn stated that he was working toward a sound budget

process and held an informal meeting in which the discussion

centered around institutional priorities, not athletics. He

stated that he would be establishing a new system for the

cabinet and establish the submission of agenda items on an

alternative basis throughout the cabinet. Dr. Guinn stated

that he has assured the cabinet of an opportunity to discuss

teaching as an institutional priority, and that a rearrange-

ment of allocations will be considered. It is his intention

not to come to the Board of Regents to seek funding, but to

reallocate within the institution. He stated that he would

like this report on teaching presented to the cabinet in

the future.



Dr. Hammargren left the meeting.



12. Approved Academic Master Plan, TMCC



Approved the Academic Master Plan for Truckee Meadows Com-

munity College, 1995-97, which had been revised following

discussion of the plan at the February, 1994 Board meeting,

and is contained in Ref. G, filed in the Regents' Office.



The revisions and the plan have been reviewed by Interim

Vice Chancellor Steinberg and Interim Chancellor Richardson

and they recommend approval of the plan.



Mrs. Gallagher moved approval of the Academic Master Plan

for Truckee Meadows Community College as resubmitted. Mr.

Graves seconded. Motion carried.



13. Approved Sale of Hillside Cemetery Property, UNR



In 1978 the Board of Regents accepted, as a gift, the unsold

plots and common areas of the Hillside Cemetery, located on

University Terrace, west of the UNR Campus. For the past

several years, the University has been attempting to sell

its interest in the property.



On April 5, 1994, sealed bids were opened for the sale of

the University's interest in the cemetery. One bid was

received for $10,000 from John Lawton of Reno, Nevada. Mr.

Lawton operates another cemetery in the Reno area.



Approved the sale of the Hillside Cemetery to Mr. Lawton

for $10,000.



Vice Chancellor Sparks stated that it would cost approxi-

mately $1 million to move all the cemetery plots, and this

land is not included in UNR's Physical Master Plan. He

recommended the sale.



Mr. Klaich moved approval of the sale of the Hillside

Cemetery Property to John Lawton in the amount of $10,000.

Mrs. Gallagher seconded. Motion carried.



14. Approved Medicaid Funding, School of Medicine



Approved authorization to seek funding from the Interim

Finance Committee for a projected revenue shortfall in the

School of Medicine budget of $188,300 for 1993-94 and

$212,000 for 1994-95, as contained in Ref. J, filed in the

Regents' Office.



Vice Chancellor Sparks informed the Board that during the

last legislative session it was determined that too much

was being collected for the Medicaid program, so the Legis-

lature reduced the amount allocated from the general fund.

However, during the legislative session the Welfare Divi-

sion reduced the per capita rate from $7 to $3.15 and this

has posed a problem for the School of Medicine. If the

case load had increased enough to offset the fee reduc-

tion then there would be sufficient funds for the Medicaid

program. However, the caseload did not increase, therefore

there is a revenue shortfall.



Mrs. Sparks moved approval to seek funding from the Interim

Finance Committee for the shortfall in the School of Medi-

cine budget due to the Medicaid program. Mrs. Gallagher

seconded.



Upon questioning, Vice Chancellor Sparks responded that a

combination of both federal and state mandates have caused

this shortfall. The Welfare Division reduced the Medicaid

fee, which affects Medicaid service throughout the State.

This reduction was not replaced with general funds.



Mrs. Berkley stated that she is aware of the need to fund

Medicaid, but stated that there are other shortfalls

throughout the System and asked how the Board of Regents

should justify seeking additional funding for the School

of Medicine and not these other programs. Vice Chancellor

Sparks responded that shortages were known in constructing

the other Campus budgets and therefore cannot qualify as

an unforeseen circumstance thereby making them eligible

for emergency allocations. However, the Medicaid budget

request was unforeseen at the time the budgets were con-

structed.



Mrs. Sparks stated that the impact of this program could

cause loss of accreditation, closure of facilities and

termination of the School of Medicine's Las Vegas medical

program. She stated that it would be a mistake not to seek

funding for this program. Mrs. Gallagher added that this

was not an oversight by the School of Medicine and that

UCCSN should seek funding from the Interim Finance Commit-

tee.



Motion carried.



15. Approved Handbook Changes, School of Medicine Tuition and

Fees



Approved Handbook changes, Title 4, Chapter 17, Section 4.3

and 4.4, Tuition; Section 10, Student Fees; and Section 13,

Distribution of Fees and Tuition, School of Medicine, as

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



Dr. Derby questioned why the School of Medicine's tuition

and fees were not discussed during the Chancellor's Tuition

and Fees Advisory Committee meetings, and Vice Chancellor

Sparks responded that the Board of Regents' policy allows

for the School of Medicine to be separate from the other

institutional tuition and fees. In addition, the timing

was not right to bring the two together for discussion.

The same process was used for both entities, which included

comparison of all western states, cost of higher education

and student involvement.



He continued by stating that the School of Medicine is pro-

posing that non-resident fees for FY 1996 be increased by

15% to $17,976 and the second year (FY 97) by 15% to

$20,672. He explained that the resident fees will be in-

creased by 3.4% for both years and are in line with the

change in the higher education price index. By averaging

the non-resident fees over the four year period the fees

will be increased by 8.5% per year. These fee increases

will be included in the 1995 budget request and placed in

the priority request for new funding and services.



Mrs. Whitley moved approval of the Handbook changes regard-

ing the School of Medicine's tuition and fees. Mrs.

Gallagher seconded.



Dr. Ashok Dhingra, Chairman of the School of Medicine Tui-

tion and Fees Committee, stated that students served on the

Committee and were supportive because quality would be im-

pacted if there were no fee increases. The School of Medi-

cine will work with the Governor and Legislature to seek

increased general funding for the School of Medicine.



Motion carried.



1. Closed Session (continued)



Upon motion by Mr. Graves, seconded by Mrs. Gallagher, the

Board moved to a closed session for the discussion of the

character, alleged misconduct, professional competence, or

physical or mental health of an employee(s) of the UCCSN,

in accordance with NRS 241.030.



The open meeting recessed at 12:05 P.M. and reconvened in open

session at 2:00 P.M. Thursday, May 19, 1994, with all Regents

present except Regents Berkley, Foley and Hammargren.



16. Information Only: Public Comment



A. Mr. Rick Trachok, representing the UNR Men's Track and

Field program, informed the Board of Regents that a

recent decision was made to discontinue the Men's Track

and Field and Cross Country programs. He stated that

he is a UNR alumnus and former track athlete. He re-

quested the Board of Regents to direct UNR Administra-

tion to reinstate the program. A number of track ath-

letes, high school coaches and community representatives

were present, although many were in attendance at the

funeral services for fellow colleague Stewart Schraeder

and were here in spirit.



Mrs. Berkley entered the meeting.



Mr. Trachok gave a brief summary of why the program

should be reconsidered and distributed a petition con-

taining 900 names that were obtained in Northern Nevada

within a 24-hour period.



Mr. Trachok emphasized that an athletic program needs

track and field. Track is the most basic athletic pro-

gram and is a source for all other programs because it

includes running, jumping, etc. The real issue is one

of opportunity for young Nevadans. UNLV dropped its

track program over 10 years ago, leaving UNR with the

only track and field program in Nevada. Nevada will be

the only state without a track program. The opportunity

for Nevada's young high school athletes who wish to com-

pete will now have to go out of State. There are 2300

young high school males who will be unable to come to

UNR if they wish to compete, and only a small percentage

will have the chance to compete out of State because

few have reached the superstar level to be recruited.

Over the last 50 years, 50% of those who have competed

at UNR have been Nevada high school graduates who were

considered as "walk ons". They were not recruited.



Mr. Trachok stated that this program has been important

in his own education and social aspect. He questioned

whether the Board of Regents wants the educational op-

portunity and the social opportunity to be taken away

from future young people. With the problems of the

youth today, he questioned why this positive program

was being removed. Although this program does not bring

money to the athletic program, its main purpose is to

educate and provide opportunity for young people in

Nevada.



Based on Mr. Trachok's initial research of Title IX,

Gender Equity, he did not feel that continuation of

the track and field program is insurmountable for UNR's

athletic program. He stated that he had spoken to Mr.

Chris Ault and had committeed to perform research neces-

sary to lay out for UNR the options to maintain the

track and field program and still satisfy the spirit and

the letter of Title IX.



Mr. Trachok requested the Board of Regents to take im-

mediate action, before the students leave UNR for Summer

break so the students will be able to make future plans

for their education.



Mr. Klaich stated that he was relatively hesitant to

react to the request to specifically direct the Admin-

istration to reinstate the track and field program at

UNR, because the Board of Regents serves as a govern-

ing board. He suggested that the process be carried

through to include Mr. Trachok working with Mr. Ault

before any action by the Board is taken.



Mr. Trachok clarified that his request is for the Board

of Regents to encourage the Administration to look at

other options and to reinstate the Men's Track and

Field program.



Mr. Klaich stated that as a Board member he will not

seek raising of tuition and fees or the redirection of

funding from instructional programs to support athlet-

ics. However, he did state that he was very supportive

of the continuing dialog between Mr. Trachok and the

Athletic Department on this subject. Mr. Trachok stated

that he would not consider taking money from other pro-

grams to maintain the track and field program.



Dr. Derby stated that she is very committed to gender

equity issues, especially in the athletic programs; how-

ever, she was distressed by the decision to discontinue

this program and she stated that she would like to see

UNR reconsider its decision. The lack of a process

could have made a difference. The process should have

informed people of the possibility that a program was

about to be eliminated and allowed those interested

persons to come forward to share their concerns before

the final decision was made. She stated that she was

disappointed that other options were not considered

before eliminating this program, and requested that

this program be reconsidered.



Mrs. Price indicated that gender equity issues have been

around for more than 20 years, so she did not agree with

the elimination of the program being based on the gender

equity issue. She stated that she was concerned with

the policy and agreed that the process was not followed

in this case.



Mr. Graves stated that he agreed with Mr. Klaich that

it is not the Board of Regents' decision to make, but

the institution's decision. However, he stated that

he did feel that Nevada should have a University to

send its track students to and allow them the oppor-

tunity to participate at a College level of competition.

He felt the program should be rectified, but did under-

stand the institution's concerns. He suggested that

the track and field program seek private funding to

maintain the program.



Mrs. Sparks stated that it was her understanding that

the closure of the Men's Track and Field program was not

a matter of finances but rather the numbers of scholar-

ships available to women athletes as opposed to men

athletes. She discussed the ski and rifle teams that

were added, which are both club sports and are supported

with private money. She noted that there are 4091 young

men involved and this may be their last opportunity to

participate in this program. She stated that she sup-

ported the Men's Track and Field program.



Although this issue is not a Regents' issue at this time

Mrs. Sparks stated that this program includes voters'

concerns and the end result and the process is the

Board's concern. She agreed that the Board should not

take action at this time, but felt that there are other

options to be considered. She strongly suggested that

this issue be revisited in the future.



Brendon Rock, student athlete, stated that as a child

growing up in Nevada he had a dream of becoming a State

hero and to be loved by the State of Nevada. Since UNLV

did not have a Men's Track program he came to UNR to

participate in the program. This program affects many

men and women and has been in existence for 96 years.

The Men's Track and Field program has the highest number

of in-state athletes in any of the athletic programs.

By coming to UNR it has given him a great opportunity

to be associated with a nationally ranked NCAA program.

He felt it was a shame to drop the program.



President Crowley stated that he understood the concerns

expressed by Mr. Trachok, Mr. Rock and others. Presi-

dent Crowley continued that the Board employs him as

President to make difficult decisions. When UNR makes

difficult decisions the Board of Regents should hear

from the constituents. However, if UNR is unable to

defend its decisions, then the Board should direct the

Administration to make a change. He indicated that the

process may be inadequate, but it is the same process

which was used to eliminate other programs at the in-

stitution.



Dr. Hammargren entered the meeting.



President Crowley stated that although it is true that

Title IX has been around for 20 years, it is not fair

to say that people are shocked at this decision. There

has been a dramatic change with Title IX requirements

and there have been a series of law suits that have made

a tremendous difference on how to deal with this issue.

It is very clear that the current Administration in

Washington, D. C. has a different view and emphasis on

Title IX and gender equity. The NCAA has spent an ex-

orbitant amount of time on this issue. There are now

many more women involved in sports and they have brought

gender equity issues to the courts, NCAA and to Wash-

ington, D. C.



President Crowley reported that he has spoken with Mr.

Trachok who has made an offer to help UNR find ways to

achieve the gender equity requirements without dropping

programs. President Crowley stated that he welcomes

his assistance. The fundamental requirement of gender

equity is proportional, and the institutions are re-

quired to achieve some significant approximation in

athletic programs in relation to the undergraduate

population, by way of allocating scholarships within

the total athletic budgets. President Crowley related

a recent California court case that was based on par-

ticipation rates with institutions that had a football

program. The law is unclear and stated that institu-

tions should maintain 55/45 participation rates. As

indicated in a NCAA survey, UNR is the mainstream with

73/27 participation rates. UNR has made significant

progress in building the women's athletic budgets.

This year UNR has a 70/30 participation rate and allo-

cation of grants in aid. Next year it should be around

64/36. In President Crowley's opinion, to achieve the

requirement of the law, institutions have 3 choices,

1) add more women's programs, 2) delete more men's

programs, or 3) do both.



The great majority of sports programs at the Division I

level are not making money. The Administrators have to

look very closely at the programs. Perhaps there are

other suggestions in making it all work, but President

Crowley stated that he did not see any other options.

He stated that this process is not fun, especially in

dropping such a sport as Men's Track and Field. UNR

has 21 students on atheletic financial aid and 7 are

from Nevada. President Crowley indicated that UNR is

without several programs such as wrestling, soccer,

softball, etc. UNR had to drop the ski program as a

sport 10 years ago; however, it has been reinstated

with private financial support. He reported that the

baseball program has private support, the golf program

has an endowment, the football and basketball programs

bring in their own money, the ski program has private

support, and the rifle program receives funding from

the ROTC program.



Interim Chancellor Richardson reminded the Board that

it was under "Public Comment" and President Crowley

had raised some fundamental issues that were consider-

ed before making the decision with regard to types of

sports for males and females on the UNR Campus. He

questioned whether the Board was going to decide on

this issue or allow the President of the institution

to make the decision.



In the last couple of months UNLV has joined the Western

Athletic Conference, which is costly, will require a new

stadium to be built, will bring in more income, and was

heavily supported in the Las Vegas area. However, In-

terim Chancellor Richardson pointed out that this issue

never came to the Board of Regents. The decision to

join WAC, in terms of cost implications, has far more

important policy implications than that being presented

at this meeting. He stated that not one Regent or citi-

zen contacted himself on that issue. Dr. Richardson

stated that the point he was trying to make is whether

this Systemwide Board would make decisions for athletics

at all the institutions, or just selectively interpose

itself to rise to the community concerns and support of

certain issues. The Board of Regents should not expect

its Presidents to operate appropriately, when they do

not know how to proceed. He stated that there is much

inconsistency.



Mrs. Sparks clarified that the Board does not wish to

change its policy; however, no one approached the Board

on the WAC issue but they did approach the Board on the

dropping of the Men's Track and Field program. She

stated that she did not want to direct the President,

but there was a human cry for this issue, and it is the

Board's obligation to hear from those concerned citi-

zens. It is part of the Board's responsibility to hear

individual problems on the Campuses. She is not recom-

mending that a change be made to the policy, or demand-

ing that UNR make this change. She just wanted to be

assured that the very best was done for the Men's Track

and Field program. She requested a follow-up agenda

item be placed in the future. She stated that she did

not want to be accused of telling a President how to

conduct business.



Mrs. Berkley stated that the Board of Regents serves as

a policy-setting board and if a wrong decision was made

after hearing this presentation, then it should be a

role of a Regent to react to the issue. She felt that

the decision to drop this program was a most difficult

decision to make and was based on a good grasp of facts.

This was not an arbitrary decision. It is not the role

of the Regents to micro-manage the institutions.



Dr. Derby stated that the role of a Regent is to serve

as a buffer and bridge to the institutions. As a Regent

she must convey her constituents' views. It is very

important that the process is followed and that all

voices are heard throughout the process.



Mrs. Gallagher stated that UNR has gone through much

soul searching to arrive at this decision. It has been

stated that UNR is willing to work with Mr. Trachok to

see if there are other options that have not yet been

considered. President Crowley is also willing to work

with Mr. Trachok, and to come up with the proper deci-

sion, and it must be President Crowley's decision.



President Crowley stated that he did not want to imply

that Regents and the public should be begrudged in any

way to voice their opinions. This has been a very

painful decision to make for many of UNR's employees.

He agreed that the public is entitled to have its say,

and he did not want to suggest that the reactions should

be hindered. If there is a way to do what is required

in meeting the law without dropping programs then he

stated that he is willing to listen.



CSUN President Joel Kostman introduced newly elected CSUN Presi-

dent Stephanie Boixo.



TMCC Faculty Senate Chairman Dan Mc Clure introduced Deborah

Baker, Professor of Radiology Technology and Educational Co-

ordinator at TMCC, who was recognized as an outstanding faculty.



B. Virginia Rivers, Science Division at TMCC, reported

that next month TMCC will be proposing another reorgan-

ization. She presented to the Board 163 signed state-

ments requesting that there be no change within the

academic structure and requested the Board to consider

a resolution that she distributed, and that questions

be asked before a decision is reached.



Mr. Klaich indicated that the labor management model

that was adopted was not chosen by this Board of Re-

gents, but by TMCC; and again, the Board did not choose

the proposed TMCC governance model. He felt that the

faculty should be made aware of this.



Mrs. Berkley requested that she be briefed by System

staff on what is happening at TMCC prior to making a

decision on the organizational model.



17. Information Only: Nevada Networking Initiative



Interim Chancellor Richardson presented a report on Nevada

Networking Initiative, as contained in Ref. F, filed in the

Regents' Office.



Dr. Richardson stated that over the last several years UCCSN

has connected the institutions, operated interactive tele-

vision, and has expanded the interactive video equipment

to Elko, Hawthorne, Fallon and Winnemucca. A number of

developments relative to electronic networking have occurred

but UCCSN has barely scratched the surface and is still be-

hind other states. To bring UCCSN up to speed and advance

UCCSN into the electronic arena, Dr. Richardson indicated

that Ref. F is an initial effort to put together a proposal

to be considered for the budget process. After several

conversations and meetings held with Nevada Bell in Reno,

Sprint Centel in Las Vegas, and System representatives,

directions for the advancement have been suggested. The

entities have reviedwed the drafts and the layman's summary

of a technical report which refers to how Nevada wants to

join the superhighway.



Dr. Richardson introduced Larry Tuteur, TMCC, who Chaired

the Campus Infrastructure Committee, and Larry Gilbert,

UNR, who Chaired the Networking Committee. Dr. Richardson

highlighted the report. UCCSN's plan calls for construct-

ing smaller components first, building phases throughout

the remainder of the 1990s until a coherent Statewide net-

work is established that connects compatibly with national

and international networks. He stated that every year

there will be an advanced networking model, so Nevada needs

to start somewhere to remain competitive for faculty, stu-

dents and industry. If not, Nevada will lag behind in

education, research and economic development.



Dr. Richardson suggested a phase-in program by first rewir-

ing the Campses to make connection and this will call for

fiber optic cabling to communicate effectively within

Nevada, nationally and internationally. Then UCCSN will

work with private industry and State government to further

enhance the network throughout Nevada.



Over 3 biennia it has been estimated to cost $26-28 million

for the package. Although this is a high price tag, Dr.

Richardson stated that it is one of the areas to which UCCSN

needs to devote greater attention and resources, and cooper-

ate with other State agencies in developing this network to

remain competitive.



Upon questioning, Dr. Richardson stated that this endeavor

could make money from the private industry and corporations.

System cost estimates indicate that if UCCSN performs the

networking in Nevada, and shares this capability with other

entities, UCCSN would save on some costs.



Mrs. Price indicated that former Regent Jo Ann Sheerin

brought this subject before the Board of Regents during

her term as Regent. Mrs. Price wanted to be assured that

students were primary and that they would be able to use

the networking capabilities. She also raised the concern

of training personnel to handle this endeavor.



Mrs. Berkley stated that this project should be a Statewide

effort with UCCSN acting as the leader of this proposal,

and questioned whether this should be considered in the

Governor's budget or whether it was just a proposal. Dr.

Richardson stated that it was his intent to make this pro-

posal public and share it with the executive branch of

government, and it will be included as a consideration

within the biennial budget with Board of Regents' approval.



Mr. Gilbert stated that the capacities within this plan are

to serve education, then to reach out to other State agen-

cies with greater cooperation with the State.



Mrs. Gallagher pointed out that currently it is difficult to

use the interactive television network because of the busy

schedule, and she questioned whether the proposed increased

capacity would be able to handle the entire State. Mr.

Gilbert responded that the entire plan was based on all

applications that would serve the citizens of Nevada, such

as health care, cooperative extension, etc. It is the

intent to blaze a path for other agencies to become involv-

ed.



Mr. Tuteur referred to the nation's highway system, in that

it was thought that the better the highways were built, the

more it would be used; however, there are still not enough

highways to accommodate everybody. This scenario holds

true to this network proposal.



Mr. Gilbert stated that there is a consensus at the insti-

tutions to proceed with this proposal and to focus on in-

struction applications for the communities throughout

Nevada.



President Calabro suggested that the Regents read the newest

AGB publication that speaks to this issue, which would give

some good guidance and insight.



18. Approved Spring 1994 Enrollment and 1993-94 Annualized

Enrollment



Ms. Tamela Gorden, Research Analyst, presented the enroll-

ment report for Spring 1994 and for the 1993-94 annualized

enrollments, as contained in Ref. H, filed in the Regents'

Office.



The report showed a continuing disturbing trend of flat or

declining enrollments at the institutions, even as the

population of Nevada continues to grow dramatically each

year. Full-time equivalent (FTE) enrollments was down

Systemwide by 1.5% from Spring, 1993 (34,657) to Spring,

1994 (34,124). Annualized FTE enrollment, an important

figure because it is used by the State for budgeting pur-

poses, was down Systemwide by 1.3% from 1992-93 (35,331) to

1993-94 (34,874). Ms. Gorden described the cause of the

enrollment slide as the lack of funding public higher edu-

cation in Nevada as experienced in recent years. There

simply is not enough money to hire new faculty to teach

desperately needed sections of courses. Students are

thereby being turned away. In more prosperous times, the

UCCSN was the fastest growing higher education system in

America.



Vice Chancellor Sparks indicated that during the last leg-

islative session the projected growth was 6.3%, and had

been based on 8% annualized growth for the last six years.

The formulas were suspended in the 1993 legislative ses-

sion, and UCCSN realized a decline of 1.3%. He stated that

if actual enrollments for the fiscal year were overlaid

with the previous formulas, it would cause a shortage of

121 faculty and staff, and $6.5 million would be required

to restore funding of the instructional formula. Last ses-

sion it was calculated that at the end of this biennium, if

enrollment projections had been realized, there would have

been a shortage of 400 faculty and staff. If UCCSN grows

by 5% during the next fiscal year the cost to restore the

instruction formulas in the budget would be approximately

$12.5 million.



Upon questioning, Vice Chancellor Sparks indicated that

growth for the next biennium has not yet been projected

but should be presented at either the June or August Board

of Regents' meeting.



Mr. Klaich moved approval of the enrollment report for

Spring 1994 and for the 1993-94 annualized enrollments.

Mrs. Gallagher seconded. Motion carried.



Regents Hammargren and Sparks left the meeting.



19. Approved the Consent Agenda



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

with the permanent minutes), which contained the following:



(1) Approved the minutes of the regular meeting held

March 31-April 1, 1994, and the special meeting held

April 8, 1994.



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

Ref. C-1, filed with the permanent minutes.



(3) Approved the appointment of Mrs. Gloria Banks-Weddle

to the CCSN Advisory Board.



(4) Approved tenure on hire at UNR for Ralph G. De Palma,

M. D. Dr. De Palma will serve as Vice Chair of

Surgery and Chief of Surgical Service at the Veterans'

Administration Medical Center in Reno. Appointment

will be effective July 1, 1994.



(5) Approved a Handbook change, Title 5, Chapter 6,

Chapter 1 4.4.6.6, Appeals Committee, UNLV, as

follows:



Chapter 1 4.6.6. Appeals Committee



The Appeals Committee hears cases involving denials

of promotion, tenure, salary increases, and/or merit.

The Committee will be activated only after the appel-

lant has exhausted all administrative remedies through

the Vice President for Academic Affairs or other

appropriate Administrators (UNLV Bylaws, Chapter III,

Section 6.5, 6.6, 6.7 and 13.1). Membership of this

Committee changes with each appeal which it processes.

Potential Committee members shall be selected from a

pool of either academic or non-academic faculty. The

Administration shall be represented on the Committee

by an Administrator elected by the members of the

Academic Council. The appellant and the Administra-

tion may be represented before the Committee by ad-

vocates of their choosing. The decision of the Com-

mittee shall be advisory.



(6) Approved a Handbook change, Title 4, Chapter 17,

Section 10, Student Fees, UNR, TMCC and WNCC, as

follows:



Health Service Fee $60



(7) Approved a Handbook change, Title 4, Chapter 17,

Section 10, Student Fees, UNLV, as follows:



UNR UNLV

Orientation:

For First-time students 50 NA

(effective Summer Session

I, 1994)

Two-Day NA 50

One Day NA 40



(8) Approved a Handbook change, Title 4, Chapter 17,

Section 18, University Inn, UNR, as contained in

Ref. C-2, filed in the Regents' Office.



(9) Approved a Handbook change, Title 4, Chapter 17,

Section 17.2, Stead Campus Apartments, and Section

17.3, Other Apartments and Houses Owned by the

University, UNR, as contained in Ref. C-3, filed

in the Regents' Office.



(10) Approved authorization to utilize Capital Improvement

Fees in the amount of $37,000 for equipment for the

Physics Department's chemistry labs in the new build-

ing at UNLV.



(11) Approved authorization to utilize Capital Improvement

Fees in the amount of $14,000 for the following pur-

poses at WNCC:



To purchase additional chairs and tables

for classrooms. $10,000



To repair and maintain the heating and

air conditioning system. $ 2,000



To upgrade the Campus Master Plan for

Minden and Douglas service area. $ 2,000



(12) Approved an easement to Nevada Bell to cover tele-

communication access for all areas within the Dandini

Research Park, DRI.



(13) Approved a permanent easement to Nevada Power Company

for the UNLV Classroom/Office Complex.



(14) Approved the following interlocal agreements:



A. UCCSN Board of Regents/Cooperative Extension and

the Department of Conservation and Natural Re-

sources/Environmental Protection Division

(Interlocal Contract)



Effective Date: May 1, 1994 through December 30,

1995

Amount : $26,227 to Cooperative Extension

Purpose : Project entitled Rotational Crops

for Soil Nitrate Remediation.



B. UCCSN Board of Regents/Cooperative Extension and

the Department of Conservation and Natural Re-

sources/Environmental Protection Division

(Interlocal Contract)



Effective Date: April 1, 1994 through December

30, 1995

Amount : $20,000 to Cooperative Extension

Purpose : Project entitled Truckee River

Conference.



C. UCCSN Board of Regents/UNR and the Department of

Human Resources/Health Division (Interlocal

Contract)



Effective Date: Date approved by Board through

June 30, 1994

Amount : $4250 to UNR

Purpose : Sexual Assault Facts and Educa-

tion (SAFE) Program.



D. UCCSN Board of Regents/UNR and Washoe County

School District (Interlocal Contract)



Effective Date: July 1, 1994 through July 30,

1995

Amount : $1.15 per mile to Washoe County

School District

Purpose : Lease of school buses.



E. UCCSN Board of Regents/UNR and the Department of

Human Resources/Health Division (Interlocal

Contract)



Effective Date: March 1, 1994 through February

18, 1995

Amount : $118,582 to UNR

Purpose : Radon Health Risk Assesment.



F. UCCSN Board of Regents/CCSN and the Department

of Human Resources/Mental Hygiene and Mental

Retardation Division (Interlocal Contract)



Effective Date: July 1, 1994 through June 30,

1995

Amount : $17,500 to CCSN

Purpose : Course of instruction for mental

health technicians, mental re-

tardation technicians and foren-

sic specialists.



G. UCCSN Board of Regents/CCSN and Department of

Human Resources/Welfare Division (Interlocal

Contract)



Effective Date: May 1, 1994 through June 30,

1995

Amount : $108,900 to CCSN

Purpose : Training classes in beginning

computer applications, recep-

tionist skills and any other

training or skills class Welfare

Division requests.



H. UCCSN Board of Regents/WNCC and State Job Train-

ing Office (Interlocal Contract - Amendment)



Effective Date: Remains same as original con-

tract -- July 1, 1993 to June

30, 1994

Amount : $8000 increase (total now

$43,000) to WNCC

Purpose : Counseling for displaced home-

makers.



I. UCCSN Board of Regents/UNLV and Nevada Division

of Wildlife (Interlocal Contract - Amendment)



Effective Date: Date approved by Board through

June 30, 1994

Amount : $6360 increase (total now

$22,860) to UNLV

Purpose : Special Problems of Fisheries

Management.



J. UCCSN Board of Regents/UNLV and Nevada Power

Company (Grant of Easement)



Effective Date: Date approved by Board

Amount : $1 to Board

Purpose : Grant of easement to Nevada Power

Company for parcels of land in

Clark County, SE 1/4 of Section

22, Township 21 South Range 61

East, M. D. M. for office/class-

room building.



K. UCCSN Board of Regents/NNCC and Nevada State

Public Works Board (Interlocal Contract)



Effective Date: May 1, 1994 to April 30, 1996

Amount : $704,500 to Public Works Board

Purpose : Legislative Interim Finance Com-

mittee authorized Public Works

Board on June 24, 1993 to receive

NNCC Foundation funds to partial-

ly fund the completion for Capi-

tal Improvement Project #91-L11,

Community Center, Phase II. NNCC

will coordinate payment of Foun-

dation funds to Public Works

Board.



20. Approved Handbook Addition, Acquisition or Sale of Real

Property



In response to direction from the Board, the Chancellor

and the Presidents proposed the policy contained in Ref.

L, filed with the permanent minutes, for the requisition

or sale of real property.



Mrs. Sparks returned to the meeting.



Mr. Graves moved approval of the Handbook addition regard-

ing acquisition or sale of real property. Mrs. Whitley

seconded. Motion carried.



21. Information Only: Recommendations for Promotion or

Assignment to Rank



The following recommendations for promotion or assignment

to rank have been forwarded for Board consideration. This

is an information item only, with Board action scheduled

for the June 23-24, 1994 meeting.



A. University of Nevada, Reno - President Crowley recom-

mends the following promotions, effective July 1, 1994:



Dhanesh Chandra to Full Professor in Chemical/Metal-

lurgical Engineering, School of Mines

Carl Looney to Full Professor in Computer Science,

School of Mines

*John C. Pettey to Associate Professor in Foreign

Languages & Literature, College of Arts & Science

Edwin G. Smith to Rank III in Cooperative Extension,

College of Agriculture



*Also recommended for Award to Tenure.



22. Information Only: Recommendations for Award to Tenure



The following recommendations for tenure have been forwarded

for Board consideration. This is an information item only

with Board action scheduled for the June 23-24, 1994 meet-

ing.



NOTE: The titles stated in this agenda item are descrip-

tive only. Faculty are tenured in institutions,

and not in particular employment positions.



A. University of Nevada, Reno - President Crowley recom-

mends award of tenure, effective July 1, 1994, to the

following:



Stephen Lafer, Curriculum and Instruction, College of

Education

*John C. Pettey, Foreign Languages & Literature,

College of Arts & Science



*Also recommended for Promotion or Assignment to Rank.



The open meeting recessed at 3:50 P.M. and reconvened at 9:17

A.M. Friday, May 20, 1994, with all Regents present except

Regents Berkley, Foley, Hammargren, Sparks and Whitley.



23. Approved UCCSN Affirmative Action Report



Mrs. Karen Steinberg, Interim Vice Chancellor for Academic

and Student Affairs, presented the 1994 UCCSN Affirmative

Action Report. The report includes System data regarding

students and faculty by gender and race/ethnic designation,

promotion and tenure, and hiring data for the past year.

The report is filed in the Regents' Office.



Mrs. Steinberg stated that federal mandates, and the Re-

gents' Status of Women Committee findings have suggested

that the UCCSN Affirmative Action Report move away from

just statistical reporting. The ad hoc Ethnic Minority

Affairs Committee also recommended that it is time to set

goals on employment and student enrollment. The Council

of Presidents are working on these issues and implementa-

tion plans will be coming forward to assess the progress.

The Chancellor's staff will monitor on a scheduled basis

graduation and performance levels of students and this

will be reported annually to the Board. Mrs. Steinberg

proceeded to highlight the report.



Regents Berkley and Sparks entered the meeting.



Mrs. Steinberg reported that data were collected on students

enrolled during Fall 1993 and staff (professional and class-

ified) employed during 1993. UCCSN has been successful both

Systemwide and on all the Campuses in enrolling a more di-

verse student population. Minority enrollment has increased

6% Systemwide over the last 8 years. Campus increases have

ranged from 1% to 6% over the same time period.



Mrs. Whitley entered the meeting.



Mrs. Steinberg reported that there was a steady growth of

UCCSN minority student enrollment between 1985 and 1993,

and pointed out that even with tight budgets and increased

tuition, the minority enrollments have not been affected.

The institutions are working very hard to increase minority

enrollments.



With regard to faculty and staff, some small changes have

occurred on some Campuses. The report reflects that System-

wide in 1983 there were 13% minority employees and in 1993

there were still 13%.



Mrs. Steinberg indicated that future reports will incorpo-

rate the measurement against the various Committee recom-

mendations.



Mr. Graves moved to accept the UCCSN Affirmative Action

Report. Dr. Derby seconded.



Mr. Graves stated that this was an excellent report; how-

ever, he felt that true measuring methods need to include

figures on growth of population in the various areas

around the State.



Dr. Derby stated that she was very pleased that the Affirma-

tive Action report will include the various recommendations

from the ad hoc Ethnic Minority Affairs Committee and the

Status of Women Committee.



Dr. Hammargren entered the meeting.



Dr. Derby requested that gender differences in terms of

ranking women at the lower ends be incorporated into future

reports, and Mrs. Steinberg responded that at this time

this information in unavailable, but will be requesting

this information when the new payroll and personnel system

goes on line to provide automatic reporting.



Dr. Derby questioned what particular findings are most

significant regarding gender equity and minority equity,

and Mrs. Steinberg responded that the Board should ref-

erence each institution and not look at the Systemwide

figures. The institutions are making great progress and

have procedures in place with regard to retention. There

is certainly more to do, but there is now evidence that

the institutions have been successful and they should be

proud of their efforts in recruiting and retaining minority

students and employees. The models most successful that

the institutions have used should be looked at by the

other institutions.



Mrs. Steinberg explained how the collection of data is

performed, which is by self-reporting data. Employee self-

reporting data is supplemented by the personnel offices

throughout the System when appropriate. Mrs. Steinberg

stated that all other institutions are faced with this

dilemma, so UCCSN's data is comparable to data throughout

the country.



Mr. Klaich clarified that the institutions are doing much

better in retaining and attracting minority and gender

equity for the student population, but not at the faculty

level. He is aware that there is not much hope in this re-

gard because of the declining minority and gender pool for

faculty positions. There is also a very poor decision that

has been made in regard to UCCSN's ability to pay in these

catagories because of discrimination. However, there is a

deterioration in this area if UCCSN is not able to meet

market demands. He indicated that the effort to attract

minorities and females is superior, but regardless of the

good efforts, there is still a deterioration in hiring.



General Counsel Klasic explained a recent case whereby

there was a recruitment effort that attracted a black male,

and several white females. The black male was chosen and

paid more than the average salary. Then a year later

another recruitment effort took place and attracted three

females. The position was offered and a slightly higher

salary was offered. UCCSN was sued under the Equal Pay Act.

The hiring was not based on gender equity but on a market

value analysis. The jury ruled against UCCSN and UCCSN is

in the process of appealing the case.



Upon questioning, Mr. Klasic responded that market values

can be considered; however, other cases have ruled that

market values cannot be considered. If the appeal goes

against UCCSN, the case can be made stronger with some

studies that can be included as additional evidence. The

law is still developing in this area.



Dr. Derby stated that other institutions are under the same

factors as mentioned. However, Campus climate is a major

factor and UCCSN must retain its minority and female em-

ployees and increase its new hires. The employement pool

is very competitive and very real. UCCSN must remain com-

mitted to this effort.



Motion carried.



24. Approved Executive Salary Models



In compliance with Board policy on executive compensation

adopted at the October 1993 meeting of the Board, "Executive

salary models (will) be constructed for all executive posi-

tions. The Chancellor in consultation with the Presidents

will be charged with constructing these models and present-

ing them to the Board for its approval. Models must be

initially constructed based on the peer group comparisons.

Specifically, for each position, salary ranges would be

constructed using the peer group median as the range median.

Ranges would be compared for internal consistency and for

proportional relationships between faculty and executive

salaries, and among executive salaries, and adjustments made

as necessary. The proposed ranges would be forwarded to the

Board for their consideration and approval and be included

in the appropriate section of the Handbook."



Interim Chancellor Richardson and Interim Vice Chancellor

Steinberg informed the Board of progress to date in con-

structing salary models and presented models for the Board's

review and adoption, as contained in Ref. I, filed with the

permanent minutes.



Dr. Richardson gave a brief overview and stated that Hay

Associates provided assistance in making its recommendation

to the Board of Regents last Fall and since that time the

Chancellor's staff has been collecting additional data

including data collected by CUPA, a national organization

that performs annual studies. CUPA provides the broadest

data base and most relevant for the different types of UCCSN

institutions. Dr. Richardson stated that this presentation

does not call for specific salaries, but for salary ranges.

If these models are approved by the Board, then specific

salaries will become the decision of the appropriate au-

thorities. He reminded the Board that approval of salaries

is now a two-step procedure that requires two approval

levels.



Dr. Richardson explained that appropriate peer groups were

selected for the institutions. The executive salaries from

those peer groups were surveyed and a review of the CUPA

data was also performed. Salary model ranges were then

constructed. There has been wide spread support for this

approach. The data has been analyzed and adjusted by the

Chancellor's staff and the Council of Presidents.



Mrs. Steinberg explained that while the process was followed

for every model, each model presented challenges that were

resolved in unique ways.



The challenge presented with the Community Colleges was to

determine an appropriate peer group and to provide linkages

to faculty salaries and middle management salaries. Utiliz-

ing the CUPA data base, existing data indicated that execu-

tive salaries were influenced by size of the institution.

Institutions with larger budgets (indicating larger size

and complexity of the organization) paid higher executive

salaries. Seven different peer studies were done by the

System Office utilizing the CUPA data base; each study re-

flected various size configurations of two-year institutions

nationwide. Analysis and discussion centered around the

merits of forwarding two salary models, one for the smaller

institutions and one for the larger institutions; or in

developing one model that would work for all institutions.

The use of one model was determined to be more consistent

with faculty and middle management practices and, therefore,

provided a better internal linkage. A salary model was

built based on the peer salary group of public two-year

institutions with budgets of $13.7 million or more. This

peer group consisted of 116 institutions in the CUPA data

base and is most appropriate for TMCC and CCSN; however,

it includes within its ranges the range of salaries paid

at smaller peer institutions. It is recommended that the

model be used for all Community Colleges, but that the

smaller institutions' salaries should actually fall at the

lower levels of the model ranges and larger institutions'

salaries should fall at the higher end of the model ranges.

This compromise appears to reflect both peer salaries and

provides for internal consistency with faculty and mid-

management salaries.



Mrs. Steinberg continued to explain that the Universities

have historically used an established peer group of insti-

tutions for their faculty and administrative salaries.

This same peer group (49 principal land grant institutions)

was used in the CUPA survey of executive salaries ensuring

internal linkages with faculty and administrative salaries.

Where CUPA peer group data were scant or not available,

they were supplimented with other appropriate data. For

instance, peer data for Dean of the College of Hotel and

Administration and Dean of the College of Fine and Perform-

ing Arts were scant from the approved peer group of insti-

tutions and were supplemented by data from a phone survey

of institutions with those positions. Data were analyzed

for consistency with CUPA data. CUPA survey data were

also deemed to be inappropriate for one position, the Vice

President, Deputy to the President. CUPA data were for

a deputy position with less reported responsibility than

is reported for the UNLV position. UNLV recommended the

salary range for that position reported in the salary

model.



The Chancellor's staff was unable to find an existing salary

survey of peer institutions for DRI. Therefore, DRI was

authorized to conduct a salary survey of peer institutions

and report the results to the Chancellor's Office. DRI

surveys the following institutions: Brookhaven National

Laboratory, Environment Research Institute of Michigan,

Midwest Research Institute, National Center for Atmospheric

Research, National Renewable Energy Laboratory, Research

Triangle Institute, Scripps Institute of Oceanography, SRI

International, Syracuse Research Corporation, and Woods

Hole Oceanographic Institute. The DRI salary model was

constructed based on the median salaries resulting from

this survey. The challenge posed is a result of the unique

nature of DRI. The survey resulted in a model that may

not be seen as internally consistent with other UCCSN sal-

aries; this is, median salaries are higher than any other

salaries in the System. It was determined, however, that

the model forwarded should reflect the peer survey; and

that internal consistency could be addressed by placement

of individual salaries on the model ranges.



The executive salaries included in the Chancellor's Office

model include the salaries for both the Presidents and the

Chancellor's Office positions. The Presidential ranges re-

flect the results of various surveys described above. The

University Presidents' salary ranges were determined from

the University peer group, the Community College Presidents'

salary ranges from the Community College peer group, and

DRI from the DRI peer group. The Chancellor's Office salary

ranges were determined from a peer group of System positions

using the same peer group as the University model. In other

words, using the CUPA data base, System level positions

affiliated with the 40 principal land grant institutions

were surveyed. Where data were scant, data were supplement-

ed with System level data from CUPA data base of "doctoral"

affiliated System Offices and compared for consistency with

the data from the primary peer group.



Mr. Klaich moved approval of the Executive Salary Models.

Mrs. Gallagher seconded.



Mrs. Sparks questioned whether there were comparable posi-

tions surveyed for the Secretary of the Board and General

Counsel positions, and Mrs. Steinberg responded that there

were data on these positions, but not 49 institutions to

make a comparison. Only "Systems" were considered; data

from single institutions were not used for these compari-

sons.



Mr. Graves stated that he was concerned that a written

policy regarding the difference between the Community Col-

leges was needed before a vote could be taken. Mr. Klaich

agreed, and added that the policy should include language

to help the Board understand the impact of the job responsi-

bilities and the background factors for placement within

the proposed models.



Mr. Klaich stated that he was concerned about the process

DRI followed and the comparability of the survey group which

was selected by DRI. The survey group consists of quasi-

public and private institutions. He was also concerned that

DRI's range was higher than the University Presidents and

the Chancellor.



Dr. Richardson explained the difficulty DRI had in obtain-

ing an appropriate peer group because of the uniqueness of

DRI within UCCSN and higher education throughout the coun-

try. Once the Chancellor's staff collected the data, the

staff was confronted with the issue that the range was

greater than what UCCSN is currently paying. However, it

was decided that the data should not be modified, because

data are data. It was concluded by the staff that the

placement within that range, as with the Community Colleges,

is a matter of political judgement and management.



Mr. Graves stated that there are searches presently being

conducted and questioned whether this is the information

that is to be given to the candidates. Dr. Richardson

responded that the request is being made for the Board of

Regents to approve the establishment of the salary ranges,

not specific salaries. Specific salaries will be dis-

cussed at a future meeting. It will become the Board's

decision on where to place positions within the range in

terms of salary.



Dr. Richardson explained the process of the two-step pro-

cedure that requires two approval levels on administrative

employment and salary recommendations. He relayed a scenar-

io that if a President is hiring a position at a salary of

$150,000, the Chancellor should demand an explanation of the

salary offer, and most likely the President would be able

to provide justification and then it would be either approv-

ed or disapproved.



Mr. Graves stated that he believed that the more you pay a

person, the better quality you will receive. However, as a

public institution using taxpayers' money, he questioned

whether it was proper to operate in that fashion. He felt

that there was much disparity with the proposed ranges.



Dr. Derby stated that she did not agree with Mr. Graves'

remarks regarding the more you pay the better you get. She

stated that the DRI salary range did concern her and may

lead to a problem based entirely on what other institutions

are paying. She stated that Nevada and local factors should

be considered, including the relationship with faculty sal-

aries. She reminded the Board that teaching is the primary

mission of UCCSN. Although DRI is comparable with insti-

tutions named in the peer group, she was concerned on the

part of the public's perception. She also raised a concern

regarding the Community College salary range, in that al-

though the budget size is a strong variable, she wondered

if other factors were included, such as the geographical

complexity, etc.



President Crowley responded to Mr. Graves' comments and

stated that in relation to making a hiring decision these

ranges would be helpful, and that it is uncharacteristic

to hire at the higher end of the salary range. The market

usually governs the salary decision, and is strongly con-

sidered when the question arises if the salary is too high

or too low. If quality is the main concern, then the pay

is once again based on the market. It is not an easy de-

cision to make.



Mrs. Steinberg reminded the Board that currently there are

no guidelines on which to base salaries. The ad hoc Commit-

tee on Executive Salaries tried to address this issue. She

stated that what is being presented are only models for

salary ranges. The Chancellor's staff was directed to set

salary models for accountability, and then these models are

administered under the two-step recommendation procedure

for approval.



Mrs. Gallagher added that in adopting these ranges it will

give parameters to work within. There needs to be some

flexibility and the market place should be one of the

determining factors.



Mr. Klaich agreed in that guidelines are needed for the

System, and requested that this information be placed in

the Board of Regents' Handbook with additional language.

However, he opposed DRI's salary range. He suggested that

the range be lowered to the same range as the University

Presidents.



Mrs. Berkley stated that this is an important step for the

Regents and the Board should be able to communicate with the

Chancellor and Presidents on how they feel about the salary

ranges, market ranges and what is occurring in Nevada.



Dr. Richardson stated that bar graphs had been prepared

which included the current salaries. The handout is filed

in the Regents' Office. Dr. Richardson highlighted these

graphs, and he continued by stating that where the Board

placed DRI within the salary range is a management decision,

just as it will be when a new Chancellor is hired.



Mr. Graves stated that he would support the proposed salary

models subject to language specific to DRI and Community

Colleges which will address the concerns that have been

raised during this discussion. Dr. Hammargren agreed that

additional language is needed.



An informative discussion ensued on the current salaries and

compensation. It was explained that the bar graphs depict

what salaries are actually reported to the Internal Revenue

Service (except for several positions at UNR which were

erroneously shown as if the System were still paying their

share of their retirement).



Mr. Klaich moved to amend the motion to include approval of

the Executive Salary Models with a contingency that a writ-

ten policy be brought back to the Board at its June meeting

regarding the placement within the salary ranges when an

initial hiring is performed that will take into considera-

tion various factors. Mrs. Gallagher seconded.



Mrs. Gallagher left the meeting.



Mr. Klaich opposed. Motin carried.



Regents Graves, Hammargren and Klaich left the meeting.



25. Report of Ad Hoc CCSN Presidential Search Committee



Mrs. Carolyn M. Sparks, Chairman, made a report on the ad

hoc CCSN Presidential Search Committee.



Mr. Graves returned to the meeting.



Mrs. Sparks reported that advertisements have been placed in

"The Chronicle of Higher Education" and "Community College

Times" and will run through May. There have been numerous

applications that have been received and a number of inquir-

ies concerning the position. Although there is not a spe-

cific closing date, applicants are encouraged to have all

information into the System Office by mid June. Mrs. Sparks

stated that she has prepared a letter to the Committee mem-

bers questioning how they want to proceed and what questions

they want to ask during the interview process. The next

Committee meeting is scheduled for 1:00 P.M. Wednesday, June

22, in Room 1100 on the CCSN Cheyenne Campus to resume the

next phase of the search process. The Committee's intention

is to announce a recommendation sometime this Fall.



26. Report of Ad Hoc Chancellor Search Committee



Mr. Madison Graves, Chairman, made a report on the ad hoc

Chancellor Search Committee. Details of the Committee's

meetings can be found in the minutes and are on file in the

Regents' Office.



The Committee moved approval of the contract with Korn/

Ferry International in the amount of $30,000 plus expenses.

The Committee adopted an itinerary. The advertisement will

be placed in "The Chronicle of Higher Education" on May 23

and on July 13 the announcement of candidate finalists

will be made public. The Committee will make a recommenda-

tion to the Board at its August 25-26 Board of Regents'

meeting.



27. Report of Ad Hoc UNLV Presidential Search Committee



Dr. Jill Derby, Chairman, reported that an organizational

meeting of the ad hoc UNLV Presidential Search Committee

is scheduled for 9:30 A.M. Wednesday, May 25, 1994, at

the Fireside Lounge, Moyer Student Union, University of

Nevada, Las Vegas.



28. Approved Regents' Special Projects Funds, Searches



Approved authorization to utilize Regents' Special Projects

Funds in the amount off $25,000 for conducting the CCSN

President Search and $25,000 for conducting the UNLV Presi-

dential Search.



Interim Chancellor Richardson stated that if the two Search

Committees should choose to hire an executive search firm,

then a request will be made for additional funding. The

proposed $25,000 amount is intended to cover the basic

travel, advertising, and clerical expenses of the searches.



Mr. Graves moved approval to use Regents' Special Projects

Funds in the amount of $25,000 for conducting the CCSN Pres-

idential Search and $25,000 for conducting the UNLV Presi-

dential Search. Motion carried.



Mr. Klaich returned to the meeting.



29. Report and Recommendations of the Audit Committee



A report and recommendations of the Audit Committee meeting,

held May 10, 1994, was made by Regent Nancy Price, Chairman.

Details of the Committee's meeting can be found in the min-

utes and are on file in the Regents' Office.



Mrs. Price announced that a special Audit Committee meeting

will be scheduled for early June in Las Vegas to address the

future of UCCSN auditing to include discussion on the IRS

regulations.



Mrs. Price reported that the following action items were

approved by the Audit Committee at the May 10 meeting:



1. Intercollegiate Athletics, UNLV

2. Athletic Development, UNLV

3. Intercollegiate Athletics, UNR

4. Bursar's Office-Cashiering Function, UNLV

5. Cashier's Office, UNR



As an Information Only item, the Committee heard the follow-

up report on the Nevada Small Business Development Center,

UNR.



Mrs. Price moved approval of the report and recommendations

of the Audit Committee. Dr. Derby seconded. Motion car-

ried.



30. Report and Recommendations of the Academic, Research and

Student Affairs Committee



A report and recommendations of the Academic, Research and

Student Affairs Committee meeting, held May 19, 1994, was

made by Regent Carolyn Sparks, Acting Chairman. Details

of the Committee's meeting can be found in the minutes and

are on file in the Regents' Office.



Mrs. Sparks reported that the following action items were

approved by the Academic, Research and Student Affairs Com-

mittee:



1. Major in Postsecondary and Adult Education, UNLV -

This proposal is a request for a change within the

existing Bachelor's Degree in Education from an

emphasis in Postsecondary Education to a major in

Postsecondary and Adult Education.



2. Major in Human Resource Management, UNLV - This

proposal is a request for a change within the ex-

isting B. S. in Business Administration from a

concentration in Industrial Relations and Person-

nel to a more specialized major in Human Resource

Management.



3. Major in Real Estate, UNLV - This proposal will

upgrade the existing Real Estate concentration to

a more specialized major within the B. S. in Busi-

ness Administration Degree.



4. Elimination of Clinical Laboratory Sciences Program,

UNR - The two year Medical Laboratory Technical

(MLT) and the four year Medical Technology (MT) pro-

grams will immediately cease to accept new students.

Arrangement will be made for current students to

complete their degrees.



Under "New Business" UNR Vice President for Research Ken

Hunter explained that it is very important to have involve-

ment from the Community College faculty in supporting

scholarship and research experiences at UNR, UNLV and DRI.

Dr. John Clevenger, Director of Technical Workforce Devel-

opment, explained the concept of the EPSCoR Program which

involves Teaching and Research - Enhancement and Collabora-

tion (TREC) within the System and other agencies.



Dr. Clevenger stated that this endeavor meets a goal that

has been defined in the UCCSN Strategic Directions and will

create a "Win-Win" situation throughout higher education in

Nevada.



Mrs. Sparks moved approval of the report and recommendations

of the Academic, Research and Student Affairs Committee.

Mr. Graves seconded. Motion carried.



31. Report and Recommendations of the Status of Women Committee



A report and recommendations of the Status of Women Commit-

tee meeting, held May 19, 1994, was made by Regent Jill

Derby, Chairman. Details of the Committee's meeting can be

found in the minutes and are on file in the Regents' Office.



Dr. Derby reported that action was taken to approve the

"Report and Recommendations of the Regents' Committee on

the Status of Women" by the Status of Women Committee.



Dr. Derby moved approval of the report and recommendations

of the Status of Women Committee. Mr. Klaich seconded.

Motion carried.



Mrs. Price commented that the Status of Women Committee has

done a fine job, and Dr. Derby's work with this Committee to

make cultural changes to the System is very much appreciat-

ed.



32. Report and Recommendations of the Ad Hoc Foundation Liaison

Committee



A report and recommendations of the ad hoc Foundation Liai-

son Committee meeting, held May 19, 1994, was made by Regent

Carolyn Sparks, Acting Chairman. Details of the Committee's

meeting can be found in the minutes and are on file in the

Regents' Office.



Mrs. Sparks reported that action was taken to approve two

sections of the UCCSN and Member Institution Foundations

Administration and Accounting Guidelines which were deferred

at the February 17, 1994 Committee meeting for further re-

view. See the ad hoc Foundation Liaison Committee agenda,

filed with the permanent minutes.



Mr. Graves moved approval of the report and recommendations

of the ad hoc Foundation Liaison Committee. Mrs. Whitley

seconded. Motion carried.



The meeting adjourned at 11:20 P.M.



Mary Lou Moser

Secretary of the Board