May 18-19, 1994
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
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-
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
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
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
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
Chairman Eardley introduced Dr. Kenny Guinn, Interim Presi-
dent at UNLV.
President Gwaltney introduced newly elected ASTM President
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
President Calabro introduced newly elected USA President
Jeanine Powers, and newly elected Faculty Senate Chairman
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
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
Lyell E. Metcalf, Emeritus Associate Professor of
Boyce W. Phillips, Emeritus Associate Professor of
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.
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.
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-
University of Nevada, Reno
Brian J. Whalen
Truckee Meadows Community College
Mata-Marie (Madge) Cooney
Northern Nevada Community College
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-
Truckee Meadows Community College
Coni (Cornelia) Taylor
Northern Nevada Community College
Mr. Klaich entered the meeting.
10. Information Only: Outstanding Classified Employee
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-
Truckee Meadows Community College
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'
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
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
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-
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
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
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
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
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
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
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-
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-
15. Approved Handbook Changes, School of Medicine Tuition and
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.
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.
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
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
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-
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
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
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
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
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-
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
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
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'
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
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
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 22.214.171.124, Appeals Committee, UNLV, as
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
Health Service Fee $60
(7) Approved a Handbook change, Title 4, Chapter 17,
Section 10, Student Fees, UNLV, as follows:
For First-time students 50 NA
(effective Summer Session
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
Effective Date: May 1, 1994 through December 30,
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
Effective Date: April 1, 1994 through December
Amount : $20,000 to Cooperative Extension
Purpose : Project entitled Truckee River
C. UCCSN Board of Regents/UNR and the Department of
Human Resources/Health Division (Interlocal
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,
Amount : $1.15 per mile to Washoe County
Purpose : Lease of school buses.
E. UCCSN Board of Regents/UNR and the Department of
Human Resources/Health Division (Interlocal
Effective Date: March 1, 1994 through February
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,
Amount : $17,500 to CCSN
Purpose : Course of instruction for mental
health technicians, mental re-
tardation technicians and foren-
G. UCCSN Board of Regents/CCSN and Department of
Human Resources/Welfare Division (Interlocal
Effective Date: May 1, 1994 through June 30,
Amount : $108,900 to CCSN
Purpose : Training classes in beginning
computer applications, recep-
tionist skills and any other
training or skills class Welfare
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
Amount : $8000 increase (total now
$43,000) to WNCC
Purpose : Counseling for displaced home-
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
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-
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
20. Approved Handbook Addition, Acquisition or Sale of Real
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-
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
Stephen Lafer, Curriculum and Instruction, College of
*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
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-
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
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
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.
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
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
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-
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
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-
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
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
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
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
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
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
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'
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-
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
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,
Mrs. Price moved approval of the report and recommendations
of the Audit Committee. Dr. Derby seconded. Motion car-
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-
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
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
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.
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-
32. Report and Recommendations of the Ad Hoc Foundation Liaison
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
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