05/19/1993

UCCSN Board of Regents' Meeting Minutes
May 19-20, 1993








05-19-1993

Pages 1-60



BOARD OF REGENTS

UNIVERSITY AND COMMUNITY COLLEGE SYSTEM OF NEVADA

May 19-21, 1993



The Board of Regents met on May 19, 1993 in the Conference Room

System Administration building in Reno, and on May 20-21, 1993

in the Pine Auditorium, Jot Travis Student Union, University of

Nevada, Reno.



Members present: Mrs. Carolyn M. Sparks, Chairman

Mrs. Shelley Berkley

Dr. Jill Derby

Dr. James Eardley

Mr. Joseph M. Foley

Mrs. Dorothy S. Gallagher

Mr. Madison Graves, II

Dr. Lonnie Hammargren

Mr. Daniel Klaich

Mrs. Nancy Price

Mrs. June F. Whitley



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

Phil Boardman (UNR), Chris Gaub (Unit), Scott Hawkins (NNCC),

Dan Mc Clure (TMCC), Alan Mc Kay (DRI), Mark Melrose (WNCC),

and John Swetnam (UNLV), and Student Association Officers.



Carolyn Sparks called the meeting to order at 3:14 P.M. Wednes-

day, May 19, 1993, with all Regents present.



Chancellor Dawson announced that the Governor has requested no

additional reductions for higher education in Nevada.



1. Mac Vicar/Peterson Report



Chancellor Dawson introduced Dr. Robert Mac Vicar, President

Emeritus of Oregon State University, and Mr. Lloyd Peterson,

Senior Assistant Attorney General of the State of Washing-

ton, consultants for UCCSN to investigate the matter of

J. R. Rider, a student athlete at the University of Nevada,

Las Vegas, and allegations in a newspaper article in the

"Las Vegas Review Journal (R-J)", that Mr. Rider may not

have done his own work in a class; therefore, may have been

ineligible to play basketball. The 60-page report is ac-

companied by a 4" notebook of exhibits. Chancellor Dawson

explained that due to the provisions of the Buckley amend-

ment which prohibits certain records/information being made

public, the written report presented at the meeting contain-

ed deleted portions. The report is on file in the Regents'

Office.



Dr. Mac Vicar compared the status of student athletes in

1935 when he was a Freshman at the University of Wyoming,

and a basketball player and debater, to the student athlete

today. He related that professional sports in the 1920's

and '30's were baseball and boxing. Students were students

first, athletes second. Today, athletics are a multi-

billion dollar industry of sports entertainment, and the

major professional sports are football and basketball. A

recent "Chronicle of Higher Education" edition had front

page stories on the final outcome of the Knight Commission

and the J. R. Rider incident at UNLV.



Dr. Mac Vicar recounted the following:



March 1993 a series of articles on J. R. Rider, alleging

the student had completed a course at CCSN, the instruc-

tor did not feel the work was his own, and that a grade

had been given under pressure. It further questioned

his eligibility to play basketball.



UNLV had reacted promptly, and determined the grade had

been transferred from CCSN to UNLV in a proper manner

and that Mr. Rider was eligible to particpate in the

basketball conference playoffs.



March 14, 1993 another article appeared stating that

some assignments were in two different handwritings and

that Mr. Rider's first name had been misspelled.



UNLV investigated further. This revealed that a tutor

had recorded Mr. Rider's comments. UNLV withdrew Mr.

Rider from further competition.



UNLV requested an official investigation and contacted

Mr. Joseph Malik, Executive Director of the Northwest

Association of Schools and Colleges. The media in

Las Vegas felt he could be prejudiced because President

Maxson had served on the Association board. Mr. Malik

withdrew from the investigation.



Chancellor Dawson intervened and called for an investi-

gation. Dr. Mac Vicar and Mr. Peterson began their

investigation on March 28, 1993. They interviewed some

35 different people and recorded a summary of the inter-

views. The individuals reviewed and approved their own

summaries prior to having those summaries included in

the report.



Dr. Mc Vicar related that he had 30 years' involvement with

law in the public sector. He explained that a fact is some-

thing that can be proven; i. e., interviews, photos, expert

testimony, corroborating testimony from those without a

stake int he matter, public records and documents.



A list of the main "actors" or participants was given:



J. R. Rider, UNLV student

Kevin Campbell, UNLV student and tutor

Rossye Carroll, Dean, Nellis Center, CCSN

Dina Gaskins, work study student

Leo Murawski, work study student

Vicki Bertolino, Instructor

Jaina Preston, UNLV Athletic Department

Lori Friel, UNLV Athletic Department

Tom Pecora, UNLV Athletic Department

Rollie Massamino, Head Basketball Coach, UNLV

Dr. Paul Burns, UNLV

Ron Allen, former UNLV Athletic Academic Advisor and

friend of J. R. Rider



Invitations to submit probative information or insight were

also extended to reports for the "Las Vegas Review-Journal"

and the "Las Vegas Sun", as well as Assemblyman James W.

Mc Gaughey, who had a special interest in these matters.

No information was received from any of these sources.



Issues and Conclusions:



The preponderance concluded that Mr. Rider did complete

all, or substantially all, of the course work for Eng-

lish 102, with the assistance of Mr. Campbell in pre-

paring typewritten copies of four essays.



At least one unit assignment submitted included portions

of work done in Mr. Campbell's handwriting. Both Mr.

Campbell and Mr. Rider acknowledged this, but both in-

sisted that the embarrassing mix-up must have occurred

as a result of the method the two had devised for re-

viewing tapes and answering focus questions. Mr. Camp-

bell did provide more intense guidance to Mr. Rider in

English 102 than would be regarded as customary tutorial

assistance.



Under the policies of the Board, UNLV and CCSN (where

the course was taken), questions could be raised con-

cerning dishonesty. However, these policies contemplate

that of the instructor in the class is the front-line

enforcer of compliance with proper standards. In spite

of questions, Mrs. Bertolino entered a passing grade,

which represents a judgement by the person in charge,

and given that passing grade, insufficient basis exists

upon which to premise any charges of academic dishones-

ty. There was not sufficient evidence to conclude that

there was deliberate intent to engage in inappropriate

academic practice.



Mr. Campbell did not receive adequate orientation on

the performance of a tutor, and supervision of his per-

formance was inadequate. Mr. Campbell and Mr. Rider

became friends, and the tutor-student relationship was

affected by this friendship.



Given the circumstances surrounding the need for Mr.

Rider to successfully complete 24 applicable credit

hours by the beginning of basketball competition in

mid-November, it was deemed appropriate for him to en-

roll in English 102 at the Nellis Center to gain 3

credit hours to supplement courses taken at UNLV.



UNLV employees did contact Mr. Carroll, Director of

the Nellis program at CCSN, who indicated he did not

feel pressured. Subsequently, he contacted Mrs. Berto-

lino who apparently had not turned in grades for any

of her classes, which included the class in which Mr.

Rider was enrolled. Mr. Ron Allen, a former UNLV em-

ployee and a friend of Mr. Rider, did contact Mrs.

Bertolino and did apply pressure for a passing grade.

Upon learning of this, Coach Massamino contacted Mrs.

Bertolino to let her know Mr. Allen was no longer em-

ployed and pressure tactics were not a part of the Ad-

ministration's handling of student athletes. Mrs.

Bertolino was contacted by UNLV Athletics Department

personnel for a grade inasmuch as the deadline for the

official listing of the basketball team was due. Mrs.

Bertolino's husband was in the hospital with a heart

condition at the time of these contacts and she did

express that she felt pressured.



During the investigation, faculty members at UNLV were

repeatedly asked whether they felt inappropriate con-

duct relative to enrollment and academic progress for

student athletes. Without exception, the response was

that while representatives monitor class attendance,

no efforts to influence their evaluation of student

performance or grades occurred.



Several violations of the Federal Family Education

Rights and Privacy Act of 1974, and policies of the

University relative to confidentiality of student re-

cords were found. A "grade slip" for Mr. Rider's Fall

semester, 1991, was secured by the "R-J" and published

on March 11, 1993. The investigating team was unable to

determine how the newspaper obtained the copy. UNLV had

instigated an investigation in this matter prior to Dr.

Mac Vicar and Mr. Peterson's investigation. They recom-

mended the UNLV investigation be continued.



Both Mr. Rider and Mrs. Bertolino deny having made Mr.

Rider's graded papers available to the newspapers.

These documents were confidential under the regulations

of both the CCSN and UNLV and should not have been made

available. The team was unable to determine how or by

whom the documents were released.



Because Mr. Rider's grade, assigned by Mrs. Bertolino,

was such a widely known factor that it bordered on

"public information", it was concluded that it would

be futile to pursue how or where the "R-J" received

the information.



Mrs. Bertolino stated that the information contained

in both the "R-J" and the "Sun" was correct, and she

regretted consenting to the interviews by the writers.

It was concluded that she did confirm to the reporters

the grade of C- for the course. The team stated they

had no basis to believe that she intentionally provided

confidential information to the Press.



No basis was found to question the nature of the Health

Education 499 course, Mr. Rider's enrollment in the

course, or the award of a passing grade for the course.



Mr. Rider enrolled in 13 hours at UNLV in Summer 1992,

while 15 hours were allowed, and normal procedures were

followed in selection of courses and credits earned

which would be applicable toward the major for the B. S.

degree. Proper University channels were followed and

necessary approvals were obtained.



Enrollment in courses was proper and consistent with

UNLV policies with regard to adding and withdrawing

from courses.



Additional Comments.



1. Because of the particular circumstances surrounding this

matter, and Mr. Rider's prominence as a student athlete,

the team related this episode should be seen as an aber-

ration rather than as an example of a typical handling

of academic issues at either institution.



2. UNLV has been involved in a 3-year nation-wide study of

student-athletes which was being completed for the

President's Task Force on Student Athletes at UNLV at

the time of this episode. The investigative team urged

the Board and the University to review this report when

considering future policy issues on student athletes.



3. The team advised review of their report and that any

deletions concerning confidentiality of student records

should be made by General Counsel prior to the report

being made public. (This was done.)



4. It was recommended that UNLV should provide Mr. Campbell

the opportunity to explain his conduct.



5. The team felt UNLV has made a positive step in trans-

ferring the academic advisory function for men and women

student athletes from the Athletics Department to the

Student Development Center. They also suggested close

supervision of the tutorial program.



The report concludes: "This unhappy event should not be

allowed to obscure the fact that a very positive spirit

exists at UNLV, and at CCSN as well ... Many good things

are happening, and can be seen in the cooperative and pro-

ductive relationships of people both on Campus and off at

UNLV and at CCSN. That was obvious to the two of us,

throughout our brief, but enlightening peek into the af-

fairs of these institutions."



Dr. Hammargren questioned the team extensively, then asked

a question from Rev. Jesse Scott, NAACP, as to whether Mr.

Rider had been used as a pawn between President Maxson and

former Coach Tarkanian. Mr. Peterson replied that he

thought Mr. Rider was a pawn but would not speculate as to

whose pawn, although he felt J. R. had been "clearly used

to further their own goals".



Mrs. Whitley moved to accept the report. Mrs. Gallagher

seconded. Motion carried.



The open meeting recessed at 5:45 P.M. and reconvened at 8:20

A.M. Thursday, May 20, 1993, in the Pine Auditorium, Jot Travis

Student Union, University of Nevada, Reno, with all Regents

present.



2. Approved Consent Agenda



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

with the permanent minutes), containing the following:



(1) Approved the minutes of the regular meeting held

April 8-9, 1993 and special meetings held April 7,

1993 and April 23, 1993.



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

Ref. C-1.



(3) Approved the following Handbook change, Title 4,

Chapter 17, Section 11.6, Special Course Fees, WNCC,

for Summer Session 1993:



Class Title Lab Fee



RPED 104 Scuba $95.00

RPED 204 Advanced Scuba $95.00



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

Section 8.6, Refund Policy, WNCC, effective Fall,

1993:



a. The refund for all students, in all programs with

the exception of Summer Session, for withdrawal of

net credit load shall be:



(1) One hundred percent (100%) if initiated dur-

ing the first week of the term.



(2) Fifty percent (50%) if initiated after the

first week of instruction and before the

end of the third week of the term.



(3) No refund after the end of the third week

of the term.



(4) No refund shall be given for the application

for admission fee.



(5) Approved an easement/lease for the Las Vegas Valley

Water District - Well "K" Site, which will be located

on the West Charleston Campus. CCSN will receive

approximately $27,875 for this easement/lease.



(6) Approved the following Extended Education Advisory

Board at UNLV. The purpose of this board will be to

advise Extended Education and design and construct an

on-Campus building. The board will also assist in

securing funds needed for the building.



Susan Houston

Donna Andress

Bill Westley

John Goodman

Paul Aizley



(7) Approved an addition to the Handbook, Title 5, Chapter

6, Chapter III, Section 5.1, UNLV Bylaws as follows:



Each academic unit shall establish guidelines to

ensure that all academic faculty maintain a pre-

dictable number of office hours during the regu-

larly scheduled semesters. Office hours shall be

posted and the faculty shall be available to stu-

dents, colleagues, and others during these times.



(8) Approved a Rural Advisory Committee for the School of

Medicine, and further requests approval of its member-

ship, as contained in Ref. C-8, filed in the Regents'

Office.



Niki Bain

Peter Ford

Morris Gallagher

Carmen Goicoechea

Tom Grady

David M. Hogle

Karen Holcher

James W. Johnson

Robert Moore

Boyd Nielson

Ron Remington

Kathy Smith



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

Section 10, Student Fees, to be effective Fall Semes-

ter, 1993:



Reinstatement Fee (for students whose registration or

enrollment was canceled due to non-payment of fees):



UNR UNLV CCSN NNCC TMCC WNCC



50% 75% N/A N/A N/A *



* A reinstatement fee of $10 per $100 (or fraction

thereof) will be charged against the total amount

owed.



(10) Approved authorization to seek a budget augmentation

caused by collection of additional fees as a result

of increased enrollments. This will require approval

from the Interim Finance Committee. The amounts are:



UNR $775,000

CCSN 350,000

TMCC 250,000

WNCC 30,000

NNCC 45,000



(11) Approved the Handbook change, Title 4, Chapter 1,

Section 11, Board of Regents' Outstanding Student

Award, as contained in Ref. C-11, filed in the

Regents' office.



(12) Approved a Handbook addition, Title 4, Chapter 10,

Section 23, Environmental Health and Safety State-

ment, as contained in Ref. C-12, filed in the Regents'

Office.



(13) Approved the following interlocal agreements:



A. Board of Regents/UNR and the State Department of

Human Resources/Division of Mental Hygiene and

Mental Retardation (Interlocal Contract)



Effective Date: July 1, 1993 through June 30,

1995

Amount : $310,000 maximum to UNR

Purpose : UNR's Department of Psychology

to provide active treatment

through Social Transitions and

Employment Program (STEP) to

developmentally disabled clients.



B. Board of Regents/DRI Research Parks, Ltd. and

United States Government (Lease)



Effective Date: April 1, 1993 through September

30, 1994, to be renewed auto-

matically to extend up to March,

30, 2053

Amount : $10,334 per month to DRI Research

Parks, Ltd. for first 18 months

to reimburse DRI for its cost of

providing access and utilities

for lease premises. The remain-

der of the term shall be limited

to mutual benefits that both

parties will be derived from the

interaction between U. S. Govern-

ment's Weather Forecast Office

and DRI.

Purpose : Lease of approximately 8.895

acres of land located in Dandini

Research Park, Mount Diablo

Meridian, Washoe County.



C. Board of Regents/WNCC and the Department of Human

Resources/Health Division (Interlocal)



Effective Date: Date approved by Board, through

June 30, 1993

Amount : $2250 to WNCC

Purpose : Emergency medical personnel

training.



The Consent Agenda contained a Supplemental Agenda and the

issues are found after item 31.



Mrs. Whitley moved adoption of the Consent Agenda and ap-

proval of the prepared agenda with the authority to change

the order of items as specified throughout the meeting. Mr.

Graves seconded. Motion carried.



3. Introductions



President Remington introduced newly elected Faculty Senate

Chairman Scott Hawkins.



President Maxson introduced newly elected Faculty Senate

Chairman John Swetnam.



President Crowley introduced newly elected Faculty Senate

Chairman Phil Boardman, GSA Co-President Laurence Doyle,

and GSA President Russell West.



President Meacham introduced newly elected Faculty Senate

Chairman Alan Balboni.



Chancellor Dawson introduced Chris Gaub, Unit Faculty

Senate member.



Additional introductions were made throughout the duration

of the meeting.



4. Chairman's Report



Chairman Sparks congratulated Chancellor Mark Dawson, who

recently received an Honorary Doctorate from UNR.



Chairman Sparks congratulated President Anthony Calabro who

is celebrating his 10th year of service as President of

Western Nevada Community College.



Chairman Sparks requested a report at the next regularly

scheduled Board of Regents' meeting from Regents who recent-

ly attended the Association of Governing Boards Conference

in New Orleans.



5. Chancellor's Report



Chancellor Dawson reported that a committee has been estab-

lished to review existing policies on differential tuition.

The committee will make recommendations for elimination of

updating the policies. Mrs. Karen Steinberg, Director of

Institutional Research, will Chair the committee.



Chancellor Dawson reported on the video conference usage, as

follows:



Meeting No. Usage (Hours)



Chancellor's Office 19 42

Board of Regents 22 53

System Computing Services 85 124

UCCSN Institutions 101 216

Total 227 435



The first 3-way video meeting was recently held between

Elko, Reno and Las Vegas. Chancellor Dawson stated that

it was a great success. WNCC will be hooked up next to

the system and will have portable units in Hawthorne and

Winnemucca. Chancellor Dawson stated that with the recent

budget cuts, the video conferencing system will be utilized

more frequently by the institutions.



Vice Chancellor Richardson reported that UNR will be utiliz-

ing a classroom configuration to teach classes at NNCC be-

ginning this Fall. UNR Academic Vice President Bob Hoover

stated that Minden, Gardnerville and Elko will also utilize

the classroom video conferencing system.



Mrs. Gallagher stated that she attended the 3-way video

conference, and expressed her delight in the system. This

will now allow her to spend more time in Elko.



President Calabro introduced newly elected USA President MaryAnne

Lavelle.



6. Approved Appointment of Interim Chancellor



Approved the appointment of Dr. John Richardson as Interim

Chancellor, with an appropriate salary increase commensurate

with the position.



Mr. Foley questioned what the term "interim" meant, and

Chancellor Dawson stated that Dr. Richardson will serve be-

tween July 1, 1993 and the time the permanent Chancellor

begins serving.



Mrs. Whitley moved approval of the appointment of Dr. John

Richardson as Interim Chancellor, with an appropriate salary

increase commensurate with the position. Mrs. Berkley

seconded.



Chancellor Dawson stated that the terms and conditions of

the appointment will be negotiated with the Chairman and

Vice Chairman of the Board of Regents.



Motion carried.



The open meeting recessed at 8:40 A.M. and reconvened at 8:47

A.M. Thursday, May 20, 1993, with all Regents present except

Regents Derby, Graves and Klaich.



7. Report and Recommendations of the Research Affairs Committee



A report and recommendations of the Research Affairs Commit-

tee meeting held May 20, 1993 were made by Regent Hammar-

gren, Chairman.



Chairman Hammargren displayed the medals for the Nevada

Regents' Research Award and the Nevada Regents' Creativity

Award which have just been produced. He requested President

Joseph Crowley to accept the medal for the Nevada' Regents'

Research Award which was bestowed on Dr. David Lightner in

1992.



(1) Information Only: EPSCoR Status Report - Dr. Bill

Bishop, Chairman of the Research Affairs Council, dis-

tributed a handout that had been prepared by Nevada's

First Lady, Sandy Miller. This handout will be mailed

to each of the Presidents.



UCCSN has recently entered into another round of EPSCoR

projects. Proposals have been sent to the Department

of Energy and a panel has met to determine the final

awards. Other proposals will be sent in the future:

EPA proposal and the National Institute of Health

proposal to be submitted in the Fall. The Department

of Defense proposal requests equipment funding and it

has already been submitted.



(2) Information Only: Congressional Initiatives - Dr. Bill

Bishop explained that the Research Affairs Council has

met and has discussed initiatives. The Council will

present cooperative ventures to Nevada's congressional

delegation.



Mrs. Gallagher commended the Research Affairs Council

and wished them well in light of the current financial

conditions placed on the Federal government.



Mr. Foley moved approval of the report and recommendations

of the Research Affairs Committee. Mrs. Whitley seconded.

Motion carried.



The open meeting recessed at 8:48 A.M. and reconvened at 9:51

A.M. Thursday, May 30, 1993 with all Regents present.



8. Report and Recommendations of the Legislative Liaison

Committee



A report and recommendations of the Legislative Liaison

Committee meeting held May 20, 1993 were made by Regent

Berkley, Chairman.



(1) Information Only: Legislative Report - Vice Chancellor

Sparks provided an update on legislative activity.



Vice Chancellor Sparks reported that it has been ap-

proved by the Interim Finance Committee to spend ad-

ditional student fees in the current year's budget.

The budgets for 1994-95 have been presented to the

Assembly Ways and Means Committee and the Senate Fi-

nance Committee and both Committees have closed the

budgets. He reported that there are two minor dif-

ferences between the outcome of the two Committees

regarding UCCSN budgets:



1) The Senate Finance Committee added the University

of Nevada Press Editor position in the Southern

Office (approximately $40,000 per year).



2) The Assembly Ways and Means Committee restored the

$70,000 from special project funds to fund the

Chancellor's Office, instead of 100% funding from

the State's General Fund.



The two Committees met and have discussed the issues,

but have not come to an agreement. However, both Com-

mittees did agree to add $700,000 for unemployment com-

pensation assessment, and to submit a letter of intent

to the Interim Finance Committee regarding the weather

modification program at DRI.



Vice Chancellor Sparks indicated that UCCSN is in

relatively good shape with regards to the budget.

The Governor's recommendations have been accepted.



Vice Chancellor Sparks relayed information as to reve-

nues to support the budgets:



1) Slot Route Tax Operators - $8 million per year has

not been adopted. UCCSN is in hopes that it will

be readjusted in order to obtain additional reve-

nues.



2) Early Release of Prisoners - The closing of Honor

Camps was not approved. A compromise was issued

and it will need to raise $22 million over the

biennium.



3) Insurance Premium Tax - The collection of the

insurance premium tax is an accounting change;

however, it has not been adopted.



4) Insurance Provider Tax and Medicare - This issue

is being discussed at the Federal government level.

The Federal government will hold Nevada harmless

until the next legislative session. However, $47

million is needed to resolve this issue at the

State level.



It will need to be determined when letters should be

sent to Legislators to encourage them to provide ad-

ditional revenues for higher education and to provide

"enrollment growth adjustments", especially during the

second year of the biennium.



The UCCSN instruction formulas must be restored to full

funding in order to support the budgets for the future.

UCCSN's share of the total State General Fund needs to

be restored to 20% from 17.6%. This amounts to approx-

imately $30 million in revenues that have been lost.



Chairman Berkley indicated she had met with Senator

Matt Callister and he is in the process of submitting

a bill to achieve additional revenues. Once the bill

is introduced, UCCSN should support the bill.



Upon questioning, Vice Chancellor Sparks stated that

the Governor's proposal for group health insurance

assessment indicates no increase for the next year;

however, the second year of the biennium may increase

the assessment by 10-15%. Other proposals have been

introduced, but Vice Chancellor Sparks stated that

UCCSN should support the Governor's recommendation at

this time.



(2) Information Only: Reports - Chairman Berkley request-

ed the Presidents to report on their respective in-

stitution's legislative activity.



President Crowley indicated that UNR is developing a

letter with a clear simple focus stating that the

budgets cannot take another reduction. He questioned

whether anything else should be highlighted within

the letter, and Chairman Berkley suggested that the

letter mention "triggers" and to restore the percent-

age of the State General Fund. President Crowley sug-

gested that the General Fund issue be addressed between

legislative sessions.



President Crowley mentioned that within the Governor's

reorganization plan, it was suggested that the State

Demographer be moved from UNR's College of Business

Administration to the State's Department of Adminis-

tration. This suggestion has been denied and deleted

from the reorganization plan. In addition, the State

Climatologist's budget has been restored. This is

helpful to DRI as well as UNR.



President Maxson reported that UNLV has met with the

southern Nevada Legislators. UNLV's focus is on stu-

dent access and to restore faculty positions. A let-

ter campaign, headed by the UNLV Faculty Senate, is

underway. UNLV Faculty Senate Chairman John Swetnam

stated that the letter campaign will be difficult

since most of the faculty have left for the Summer.

Vice President Buster Neel stated that UNLV's data

base could be used to contact faculty and staff to

encourage them to write letters to the Legislators.



Mr. Fred Davis, Assistant to President at DRI, stated

that DRI's focus is on positions being restored and

that there be no additional budget reductions. DRI

has conducted facility tours for the Legislators and

a video has been developed depicting the Sage building

programs and facility.



President Remington reported that the community has

been made aware of the needs of the College. NNCC's

data base is completed and could generate 50-100

selected letters.



President Calabro reported that WNCC has already sent

a letter to the Legislators which focused on student

access. In addition, the Carson/Tahoe Hospital has

donated funding for the Nursing Program at WNCC. The

Legislators have indicated to President Calabro that

they do agree with the needs of the System, but are

faced with limited resources.



President Meacham reported that a schedule of CCSN's

circumstances has been developed. The community

people have indicated that they would like to help the

Community College's cause. In addition, CCSN has re-

quested students to submit post cards indicating which

classes they were unable to attend due to inaccessi-

bility. At this time, approximately 400 cards have

been submitted.



President Gwaltney stated TMCC intends to send 100-200

letters to the Legislators. The Business and Industry

Center and the TMCC Advisory Board are being kept in-

formed of TMCC's issues and encouraged to contact Leg-

islators with its needs.



Chairman Berkley encouraged the institutions to go

forth with the letter campaign within the next two

weeks, due to the chance that the Legislature will

quickly adjourn.



Chairman Berkley reported that she has written an

editorial, which will be distributed within the next

week. The editorial addresses the Governor's recom-

mendations.



(3) Information Only: Overview of Legislative Bills

Pertaining to UCCSN - Genral Counsel Klasic reviewed

the bills concerning UCCSN which have been introduced

in the Legislature.



(4) Information Only: Planning - Chairman Berkley suggest-

ed the following issues for future legislative action:



A. UCCSN should become more sophisticated in approach-

ing the Legislature, such as K-12's approach.



B. Continue efforts between sessions and become better

organized in the future.



C. State funds are not to be used for lobbyist ef-

forts.



Mr. Klaich moved approval of the report and recommendations

of the Legislative Liaison Committee. Mrs. Gallagher sec-

onded. Motion carried.



The open meeting recessed at 9:52 A.M. and reconvened at 12:07

P.M. Thursday, May 20, 1993, with all Regents present except

Regent Berkley.



9. Report and Recommendations of the Ad Hoc Foundation Liaison

Committee



A report and recommendation of the ad hoc Foundation Liaison

Committee meetings, held April 23 and May 20, 1993, were

made by Regent Hammargren, Chairman.



(1) Information Only: Discussion on Proposed Contract,

UNLV Foundation - Proposed contract between UNLV Foun-

dation and the Board of Regents was discussed. As per

the Regents' Foundation Liaison Committee's direction,

this contract has been referred to Mr. William T.

Hutton, an expert on tax-exempt foundations, for re-

view and consultation. Mrs. Edna Brigham, UCCSN En-

dowment Director, introduced Mr. Hutton.



Mr. Hutton reviewed the 1969 Tax Reform Act which re-

wrote the laws for charitable contributions and exempt

organizations within the 501(c)(3) law. A private

foundation is a family foundation or a corporation

scholarship foundation, the support for which comes

from a single or very limited number of sources. For

the purpose of IRS classification, a public charity is

one that is very broadly supported such as United Way

or the American Cancer Society. Because a number of

charities fell in between these two definitions, the

two Houses of Congress compromised and sorted these

charities with regard to support relationships between

a public charity and another organization. The compro-

mise reached was that a support organization could sup-

port any number of organizations and they need not be

"satellites" and escape from private foundations, which

is crucial for UCCSN foundations. The reason for that

is contribution deductibility for private foundations

is severely limited in many aspects and are discouraged

except by bequests.



The private foundations are heavily regulated by Fed-

eral law, by internal revenue code provisions which

impose exise taxes in some cases.



UCCSN foundations escape the private foundation rules

through attachments to the UCSN, through exclusive sup-

port of University policies and programs. That support

may be either functional in terms of actually support-

ing and running programs that might not be sustainable

by the University itself or may be financial, which is

the category of support that the foundations have fo-

cused upon. They furnish financial support.



UCCSN foundations also qualify under the control test.

The trustees are appointed by the members of the cor-

poration. The members of the corporation are the Board

of Regents. The Board of Regents, therefore, are in-

directly in complete control of the foundation opera-

tions. The analogy of corporate parent and subsidiary

has been suggested with the members in the place of the

corporate chair holders. Structurally, it is probably

accurate, but with a little deeper analysis it breaks

down.



The proposed contract with the University of Nevada,

Las Vegas Foundation and the Board of Regents is an

arms length agreement between the Foundation and

University setting out the rights and duties and ex-

pectations of the parties. It is appropriate. Es-

sentially, there is nothing that would discourage its

execution, and it provides a very sensible set of

operational guidelines and expectations between the

University and the Foundation. However, this is just

a contract with oneself, because the parent University

(Board of Regents) has the right to appoint the mem-

bers of the Board of Trustees of the foundation, and if

the University (Board of Regents) does not like the

policies or actions, through the governance structure,

the contract can be revised or the composition of the

Board of Trustees can be changed. The contract is no

more than a corporate parent signing an agreement with

its subsidiary which is inherently at less than arm's

length.



However, there is a big difference between the non-

profit subsidiary and the for-profit subsidiary. The

non-profit subsidiary is a voluntary collection of

individuals who are supporters. Unless there is a

major endowment involved which could indeed be managed

through the designation of trustees, the success of

the foundation and the contributions of the foundation

to the operations of the University will come through

a constant fund raising effort and the reservoir of

good will that exists because of the relationship of

the foundation and its major supporters to the Uni-

versity. This is an entirely voluntary relationship.



Although in form, the University might be seen through

the contract to have the right to govern the operations

of the foundations, in actuality it cannot deviate very

much from the expectations of the supporters without

losing support. If that should happen there would

still be the prospect of the supporters saying that

they had created an entity that was too close to the

University System. They could then decide to operate

with as little as one University appointed member on

the foundation's Board of Trustees, and although there

would be a University voice, there would not necessar-

ily be a University persuasion.



That is the ultimate dynamic in a non-profit relation-

ship. It depends upon maintenance of that reservoir

of good will.



Mr. Klaich asked whether the relationship, the "in

connection with and under the control of", would still

render it the same status? Mr. Hutton replied that it

did. The status is section 509(a)(3) organization,

which must be a 501(c)(3) charity to begin with, and

the 509(a)(3) qualification enables them to escape

being treated as private foundations.



Mr. Hutton related he had been asked to review the

contract for irregularities and he had found none,

and that it generally encompassed a pretty sensible

recitation of expectations of both sides.



General Counsel Klasic stated, for the benefit of the

Board, that all UCCSN foundations have received 509(a)

(3) status.



In answer to questions from Dr. Hammargren, Mr. Hutton

explained that the 509(a)(3) law requires only that

the connection between the foundation and the system

be established. The mission of the foundation is en-

tirely different. The mission is anything that may

enhance or advance the purposes of the supported organ-

ization. For instance, if the University did not have

a Department of "X", the foundation operated "in con-

nection with" could create such a Department and could

fund it through the University or even conduct its own

program to operate in symbiosis with the University

programs. The support may come in either the program

form or the financial form.



In answer to a question from Dr. Derby whether Mr.

Hutton, if he were a Regent with her responsibilities,

would accept or approve this proposed contract, Mr.

Hutton replied that he would ask for modifications,

and make the contract as clear as possible with regard

to expectations. Mr. Hutton was asked to make sugges-

tions for modifications.



Mrs. Gallagher asked for clarification for a founda-

tion to be private. Mr. Hutton stated that even if

UCCSN foundations were not connected to the University

in any way, they would not be private foundations.

The fundamental test of private foundation status is

the breadth of support test. The UCCSN foundations

are sufficiently broadly supported so as to operate

independently as public charities and make their

largesse available to the University and whomever else

they want to make donations and grants to.



Mrs. Price asked about the difference between 509(a)(1)

and (c)(3). Mr. Hutton replied that 509(a)(1) relates

to 8 categories of organizations. 509(c)(3) is essen-

tially a support test -- "are you affiliated with ..".

509(a)(1) is a contributions test -- "are you getting

gifts/grants/revenues from a broad spectrum of the

public or government. She then asked whether UCCSN

foundations could apply under either (1) or (3), with

Mr. Hutton replying that they could. Mrs. Price then

asked what the liability to the Regents would be. Mr.

Hutton replied that this would probably not be a major

question under either construct. The foundations are

a separate corporate entity and therefore the Regents

should not be affected. She asked whether there were

advantages to the main organization interms of their

control or policy making or access depending upon

whether they file under (1) or (3)? Mr. Hutton stated

he did not believe there were any significant differ-

ences. He added that question was largely a measure

of state or local law and, explained in terms of local

laws, it would refer to the sunshine laws, the avail-

ability records. This division is fairly recent on

this matter, but it is the governing assumption that

support organizations are private corporations even

though they exist to support governmental entities,

and, therefore, governmental secrecy sunshine laws are

not applicable.



Mrs. Price asked whether she could resign as a member

of the foundation, with Mr. Hutton replying that she

could.



Mrs. Price related that donations are given to either

the foundation or the Board of Regents. She asked

whether there was a form that could be given to pros-

pective donors, with an explanation of how the dona-

tion would be treated if given to one or the other,

so the donor could make an informed choice. She ex-

plained that there is a perception on the part of some

donors that the donation might not be going as intend-

ed. Mr. Hutton stated that was a policy question. He

added that the main value of having a foundation is to

attract contributions from persons who might be some-

what reluctant to give directly to the University be-

cause they have the perception that the donations

might be controlled or redirected by the governing

Board. Mrs. Price explained that she was concerned

that a donor could look at the performance of the two

entities to review administrative costs, etc. Mr.

Hutton stated there would be no legal barrier to

having a form for donors with which to direct where

the gift was to go -- the foundation or the Regents.



Mrs. Price related that the Regents are under the

Nevada constitution; they are an elected Board; there

are a lot of foundations in UCCSN; the Board is re-

sponsible for policy making; and these foundation

funds become out of its control. Constitutionally,

is the Board abdicating its power by having the large

number of foundations, and, if not, what is the clear

responsibility for oversight? Mr. Hutton stated the

Board does have a control responsibility, and, if it

was found the foundation was not operating to exclu-

sively benefit the System, there would be an obliga-

tion to sever the relationship because that is the

essence of the relationship. The Board has a control

on an annual basis, and, if necessary, immediately in

the case of misconduct, to appoint new members of the

Board of Trustees. But, as a practical matter, that

sort of control over what is, in essence, a voluntary

association of donors, is fairly limited. The Board's

policy making implications or authority over the oper-

ations of the foundations is inherently limited, what-

ever the structure. If the Board attempts to impose

a policy that would be unduly restrictive, the founda-

tions will dry up -- people will just stop donating to

these foundations and they will establish their own

foundations in ways that are quite simple administra-

tively and mechanically to operate. There will al-

ways be a dynamic relationship between the Regents

and these numerous "orbiting satellite" organizations.

That is inherent, it is built in.



Mrs. Price asked whether if the Board came to a posi-

tion where it needed funds, the foundation could re-

fuse to turn over the funds if they disagreed with the

Board? Mr. Hutton replied they could in theory and in

the short run. Mrs. Price then asked that in terms of

holding property, she questioned whether there was a

standard with regards of turning it over to the Uni-

versity, or sold? Mr. Hutton stated that if it was

property that was function related, i. e., a piece of

undeveloped land which could be used for expansion of

the University, it might be useful to hold it for a

long period of time. If endowment kinds of assets

are in question, then it depends upon the investment

philosophy of the foundation trustees, and hopefully

they take their cue from the Regents.



Mr. Foley expressed concern about private vs. public

foundations and liability. Mr. Hutton stated there

is confusion over the term "public charity". He ex-

plained that it has absolutely nothing to do with

"government". The "public charity" term is used to

mean an organization that is not a private foundation.

Public charities are invariably private organizations;

they are not governmental organization. They are pub-

lic in the sense that they reach out to the public and

make a broad public appeal, or in the case of the

foundation, they are public in the sense that they

attach themselves, through a support relationship to

the UCCSN, but they are not governmental entities.



Mr. Hutton related that the Nevada Ethics Commission

Report, which he had reviewed, had reached that con-

clusion, and is entirely reflective of the general

state of the law on that issue. Mr. Foley stated that

the foundations and its officers -- the trustees --

are prevented by their bylaws to operate for their

individual benefit in any way, but they are perform-

ing a public function. Mr. Foley questioned whether

the trustees might have the benefit of whatever im-

munities there may be in their performance of a public

function. Mr. Hutton replied that they would not, if

the immunities are premised upon governmental posi-

tion. Mr. Foley questioned then, whether the Board of

Regents, elected public officials, serving as members

of the foundations, are not performing a government

function? Mr. Hutton replied that the Regents, in

their capacity as Regents, are peforming a govern-

mental function. In the capacity as automatic members

of the non-profit, the Regents are wearing another hat.

Members are not directors of the foundations. Members

are once-removed; members are akin to shareholders, and

shareholders are not trustees, and shareholders do not

have fiduciary responsibility. The fiduciary responsi-

bility lodges in the directors, or what the foundations

call the Board of Trustees. Those are the people who

would be liable for not paying attention, for not know-

ing what is going on, for serious abuses of fiduciary

duty.



Mrs. Berkley stated that a contract is a desirable

thing to have, but her first reaction after reading

it was that she felt that by signing it she would be

abdicating her responsibility and control over the

foundation. Mr. Hutton replied that the Board should

not look at the contract as a permanent solution to

the inevitable tension of the dynamic that exists be-

tween the foundation and the System. The Regents can

change the members of the trustees at any time. The

signing of the contract does not undermine the re-

sponsibility of the Board even when signed.



Mr. Graves stated that the Regents should be listing

what they want in a contract with foundations. Mr.

Klaich added that Mr. Hutton would be expected to

bring back to the Committee what would be normal to

be covered in such a contract and to incorporate into

this the Board's thinking and suggestions. Mr. Graves

stated he felt this should be a model contract and

since it is an interactive process, the contract

should be uniform.



General Counsel Klasic stated he and Mr. Sully have

been working on this contract for a number of months

and suggested they work with Mr. Hutton to revise the

contract, incorporating suggestions which have been

made. Chairman Hammargren asked that those who had

concerns send suggestions, additions and deletions

on policy matters to the Chancellor's Office.



Dr. Eardley stated that he felt there was an under-

standing between Regents and Presidents that Presidents

would not accept gifts unless they were a part of the

UCCSN master planning. He also felt that the control

over what is spent rests with the Regents. Mr. Hutton

replied that it legally rests with the foundation.

The Board of Trustees of the foundation governs the use

of the foundation's assets. The only legal constraint

is that the use of those assets must be exclusively for

the benefit of the University. But the means of pro-

viding that benefit, or the time frame within which

it is provided, is within the jurisdiction of the

Board of Trustees of the foundation.



Dr. Eardley then stated that the Board policy indicates

that the foundation is to send the funds through the

Board of Regents to be spent. Mr. Hutton questioned

the premise that the Board or anybody would be able to

predict what the scope of proper foundation operations

might be for the long term; i. e., it is unpredictable

what individuals may wish to donate in the future.



The following issues were posed for consideration:



Disclosure of discretionary funds.

UNLV goals and policy should be reviewed annually

by the Board of Regents.

At what point are the funds turned over to Board

of Regents, and what is the past history on

return of foundation monies?

How are administrative costs paid? Is there a

better way? Is the administrative cost set

at 5% the best way?

Review contract in context of Board of Regent

policies. A full, complete, easily under-

stood, public disclosure of the expenditure

of all funds.

Common reporting format.

Arms-length relationship; i. e., use of University

logo.

What is the governance of the Foundation?

How much control does the President have?

How does the President function with the Board of

Trustees?



Mr. Klaich stated that he wanted to be certain that

there is no misunderstanding of his questions. He

has supported the foundations since the beginning,

he continues to support them, and he felt they were

important to the functioning of the System. The

foundations provide an enormous financial benefit

to the students. He is extremely supportive of the

work of the foundations and the manner in which the

work is accomplished.



President Gwaltney requested that policies and con-

tracts take into account the differences of the

Community College foundations from the Universities.

He reminded the Committee that these foundations are

in their infancy and for awhile may have to operate

somewhat differently than well established organiza-

tions.



President Crowley stressed that UNR does not have an

interest in the kind of contract currently under dis-

cussion. He related they were a different organiza-

tion, a different University with different needs and

a different history. Some of the assumptions under-

lying this contract are not assumptions that UNR could

support. UNR does not need a contract. He reiterated

his hope that there would be different sets of rela-

tionships with the various foundations and the Board

of Regents. Dr. Hammargren stated that they were try-

ing to form a model contract, but would not force any

foundation to use it. He added that the last thing

the Board wants to do is to inhibit the donors.



President Crowley then asked whether every foundation

must have a contractual relationship with the Board

because UNR does not feel it is necessary for them.



President Maxson stated that he did not feel the UNLV

Foundation had intended for this contract to be appli-

cable to anyone else; that it was developed simply to

define the Foundation's relationship with the Board

of Regents.



Mr. Graves expressed his desire that all foundations

have a contract with the Board. He envisioned three

basic contracts, one for the two Universities, with

slight deviations; one for the Community Colleges; and

one for DRI. Mrs. Gallagher stated she felt a single

standard contract would not work for all institutions,

but that it was critical to identify in some manner

the responsibilities of both the Board and the founda-

tions so there is no misunderstanding. She also sug-

gested that this should not be done hurriedly.



Dr. Hammargren asked General Counsel Klasic to look at

bylaws, contracts, a memo of understanding, etc., which

might be usable.



Mrs. Berkley agreed with Mr. Graves and Mrs. Gallagher.

She referred to the several bills which had been in-

troduced in this session of the State Legislature. In

testifying at the Committee hearing, there was an un-

derstanding that there would be a Board policy forth-

coming for governing its relationship with the founda-

tions.



President Crowley stated that the UNR Foundation's view

is that it is governed by Board of Regents policies and

has been from the very beginning. He suggested that

there is a difference in having policies which may need

to be revisited than in having a single contract that

applies to both Universities, since the Universities

and their foundations are different.



In response to Dr. Hammargren's question, General Coun-

sel Klasic replied that he has discussed this matter

with colleagues around the country and historically

there are two ways to approach the matter: by contract

or by policy. Oregon has a general policy set by the

Board as to what is expected of the foundation. Then,

where there are institutional differences, they do have

a contract to take care of those matters.



Mrs. Edna Brigham stated that the foundations have

brought more funds into the System than ever before.

However, the funds that are coming in are going into

the foundations and not coming into funds which the

Board can invest. Regents funds are being depleted,

which will cause the Board to function in a very dif-

ferent way should this continue.



Mr. Les Sully commented that the UNLV Foundation could

easily work within the confines of all that had been

discussed at this meeting. He felt that Mr. Graves'

concerns are answered within the working of the con-

tract. He related that the UNLV Foundation is commit-

ted to and works cooperatively as a support organiza-

tion with UNLV, and with the Board of Regents. The

UNLV Foundation does exist as one of those entities

that is controlled indirectly by the Board of Regents.

Mrs. Gallagher stated she has never questioned the

foundation's cooperation with the Board. However, she

again stated she did not feel it was possible to de-

velop a single contract for everyone.



Mr. Sully explained that there are a number of founda-

tions at UNLV. The uniformity he is looking for would

apply to those as well, not necessarily other institu-

tion foundations.



Mr. Foley asked how to be certain the line of authority

is maintained so that the President is in charge of the

Campus, and the foundation, an instrument of the insti-

tution, is not in charge. Mr. Sully stated that they

have a very good developmental history that supports

this; that all the foundations recognize the role they

must play. The Board does have the control of appoint-

ing the trustees; therefore, has the ability to change

them if something does go awry.



Mrs. Price stated she feels there is a constitutional

question with regard to the role for elected officials

in policy making and that these foundations actually

become, or can become, or are, adversarial. She added

that there must be some form of standard regarding the

role inasmuch as there are 27 different foundations

within UCCSN.



President Maxson stated that the UNLV Foundation an-

nually asks the President for a list of priorities for

fund raising. Vice President Unrue solicits priorities

from the Deans each year which are used as the basis of

the request. The number one priority each year is

scholarships.



(2) Information Only: Report on Foundation Report Format -

Chancellor Dawson requested Mr. Gordon Gochnour, CCSN

Foundation, to make the presentation. Mr. Gochnour

reported that internal auditors, Sandi Cardinal and

John Love, prepared a list of the essential material

that is to be reported.



(3) New Business - UNLV Faculty Senate Chairman John

Swetnam expressed his concern with the Board of Re-

gents' denying a gift just because it is not included

in the approved master plans. This may create a

chilling effect if donors' requests are not accepted.

The Board should allow for a window of opportunity

and he urged the Board to allow the foundations some

flexibility in accepting gifts.



Mrs. Price moved approval of the report and recommendations

of the ad hoc Foundation Liaison Committee. Mr. Graves

seconded. Motion carried.



The open meeting recessed at 12:08 P.M. and reconvened at 1:15

P.M. Thursday, May 20, 1993, with all Regents present.



President Crowley introduced Chris Crease, newly appointed As-

sistant Basketball Coach, and Matt Williams, UNR Outreach and

Retention Coordinator.



President Gwaltney introduced newly elected Faculty Senate

Chairman Dan Mc Clure.



President Taranik introduced newly elected Faculty Senate Chair-

man Alan Mc Kay.



Chancellor Dawson introduced Dr. Warren Fox, former UCCSN Vice

Chancellor for Academic Affairs.



The open meeting recessed at 1:20 P.M. and reconvened at 1:25

P.M. Thursday, May 20, 1993, with all Regents present except

Regent Price.



10. Approved Lease, Thomas and Mack Center, UNLV



Approved a lease agreement between the Thomas and Mack

Center and Las Vegas Hockey Club. The term of the lease

will be six years. President Maxson stated that the Las

Vegas Hockey Club schedule will not conflict with UNLV

basketball or the National Rodeo Finals.



Mrs. Whitley moved approval of the lease agreement between

the UNLV Thomas and Mack Center and Las Vegas Hockey Club.

Mrs. Gallagher seconded.



President Maxson reported that the Las Vegas Hockey Club

will be an independent team during the first hockey season.

The Club will have an opportunity to either become affili-

ated with the National Hockey League or not. Chairman

Sparks attended a luncheon with Regents Berkley and Hammar-

gren, and it was announced that the team name would be "Las

Vegas Thunder". Dr. Hammargren stated that independent

teams are usually better than the farm teams. This is a

good opportunity for Las Vegas.



Upon questioning, President Maxson stated that 300 season

tickets have already been sold before any advertising cam-

paign has taken place.



Mr. Pat Christenson, Director of Thomas and Mack, explained

that 41 games plus possible playoff games will be scheduled.

A portable ice system will be installed so that other events

will not be affected. Revenue will be derived from parking,

mechandise, rent and food concessions. It will cost approx-

imately $4500 per game. The estimated power utility will

cost approximately $125,000. He stated that the net result

of the contract will be $1.4 million per year.



Mr. Graves commended Mr. Christenson for bringing this event

to Las Vegas and negotiating the contract. Mr. Graves ex-

pressed that he felt this event will be a tremendous asset

to the Las Vegas community.



General Counsel Klasic recommended approval upon review of

legal documents and stated that it was not necessary to

bring the contract to the full Board because it was a typi-

cal contract; however, the item needed to be considered by

the Board due to the fact that it involved leasing of a

State building.



Motion carried.



11. Accepted Gift, Thomas and Mack Center, UNLV



Accepted a gift donated to the UNLV Thomas and Mack Center

as described below, and approved authorization to seek State

Public Works Board approval for the project.



Henry E. Stickney has announced his intention to make a

gift to UNLV for permanent improvements to be made to the

Thomas and Mack Center at UNLV to accommodate an ice arena

suitable for competitive ice activities including ice hockey

and figure skating. The project will be done as a design/

build team project and the amount of the gift will be based

on final guaranteed price negotiations with the contractor.

The estimated amount of the gift is between $1 and $2 mil-

lion dollars (dependent upon negotiations noted above).

The permanent modification to the Thomas and Mack Center

will be made at no cost to the University.



General Counsel Klasic recommended approval upon review of

legal documents.



Mrs. Gallagher moved to accept the gift from Mr. Henry E.

Stickney to UNLV Thomas and Mack Center and approved au-

thorization to seek State Public Works Board approval for

the project. Dr. Eardley seconded. Motion carried.



12. Accepted Gift, Thomas and Mack Center, UNLV



Accepted a gift from Marilyn and Si Redd of approximately

$2.025 million dollars towards a new athletic complex at

UNLV and to make various permanent improvements to the

UNLV Thomas and Mack Center.



Mrs. Gallagher moved to accept the gift from Marilyn and Si

Redd for a new athletic complex at UNLV and to make improve-

ments to the UNLV Thomas and Mack Center. Mrs. Whitley

seconded.



President Maxson explained that this concept was first dis-

cussed when Regent Chris Karamanos served on the Board of

Regents. The athletic complex will house offices, weight

room, study halls, etc. The gift will be placed into a

fund until funds are raised for a new building.



Dr. Eardley questioned if this gift was accepted by the

UNLV Foundation, and President Maxson answered in the af-

firmative.



Mr. Klaich requested a breakdown of the gift, and Mr. Pat

Christenson, Director of Thomas and Mack, stated that $1.5

million is for the sports medicine complex; $250,000 is for

renovations; and $175,000 is for improvements to the Si

Redd Room and the creation of a Hall of Fame.



Motion carried.



13. Information Only: Report from the External Auditors



Acting Internal Audit Director John Love introduced Mr.

Dennis Gauger from Deloitte & Touche who presented a report

on the external audit relationship with UCCSN, and Mr. Bob

Shapperly from Deloitte & Touche in Philadelphia who pre-

sented a report on higher education services.



Mr. Gauger reported that the role of the Regents' Audit

Committee is a key component that oversees controls through-

out the System and oversees the external audit operations.

The external auditors meet with the Audit Committee several

times throughout the year.



Mrs. Price entered the meeting; Dr. Hammargren and Dr. Derby left

the meeting.



Mr. Gauger stated that Deloitte & Touche are proud of its

history with UCCSN and the continuity of the staff and in-

ternal auditors. The external auditor staff works exten-

sively with the internal auditor staff and it is a good

working relation.



Mr. Shapperly stated that UCCSN is a very important client

to Deloitte & Touche. Deloitte & Touche has 250 clients

throughout the United States, with 1/3 being public insti-

tutions and 2/3 being private institutions. He discussed

several support networks and programs that Deloitte & Touche

help the System to comply with, such as the Client Service

Standard Program and the Financial Reporting Standards,

which are in the process of being revised at the Federal

level.



Mr. Klaich questioned when a gift should be reported when

it is actually a pledge, and Mr. Shapperly responded that

a new policy on the reporting aspect of gifts will be ef-

fective in 1996. Mr. Klaich requested that the UCCSN

policies on gift giving be reviewed by the external auditors

so that UCCSN will be in compliance with the Federal regula-

tions.



Mr. Shapperly continued his report and discussed the Inter-

nal Revenue Service Compliance Audit. He indicated that

policies and procedures are important for each of the in-

stitutions.



Mrs. Whitley left the meeting.



Mr. Shapperly reported that Deloitte & Touche are familiar

with the regulations found in the Higher Education Reauthor-

ization Act which deals with annual reporting on athletic

programs to the Department of Education. President Crowley

stated that as President of the NCAA, it was his under-

standing that there were modest differences between the

Federal reporting and the NCAA reporting of the graduation

rate. The Department of Education is unwilling to accept

NCAA's reporting approach.



Dr. Derby returned to the meeting.



Chairman Sparks commended the external auditors and the

internal auditors. She stated that auditors have become

a respected resource to UCCSN. Mrs. Gallagher, Chairman

of the Audit Committee, stated that she has enjoyed working

with both entities and commended them for the fine work

they have performed.



Mr. Shapperly stated that UCCSN's staff are dedicated to the

System and it has been a pleasure working with them.



14. Discussion on Multi-Year Professional Contracts



Chancellor Dawson requested consideration of reports pre-

pared by the Faculty Senates on revolving multi-year con-

tracts. The Board requested additional information. The

institutions discussed the issue with the Board. See

Ref. D, filed in the Regents' Office.



Dr. Hammargren returned to the meeting.



A joint recommendation of UCCSN Faculty Senate Chairs was

distributed to the Board and is filed in the Regents' Of-

fice.



Several people spoke to the issue:



Phil Boardman, UNR Faculty Senate Chairman

Don Klasic, UCCSN General Counsel

John Richardson, Vice Chancellor for Academic Affairs

Bourne Morris, UNR Professor of Journalism

Cynthia Birk, UNR Lecturer of Accounting/Computer

Information Systems

Helen Jones, UNR Director of the Women's Center



After a lengthy discussion, it was determined by the Board

to refer the issue to the Academic Affairs Commitee for

resolution.



Regents Foley, Gallagher and Sparks were not in attendance during

portions of the discussion.



Mr. Klaich moved approval to refer this issue regarding

Multi-Year Professional Contracts to the Academic Affairs

Committee, including the joint resolution submitted by the

UCCSN Faculty Senate Chairmen. Mrs. Gallagher seconded.

Motion carried.



The open meeting recessed at 3:55 P.M. and reconvened at 4:33

P.M. Thursday, May 20, 1993, with all Regents present except

Regents Foley, Gallagher and Graves.



15. Report and Recommendations of the Status of Women Committee



A report and recommendations of the Status of Women Commit-

tee meeting, held May 20, 1993, were made by Regent Jill

Derby, Chairman.



(1) Information Only: Student Survey Results - In response

to the recommendation of the Committee's Interim Report

which directed the Campuses to focus on the issues con-

cerning women students, a student survey of efforts and

preliminary results were presented by Jill Winter, UNR

Center for Applied Research, and are filed in the Re-

gents' Office. A comprehensive report will be present-

ed in the future.



(2) Information Only: ACCT Conference - Chairman Derby

discussed recent developments regarding a session

proposal submitted to ACCT (Association of Community

College Trustees). The session would present the

Committee's efforts to address status of women issues

within the UCCSN. Chairman Derby was pleased to an-

nounce that ACCT has accepted UCCSN's proposed session

for its next meeting, to be held September 30 through

October 2 in Toronto, Canada. Chairman Derby and the

following people will be present at the session: Ron

Remington, Daniel Klaich, Jackie Kirkland and Tamela

Gorden.



Mrs. Price congratulated Chairman Derby and the Com-

mittee in submitting UCCSN's efforts on women's issues

to ACCT and having it accepted for presentation at the

ACCT seminar. Chairman Derby expressed her apprecia-

tion of the Campus advisory committees which have done

excellent work in this area.



Mr. Klaich moved approval of the report and recommendations

of the Status of Women Committee. Dr. Hammargren seconded.

Motion carried.



The open meeting recessed at 4:34 P.M. and reconvened at 5:52

P.M. Thursday, May 20, 1993, with all Regents present except

Regents Eardley and Foley.



16. Report and Recommendations of the Academic Affairs Committee



A report and recommendations of the Academic Affairs Commit-

tee meetings, held April 8 and May 20, 1993, were made by

Regent Jill Derby, Chairman.



April 8, 1993



(1) It has been requested to rescind the moratorium on

new program proposals from institutions.



Mrs. Carolyn Sparks, Chairman of the Board, explained

that several Campuses requested that the moratorium be

reconsidered. She recently received a letter regard-

ing the Lied Institute for Real Estate Studies which

lost a program to the University of Southern Cali-

fornia due to the moratorium placed on new program

proposals.



Vice Chancellor John Richardson stated that he felt

the moratorium should remain in effect. He gave the

following reasons:



1) Institutions have always been able to bring for-

ward new program proposals under special circum-

stances that include an explanation that funding

could be proven; and



2) By lifting the moratorium, the planning process

would be undermined.



Vice Chancellor Richardson stated that he has never

seen any correspondence on this matter, and felt this

was an example of going directly to the Board with-

out review by the Chancellor's staff.



UNR Vice President for Academic Affairs Robert Hoover

questioned the Committee's "special circumstances" in

bringing forward new program proposals and reminded

the Committee that UNR brought forward a proposal for

Speech Pathology and Audiology, which was denied until

further notice.



Several comments were made by Faculty Senate Chairmen

against the moratorium. They requested that the Com-

mittee consider different language, inasmuch as the

faculty perceive the present language as absolutely

no new programs can even be considered at this time.

Vice Chancellor Richardson indicated that the Aca-

demic Affairs Council will be discussing the Academic

Master Plans and the programs that have been brought

before the Counsel, and will report back at the next

meeting.



Mr. Graves expressed his dissatisfaction that the Lied

Institute for Real Estate Studies proposal was never

forwarded to the Chancellor's Office for review. UNLV

Vice President for Academic Affairs John Unrue stated

that his office was unaware of the correspondence re-

layed to Chairman Sparks regarding the Lied Institute.

He explained that this proposal did not receive high

priority when compared to other vital programs at

UNLV. Chairman Sparks clarified that this issue was

brought to her attention by a member of the Lied

Institute, not a UNLV faculty member, and was not

meant to go around the Chancellor's staff without

review prior to the Committee's review.



Mr. Klaich stated that he was pleased that the mora-

torium statement reached the faculty members at the

institutions. He recalled that budget reductions were

placed upon the System, and an increase in student

fees and tuition was going into effect. The mora-

torium halted two costly programs that were presented

at that time, one being the Speech Pathology and

Audiology program at UNR. It was not "business as

usual" and it was very chilling, but had to be done.



May 20, 1993



(1) In accordance with the UCCSN's academic master plan-

ning schedule, the Board of Regents received and re-

viewed the academic master plans of the 4 Colleges

and 2 Universities and DRI at a Board workshop held

in Minden on February 3-4, 1993. Based on discussion

at that meeting, it was determined that 4 of the plans

-- Community College of Southern Nevada, Northern

Nevada Community College, Western Nevada Community

College, and the Desert Research Institute -- were

ready for acceptance following minor modifications.

It was further determined that 3 of the plans -- Uni-

versity of Nevada, Las Vegas, University of Nevada,

Reno, and Truckee Meadows Community College -- needed

more substantial modification and/or discussion be-

fore the Board was prepared to accept them.



In the interim since the Board workshop, the 4 insti-

tutions accomplished the necessary minor modifica-

tions to their plans, presented them to the Office

of Academic Affairs, and the plans were approved by

that office for submission to the Board for final

approval. The remaining 3 institutions also modified

their plans in accordance with Board discussion and

staff comment at the workshop. Informal meetings

between institutional representatives, Board members,

and Board staff were held to review and discuss the

proposed changes to each of the 3 institutions' aca-

demic master plans. It appears the 3 institutions

have satisfied the earlier expressed concerns regard-

ing their respective plan. Therefore, all 7 plans

are presented to the Board for approval.



In considering the approval of the academic master

plans it is important to note that all of the plans

will continue to evolve and therefore change. It is

further worth noting in this regard that in keeping

with the schedule adopted for academic master plan-

ning, the Colleges and Universities and DRI will

again present their plans, no doubt with further

modification, elaboration, and detail at the January

1994 meeting of the Board of Regents.



The following academic master plans are filed in the

Regents' Office:



Community College of Southern Nevada

Northern Nevada Community College

Truckee Meadows Community College

Western Nevada Community College

University of Nevada, Las Vegas

University of Nevada, Reno

Desert Research Institute



Mr. Klaich stated that this new interactive process

was refreshing, in that everyone pulled together to

produce the academic master plans that are before the

Board for consideration. He greatly appreciated the

discussions that led up to the finalization of these

documents.



Mrs. Gallagher stated that she, too, was pleased with

the academic master plans and the process.



(2) The Board of Regents earlier enacted a moratorium on

the approval of new academic programs until it had

approved academic master plans for each institution.

The Board rescinded the moratorium in respect to the

institutions whose academic master plans have been

approved.



Mr. Klaich stated that the circumstances that led to

implementing the moratorium are still in existence

and encouraged the institutions to be cautious in

what new programs they bring forward for considera-

tion.



(3) At the April meeting of the Board of Regents, the

Academic Affairs Committee reaffirmed a moratorium

on the consideration of new program proposals pending

approval of Campus academic master plans. Since the

moratorium has been rescinded, the Board approved the

following proposals:



A. M. S. Department of Geography, UNR - The Committee

recommended approval and that the item be forward-

ed to the Board of Regents for consideration of

the M. S. in the Department of Geography at UNR,

as contained in Ref. AA-3A, filed in the Regents'

Office.



This program will focus on the management of

natural and human resources, with an emphasis on

Nevada and the Great Basin.



Graduates will be prepared to work in a variety

of areas, including business, government and edu-

cation. Interest in pursuing graduate training

in Geography has been expressed by a large number

of Nevada teachers, as well as former undergradu-

ate majors and others. The masters program will

build upon a strong undergraduate program.



No new funds are requested to implement this pro-

gram, as the degree is designed to operate with

existing personnel, equipment and library resourc-

es.



Dr. Gary Hausladen, Associate Professor of Geog-

raphy, stated that the Geography Department will

undergo a reorganization to implement this pro-

gram.



B. Ph. D. Speech Pathology and Audiology, UNR - The

Committee recommended approval and that the item

be forwarded to the Board of Regents for consider-

ation of the Ph. D. in Speech Pathology and Audi-

ology at UNR, as contained in Ref. AA-3B, filed

in the Regents' Office.



This program, to be offered through the School of

Medicine, will build upon existing undergraduate

and master's degrees.



An increasing demand for doctoral level graduates

in a variety of settings is expected to continue

over the next several decades. There is a need

for Ph. D. level professionals in Nevada's hos-

pitals, clinics and schools. Doctoral students

will also act as clinical supervisors for masters

level students, which will in turn allow for an

increase in the number of masters graduates. This

will respond to a need to fill a large number of

vacancies in Nevada's school districts. Because

of the length of time required to complete the

program, there is an urgency to begin implementa-

tion at this time. It is anticipated that 18 stu-

dents will be enrolled by the 4th year. The pro-

gram will be housed in the new building for Speech

Pathology & Audiology and Student Health at UNR.



The program will initially require only one gradu-

ate student stipend in the amount of $10,000. In

the second year of the program, an additional

faculty position will be requested, pending avail-

able funds.



Mr. Klaich questioned the financial impact in the

2nd year of the program when an additional facul-

ty position will be requested, and Vice President

of Academic Affairs Robert Hoover responded that

the funds will be reallocated from other sources

to provide for this position.



(4) Approved the reorganization of the College of Agri-

culture, as contained in Ref. AA-4, filed in the

Regents' Office.



The organizational structure of the College will be

consolidated with the number of units reduced from 7

to the following 4:



Department of Environmental & Resource Sciences

School of Veterinary Medicine

Department of Agriculture Economics

Department of Biochemistry



The community based Cooperative Extension program

will become a University-wide organization which

will report to the Academic Vice President.



A comprehensive study was undertaken to determine how

the College might best meet the needs of the State

and provide a contemporary education for students.

The proposed changes are designed to accomplish these

goals. No financial impact is anticipated.



Mr. Klaich questioned if a Doctor of Veterinary Medi-

cine would be established in the future, and Vice

President of Academic Affairs Robert Hoover responded

that a gift was bestowed 15 years ago to establish a

Veterinary Medicine Program, but the gift was not

substantial enough to establish a doctorate program.



In response to a question regarding the Dean's role,

Dr. Hoover explained that the Cooperative Extension

Program would now become Campus-wide; however, the

Dean would continue to oversee the program and report

to the Vice President of Academic Affairs.



(5) Approved a change in title of the Information Systems

Division to Computer and Office Technology at TMCC,

as contained in Ref. AA-5, filed in the Regents'

Office.



The proposed change is more inclusive of the 3 course

prefixes currently offered in the Division: Computer

Information Systems, Office Administration and Word

Processing.



(6) Approved a change in title of the AAS degree in Office

Administration to the AAS in Computer and Office Tech-

nology at TMCC, as contained in Ref. AA-6, filed in

the Regents' Office.



The proposed change in title is in keeping with the

change of the name of the Information Systems Division

to Computer and Office Technology. The change will

have no financial impact.



(7) Approved a change in title for the Graphic Arts Pro-

gram to Graphic Communications at TMCC, as contained

in Ref. AA-7, filed in the Regents' Office.



The new title will reflect the breadth of coverage of

this program which indicates graphic design, computer

graphics and printing. No additional resources or

funding are required.



(8) Approved plans to revise the registration and credit

system for the School of Medicine, as contained in

Ref. AA-8, filed in the Regents' Office.



Under this revision, students will be registered an-

nually for all courses to be taken during the next

academic year. Although the student's transcript

will indicate the courses completed, course credits

and grade point averages will no longer be used.

Grades will continue to be awarded and submitted an-

nually to the UNR Registrar, and student promotion

will be recommended on an annual basis.



The curriculum for the first 3 years of Medical

School is offered as a continuous block, with all

students enrolling in the same courses, and the 4th

year involves clinical rotations. As the course of-

ferings are year-round, they do not coincide with the

traditional semester or Summr School schedules. These

changes, which will apply only to students enrolled

in the M. D. Program, will more accurately reflect the

Medical School registration process and curriculum.

The revisions will not impact course or program re-

quirements, and will have no financial impact.



(9) Board of Regents' policy states that grading systems

for University parallel courses in the Community

Colleges should be comparable to the grading systems

used by the Universities. Currently, however, two

UCCSN Campuses use the "plus" and "minus" in calcu-

lating grade point averages, and several Campuses

differ in the use of the "withdrawal" and "failure"

grades. A proposal to bring all Campuses into com-

pliance with Board policy is contained in Ref. AA-9,

filed in the Regents' Office.



Vice Chancellor John Richardson gave a brief history

of the UCCSN Grading Policy. In September 1992 Regent

Jim Eardley received a letter from ASTM President

Charlie Covington, and requested that this issue be

discussed by the Academic Affairs Council. Since Dr.

Eardley's request, the Academic Affairs Council has

met with Faculty Senate Chairmen and Academic Vice

Presidents, and the proposal was presented to the

Council of Presidents in December. After extensive

discussions, compromises were made to the proposed

policy language that is before the Committee for its

consideration.



USA President Debi Green requested that the Committee

make the policy uniform throughout UCCSN. She related

a personal experience in which she lost a scholarship

due to the grading differences between the institu-

tions. She also noted that students were never con-

tacted during the discussion period on this issue and

requested that the item be withheld until the Fall so

that students could be involved.



Vice Chancellor Richardson cautioned the Committee

that if they chose to delay this issue until Fall,

the policy could be implemented during Spring 1994,

but felt it was not good management to change the

grading policy in the middle of the academic year and

suggested that it be implemented Fall 1994.



Vice Chancellor Richardson expressed the view that the

faculty have the primary responsibility of determining

grading procedures, but that it was appropriate to in-

clude the students in the discussions. Dr. Derby ex-

pressed her concern that students were not sufficient-

ly involved in earlier discussions.



Upon questioning, Vice Chancellor Richardson explained

that footnotes 1 and 2 of the proposed policy were

compromises and that it was the prerogative of the

faculty on how grades would be determined.



WNCC Vice President Bill Davies expressed his concerns

that all students throughout the System should be

treated the same. If the proposed policy is accepted

it would be an injustice to the students and would

only compound the problem. He stated that he does

not support the "F" grade at the Community Colleges.



President Maxson stated that if uniformity is needed,

then the proposed policy should be accepted; however,

he felt that each Campus should determine its own

grading policy. Over the years, UNLV has not re-

ceived any complaints regarding the current grading

policy.



UNLV Faculty Senate Chairman John Swetnam stated that,

as a faculty member, he has calculated grades by using

the "plus/minus" system and by using the straight

grading system and determined that there is no effect

either way to the student. He prefers using the

"plus/minus" system and has not received any com-

plaints from the students.



UNR GSA President Russell West agreed that it is the

right of the faculty to determine the grades, but

after the grades are determined the grades then "be-

long" to the student and will be placed on the trans-

cripts forever. He felt that students should be in-

volved in the decision process. He felt that each

institution should have its own grading policy.



ASUN President Jim Grogan stated that he was opposed

to the proposed policy. ASUN has surveyed students

and 95% opposed the changes. He reminded the Com-

mittee that financial costs may be incurred if a

change is made. He stated that the ASUN Student

Government has issued a resolution opposing the

"plus/minus" grading policy.



(10) Approved an amendment to the Board of Regents' Hand-

book, Title 4, Chapter 16, Section III.1, General

Admission Policy, as follows:



High School Course Requirements



The following high school course admission require-

ments will apply for Freshman admission to UNR and

UNLV for students who graduate from high school in

Spring 1989 or thereafter, in addition to the spe-

cific admission requirements for those institutions

which appear elsewhere in this chapter:



This change would address admission requirements for

older students who graduated from high school prior

to Spring 1989, but have not completed the high

school core courses requirement which became effec-

tive Fall 1989.



When the Board of Regents established the high school

core course requirements in 1984, members were cog-

nizant of the need to allow students to prepare for

the new requirements and thus instituted a 5-year

phase in policy. This action seems to indicate that

it was not the Board's intent to have a retroactive

policy. The proposed change in wording will accom-

modate students whose high school courses were com-

pleted in accordance with early admission require-

ments.



Mr. Klaich moved approval of the report and recommendations

of the Academic Affairs Committee with the exception of

item (9) from the May 20, 1993 meeting, and referred the

item to the Academic Affairs Council. Dr. Derby seconded.

Motion carried.



Addition discussion was held later in the meeting and is

found after item 29.



17. Information Only: Regents' Bylaw Amendment, Officers of

the Board



Regent Graves had requested an amendment to the Board of

Regents' Bylaws, Article IV, Section 2, Officers of the

Board as follows:



Section 2. The Chairman and Vice Chairman shall be

elected from among the membership of the Board at the

organizational meeting of the Board held during the

Board's last meeting of the fiscal year, a one-year

term, to commence on the following July 1. The Chair-

man or Vice Chairman may serve only two successive

terms in the respective office, but may be re-elected

to such office after an intervening term. In the

event of a vacany in the office, the Board shall fill

the vacancy for the remainder of the term by election

at the next regularly scheduled meeting of the Board.

No person serving more than 3 successive years as

Chairman or Vice Chairman shall be elected to succes-

sive terms in those respective offices.



In accordance with Bylaws Article VIII, Amendments, this

shall serve as notice for action to be taken at the June

1993 meeting.



Mrs. Whitley left the meeting.



18. Professional Search Committee Consultants



The Board considered proposals from outside CEO search con-

sultant firms and discussed whether to hire such a firm to

conduct the search for the Chancellor position.



Mrs. Gallagher moved approval to hire professional search

committee consultants for the Chancellor's position. Mr.

Graves seconded.



Dr. Derby opposed the motion. She felt that the selection

of the Chancellor is a very important process and that it

should be the Board's process. She also felt that in light

of the System's current financial situation, hiring an out-

side consultant would not be prudent at this time.



Mrs. Gallagher reminded the Board that it has conducted ex-

cellent searches in the past, with Secretary Mary Lou Moser

providing staff expertise to the search process. Mrs.

Gallagher felt that each member of the Board needs to sup-

port the search process. She suggested that the Board

identify what they would expect from the next Chancellor.



Upon questioning, Chairman Sparks indicated that to hire

an outside consultant would cost the System approximately

$29,000 plus $5,000 in expenses from one firm, 33% of the

Chancellor's first year compensation from another firm, and

$30,000 plus expenses or $1,800 per day. The funding would

be allocated from the Regents' Special Project Fund.



Mrs. Berkley stated that she agreed with both Regents

Gallagher and Derby. She felt that the Board should deter-

mine parameters for the position of Chancellor. She stated

that she is confident in having Secretary Moser staff the

search committee. She opposed the motion in hiring a

professional outside consultant.



Mrs. Price asked her fellow Regents if money were not an is-

sue would they be so inclined to hire an outside consultant.

Mrs. Berkley stated that she was very comfortable with the

staff aiding the internal search committee. Dr. Derby stat-

ed that money is an issue, but strongly felt that the Board

members should be involved in the process.



Chairman Sparks stated that she disagreed for the same

reasons as mentioned. Hiring the next Chancellor is a very

critical issue. She reminded the Board that funding has

been made available for other consultants on different is-

sues, such as collective bargaining, sexual harassment, etc.

She felt that the Chancellor is the Chief Executive Officer

of a large business conglomerate. UCCSN needs a strong

person who will represent the interests of the Board of

Regents. The staff is already overloaded and the Board of

Regents owes it to itself to make the best selection in

its next Chancellor.



Mrs. Gallagher stated that there is time to hire a new

Chancellor. Vice Chancellor Richardson has agreed to

serve as Interim Chancellor until a permanent Chancellor

is selected. There is no real urgency in hiring a profes-

sional consultant at this time.



Mr. Graves requested that at the next regular scheduled

meeting a discussion be held on the Chancellor's job des-

cription and to leave the issue of hiring a professional

consultant open.



Mr. Klaich noted for the record that he would not be par-

ticipating in the discussion nor the vote. Mrs. Price

also abstained from the vote.



Motion failed. 5 Regents voted against hiring professional

search committee consultants for the Chancellor's position,

and 1 Regent voted for the motion. Regents Klaich and Price

abstained.



19. Approved Emeritus Appointment



A. University of Nevada, Las Vegas - President Maxson rec-

ommended the following, effective June 30, 1993, upon

retirement:



Dr. John Nixon, Emeritus Professor of Management Infor-

mation Systems



Mr. Klaich moved approval of the emeritus appointment at

UNLV. Mrs. Gallagher seconded. Motion carried.



20. Approved Tenure on Hire, UNLV



Approved to hire with tenure the following person effective

August 23, 1993:



Dr. Robert Bosselman, Associate Professor of Food and

Beverage Management



President Maxson withdrew the name of Dr. Robert Molzon,

Professor of Mathematical Sciences.



Mr. Klaich moved approval to hire with tenure, Dr. Robert

Bosselman, effective August 23, 1993. Mrs. Berkley second-

ed. Motion carried.



21. Approved Recommendations for Promotion or Assignment to Rank



The following recommendations for promotion or assignment to

rank have been forwarded for Board consideration:



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

mended the following promotions, effective July 1, 1993:



Yunas Cengel to Associate III, Engineering

*Indira Chatterjee to Associate III, Engineering

Peter Sebaaly to Associate III, Engineering



*Recommended for both promotion and tenure.



Mr. Klaich moved approval of the recommendations for promo-

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

Motion carried.



22. Approved Recommendations for Award to Tenure, UNR



The following recommendations for award to tenure have been

forwarded for Board consideration:



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

mended award to tenure, effective July 1, 1993, to

the following:



*Indira Chatterjee, Electrical Engineering, College of

Engineering

A. Trzynadlowski, Electrical Engineering, College of

Engineering



B. University of Nevada, Reno - Vice President Hoover

recommended award to tenure, effective July 1, 1993,

to the following:



Carl Looney, Computer Science, Mackay School of Mines



*Recommended for both promotion and tenure.



Mrs. Berkley moved approval of the recommendations for award

to tenure at UNR and UNLV. Dr. Hammargren seconded. Motion

carried.



The open meeting recessed at 6:27 P.M. and reconvened at 8:15

A.M. Friday, May 21, 1993, with all Regents present except

Regent Hammargren.



23. Regents' Workshop, Sexual Harassment Education Training



Dr. Jill Derby, Chairman of the Status of Women Committee,

introduced Ms. Beverly Ledbetter, Brown University, who

presented a workshop on sexual harassment education train-

ing for Administrators of UCCSN. Ms. Ledbetter discussed

policies, laws, and Campus procedures regarding sexual

harassment.



She indicated that there were several definitions of sexual

harassment and that most of the definitions rely on the

EEOC's guidelines which identify sexual harassment in the

workplace. The guidelines state that:



"'Sexual Harassment' includes unwelcome sexual advances,

requests for sexual favors, sexually motivated physical

contact or other verbal or physical conduct or communica-

tion of a sexual nature when:



(1) submission to that conduct or communication is made

a term or condition, either explicitly or implicitly,

of obtaining employment;



(2) submission to or rejection of that conduct or communi-

cation by an individual is used as a factor in deci-

sions affecting that individual's employment; or



(3) that conduct or communication has the purpose or effect

of substantially interfering with an individual's em-

ployment or education, or of creating an intimidating,

hostile, or offensive employment."



Ms. Ledbetter described the different basis for complaints

which included "quid pro quo", "hostile environment", "acts

of physical aggression", and "third parties".



She then highlighted the components of a good sexual harass-

ment policy for an institution, including the following:



Definition of sexual harassment

Prohibition of behavior

Consequences for violators

Procedures for resolution of allegations



Ms. Ledbetter indicated that education and counseling, in-

formal review and resolution, and formal resolution should

be addressed in the sexual harassment policy.



Ms. Ledbetter encouraged UCCSN Administration to act in

good faith when an allegation is brought forth. She stated

that without a policy in place, the System, and possible

individuals, may be liable in sexual harassment cases.



Dr. Derby expressed her thanks to Ms. Ledbetter for conduct-

ing the most helpful workshop.



The open meeting recessed to conduct a joint meeting with the

State Board of Education (the minutes are filed in the Regents'

Office) and reconvened at 1:15 P.M. Friday, May 21, 1993, with

all Regents present except Regents Berkley, Derby, Foley and

Price.



24. Emergency Item: Tenure on Hire, UNR



President Crowley requested consideration of an emergency

item regarding an additional approval to hire with tenure

at UNR. General Counsel Klasic determined that this item

was unforeseen at the time the agenda was prepared and

must be approved before this week in order to implement

the hiring.



Mr. Klaich moved approval to consider an emergency item

regarding approval to hire with tenure at UNR. Mrs.

Gallagher seconded. Motion carried.



25. Approved Tenure on Hire, UNR



Approved to hire with tenure the following persons for

UNR:



Dr. Jerry Johnson, Professor of Mathematics

Dr. Lucinda Davenport, Associate Professor of Journalism



Mr. Klaich moved approval to hire with tenure at UNR, Dr.

Jerry Johnson and Dr. Lucinda Davenport. Mrs. Whitley

seconded. Motion carried.



Mrs. Price returned to the meeting.



26. Approved Contract, UNR



In accordance with Section 5.4.2 of the UCCSN Code, approved

the employment contract for Mr. Pat Foster to serve as Head

Coach, UNR Men's Basketball Team, for a 5-year term.



Copies of the contract were made available at the meeting

and are filed in the Regents' Office.



President Crowley explained that it is a national norm to

offer a 5-year contract for this position.



Mr. Graves moved approval of the contract for UNR Men's

Basketball Head Coach Pat Foster, for a 5-year term. Mrs.

Gallagher seconded.



Mr. Graves reviewed the contract and stated that he felt

it was a very progressive contract. Mr. Klaich agreed with

President Crowley in that the new Head Coach will be up-

grading the program and will need time to implement the

basketball program. Dr. Eardley stated that the community

is ready for a Coach of this caliber.



Dr. Hammargren stated that he personally feels that there

has been an overemphasis on athletics recently. He criti-

cized the Mac Vicar/Peterson Report for being too limited

in scope. Dr. Hammargren distributed a letter highlight-

ing 5 different contracts that executed 5-year contracts.

He stated that he opposed issuing 5-year contracts.



Motion carried. Dr. Hammargren voted against the motion.



Dr. Hammargren requested President Maxson to respond to each

of the issues he mentioned in the letter. President Maxson

indicated that issues 1, 3, 4 and 5 were incorrect and he

would submit in writing the discrepancy. Issue 2 is correct

in that Jim Weaver's hiring process was ruled as an "illegal

procedure" by the Attorney General as a violation of the

Open Meeting Law, because it was brought before the Board

as an Emergency Item. The issue was then brought before

the next regularly scheduled meeting and was approved by

the Board of Regents.



27. Information Only: Outstanding Faculty Recognition



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

Chairman reported on the outstanding faculty achievements

for the institution; Ref. B, filed in the Regents' Office.



Truckee Meadows Community College



Cynthia Davis

Rosemary Rinaldi



Northern Nevada Community College



Juanita Karr

Joan Williams



28. Information Only: Outstanding Students Recognition



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

ment Officer reported on the outstanding student achieve-

ments from the institution. Ref. C, filed in the Regents'

Office.



Truckee Meadows Community College



Lori Jensen

Terry L. Tallan



Western Nevada Community College



Debra Green



Northern Nevada Community College



Laura Bird



Mrs. Whitley returned to the meeting.



29. Information Only: Report on Organizational Review



Dr. John Richardson and Mr. Doug Burris have conducted an

organizational review and presented their findings. The

report is filed in the permanent minutes.



Interviews were conducted with Regents, Chancellor's staff,

and Presidents. The Board, the Presidents, and the staff

are virtually of one mind regarding the directions they

want to pursue. This unanimity of view signals a golden

opportunity for the Board to formalize a transition to the

System's current level of need for direction. The Board of

Regents may never again have such an opportunity for change

supported by so many -- and at a time when it is absolutely

necessary for the continued positive development and growth

of our University and Community College System. Nearly

everyone is calling for major change. The issue facing the

Regents, the leaders of the System, is whether or not they

have the will to make appropriate changes, and have suf-

ficient foresight and understanding to make the right

changes.



The report is divided into 5 primary sections:



1) The role of the Chancellor in System governance

2) The role of the Board

3) The role of the Presidents

4) The role of System staff and the System Office

5) Additional System structure and process issues

that need attention



In response to what the next steps should be, Vice Chancel-

lor Richardson stated that a decision should be made on

priority issues for UCCSN over the next 5 years, discussions

on whether to move to a stronger leadership role for the

Chancellor should be held, and a position description and

an announcement for the position should be developed prior

to beginning the search.



Dr. Eardley stated that we must not lose sight of students.

He felt that the Board has too many committees, meetings

should not be scheduled during registration time, individu-

al Board members cannot speak for the full Board, and indi-

vidual Board members should not be allowed to discipline

individual staff members.



Mrs. Gallagher felt strongly about the recommendation that

the Chancellor should be responsible for governmental/leg-

islative relations for the System and should exercise active

leadership in this arena. She did not agree with the rec-

ommendation that the Board Secretary should report directly

to the Chancellor. The Board Secretary should be able to

work directly with the Board and be held accountable to the

Board. Mrs. Gallagher stated the auditors should also re-

port directly to the Board.



Mr. Graves stated that he was not serving on the Board of

Regents when this report was being developed, however he

felt that the report is a tremendous piece of work and is

glad that it is coming together. He approved of the struc-

ture of the report.



Mr. Klaich suggested that the findings, found on pages 5,

6 and 7 of the report, should be used in defining the role

of the Chancellor. He did not feel additional comments

from other constituents were needed because of the number

of governance studies the Board has already undertaken in

the past several years. Vice Chancellor Richardson replied

that the Board should hear all views prior to making a de-

cision in this important matter.



Mr. Graves and Dr. Hammargren left the meeting.



16. Report and Recommendations of the Academic Affairs Committee

(continued)



USA President MaryAnne Lavelle requested that approval of

the UCCSN grading policy be deferred until the June, 1993

meeting.



Mr. Chad Bible, ASUN Senator, stated that the grading policy

directly affects the students and requested reconsideration

of the policy.



Ms. Jennifer Johns, ASUN Senator, stated that it has been a

gross oversight to not include students in the delibera-

tions on the UCCSN grading policy. She requested that the

issue be brought back to the Board in the Fall when students

have returned and can lend their input.



ASTM President Don Isler requested this item be deferred to

the June meeting in order for southern students to have a

chance to review the policy and discuss the issue.



Chairman Sparks agreed to defer the issue until the June

meeting. Mr. Klaich did not feel it necessary to discuss

this issue again in June.



Dr. Hammargren returned to the meeting.



30. Approved Handbook Addition and Change, Increased Student

Fees, School of Medicine



Approved the following additions and changes to the Handbook

regarding increased student fees for the School of Medicine:



a. Paragraphs 4 and 5 (Attachement A) be added to the Board

of Regents Handbook, Title 4, (Codification of

Board Policy Statements), Chapter 17 (Fees and Expenses)

Section 1 (Assessment of Fees).



b. Resident annual tuition for medical students in the

School of Medicine at the University of Nevada, Reno,

be increased to $6067 in 1993-94 and to $6597 in

1994-95 (Attachment B).



c. A $1400 annual fee be established to cover the cost of

the health, life and disability insurance that the

Association of American Medical Colleges recommends

for all medical students (Attachments C and D).



Ref. E is filed in the Regents' Office.



Mr. Eardley moved approval of the Handbook changes and ad-

ditions regarding increased student fees for the School of

Medicine. Mrs. Gallagher seconded. Mrs. Price voted

against the motion. Motion carried.



Dr. Hammargren left the meeting.



31. Report and Recommendations of the Audit Committee



A report and recommendations of the Audit Committee meeting,

held May 13, 1993, were made by Regent Dorothy Gallagher,

Chairman.



(1) Acting Director of Internal Audit John Love presented

the audit of the UNR Associate Students of University

of Nevada School of Medicine, July 1, 1992 through

June 30, 1992. The audit report is filed in the

Regents' Office.



(2) Acting Director of Internal Audit John Love presented

the audit of the UNLV School Refusal Clinic, July 1,

1991 through December 31, 1992. The report is filed

in the Regents' Office.



(3) Acting Director of Internal Audit John Love presented

the audit of the UNR Graduate School, July 1, 1991

through June 30, 1992. The report is filed in the

Regents' Office.



The following follow-up reports were presented by Acting

Director of Internal Audit John Love. The follow-up reports

are on file in the Regents' Office:



4. Extension Centers, CCSN

5. Fleischmann Planetarium, UNR

6. Fallon Campus Business Office, WNCC



A discussion was held on the inventory process for UCCSN

property and equipment. It was explained that the internal

auditors review inventories of each Department to determine

that the assigned equipment is in place. At the Universi-

ties, there is a central receiving area where all purchases

are inventoried before being delivered to various Depart-

ments.



A recent article in the Las Vegas "Review Journal" incor-

rectly reported than an inventory had not been taken since

1986 at UNLV. Mr. Mike Sauer, Controller, reported that

since 1986, because of lack of personnel in the Inventory

Department, it has been impossible to inventory all of the

equipment on the Campus in one year. Inventories are taken,

but with the growth of the Campus, it takes approximately

three years for a complete Campus-wide inventory. Requests

for positions have been made with each budget request to

the State, but those positions have not been funded.



It was agreed that the Committee would request the Presi-

dents to make inventory a priority. The controllers will

prepare a plan for automated inventory. Dane Apalategui,

WNCC, is in the process of preparing a procedures manual

which, when finished, could be adopted by all Campuses.

It is compartmentalized by Department with the intention

of making it faster and easier for taking inventory.



In answer to a question of whether instructors were col-

lecting fees, it was explained that with the new telephone

registration system, most of this has been eliminated be-

cause the student is able to pay with credit card regis-

tration, or is billed automatically upon completion of

registration. There is still some collection of fees in

the very remote outlying areas, but all this has been cut

to a minimum.



A discussion of the number of internal auditors was held.

It is recognized that more staff is needed; however, fund-

ing is not available for additions at this time.



In answer to a question concerning whether any funds have

had to be repaid to the Federal government because of in-

ventory problems, it was reported that all items were in

place, and no funds have had to be returned.



Mrs. Whitley moved approval of the report and recommenda-

tions of the Audit Committee. Dr. Eardley seconded.

Motion carried.



Mrs. Price indicated that there was an apparent need for

more support for UCCSN's internal auditors.



2. Approved Consent Agenda (continued)



(14) Approved an amendment to a lease at UNLV. At the

April 1993 Board meeting, President Maxson presented

a facilities plan for land surrounding the UNLV Cam-

pus. One parcel concerns 19 acres on the northeast

corner of Tropicana and Paradise which could be used

for parking. Previously, the Board approved an agree-

ment with Clark County for UNLV to lease 11 acres of

this parcel to construct a parking lot thereon. The

lease change would be for the county to license the

8 acres and license the 11 acres from UNLV from June

1993 through January 1995. During that time Clark

County will construct the parking lot on the 19

acres. After January 1995, UNLV will own the park-

ing lot on its 8 acres and will have use of the

additional 11 acres of parking for the remainder of

the 20-year lease. In addition, UNLV would also

agree that any construction within the County's

Airport Environs Overlay District would comply with

the restrictions set forth in the Clark County Code.



Mr. Eardley moved approval of the amendment to the

lease at UNLV. Mrs. Gallagher seconded. Motion

carried.



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

Section 10, Student Fees at UNLV that concern the

student health insurance fees, as contained in

Ref. C-15. This change in student health insurance

fees is a result of increased pay out rate last year.



Dr. Eardley moved approval of the Handbook change

regarding student health insurance fees at UNLV.

Mr. Klaich seconded.



Mrs. Gallagher abstained from voting due to a conflict

of interest. She serves on the Blue Cross/Blue Shield

Board of Directors.



Motion carried.



32. Approved Food Service Proposal, UNR



The Business Center North is in the final stages of evaluat-

ing proposals to provide a comprehensive food service to

the northern institutions.



The vendor will be responsible for designing, building,

equipping, managing and operating food services, to include:

student residential dining, retail food sales, catering,

vending and concessions. This venture will require a long-

term contract and significant capital investment.



Approved to secure financing between $2 and $3 million for

capital construction and renovation for this project. De-

tailed backup material was distributed at the meeting and

is filed in the Regents' Office.



Mrs. Whitley moved approval of the Food Service Proposal at

UNR and to proceed securing a loan for Business Center North

between $2 and $3 million for this project. Dr. Eardley

seconded. Motion carried.



33. Information Only: System Priority Issues, 1993-1998



Various constituencies were requested to draft priority

issues for the System for the 5-year period 1993-1998.

These were presented for discussion at the meeting and

are filed in the Regents' Office.



Mr. Klaich expressed anger and disappointment in that only

6 Regents were in attendance to discuss these important

issues.



CCSN faculty member Carolyn Collins requested time for

faculty input to address this issue. The Board agreed to

place this item on the June agenda.



The meeting adjourned at 3:52 P.M.



Mary Lou Moser

Secretary of the Board

05-19-1993