May 19-20, 1993
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
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'
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
(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,
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.
(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'
David M. Hogle
James W. Johnson
(9) Approved a Handbook change, Title 4, Chapter 17,
Section 10, Student Fees, to be effective Fall Semes-
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
(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:
(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
(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'
(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,
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,
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
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
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.
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
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
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
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
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
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.
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-
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
(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
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.
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
A report and recommendations of the Legislative Liaison
Committee meeting held May 20, 1993 were made by Regent
(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-
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
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
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
(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
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
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
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
Chairman Berkley reported that she has written an
editorial, which will be distributed within the next
week. The editorial addresses the Governor's recom-
(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-
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
9. Report and Recommendations of the Ad Hoc Foundation Liaison
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
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
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)
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
Mrs. Price asked whether she could resign as a member
of the foundation, with Mr. Hutton replying that she
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
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
What is the governance of the Foundation?
How much control does the President have?
How does the President function with the Board of
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-
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
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-
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-
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
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
(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
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
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
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
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
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-
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.
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
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
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
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-
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-
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-
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
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
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.
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
(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
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.
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
Vice Chancellor John Richardson stated that he felt
the moratorium should remain in effect. He gave the
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
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
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
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
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
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-
(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
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'
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-
Dr. Gary Hausladen, Associate Professor of Geog-
raphy, stated that the Geography Department will
undergo a reorganization to implement this pro-
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-
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
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'
The proposed change is more inclusive of the 3 course
prefixes currently offered in the Division: Computer
Information Systems, Office Administration and Word
(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
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
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-
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.
Addition discussion was held later in the meeting and is
found after item 29.
17. Information Only: Regents' Bylaw Amendment, Officers of
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
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.
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
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
19. Approved Emeritus Appointment
A. University of Nevada, Las Vegas - President Maxson rec-
ommended the following, effective June 30, 1993, upon
Dr. John Nixon, Emeritus Professor of Management Infor-
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
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.
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
*Indira Chatterjee, Electrical Engineering, College of
A. Trzynadlowski, Electrical Engineering, College of
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
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
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
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
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
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
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.
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
Northern Nevada Community College
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'
Truckee Meadows Community College
Terry L. Tallan
Western Nevada Community College
Northern Nevada Community College
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
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
USA President MaryAnne Lavelle requested that approval of
the UCCSN grading policy be deferred until the June, 1993
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,
(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
(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
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-
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.
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
(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.
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
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