BOARD OF REGENTS
UNIVERSITY AND COMMUNITY COLLEGE SYSTEM OF NEVADA
College of Education, Room 1003
University of Nevada, Reno
Thursday-Friday, August 16-17, 2001
Mrs. Thalia Dondero, Chair
Dr. Jill Derby
Mrs. Dorothy S. Gallagher
Mr. Douglas Roman Hill
Mrs. Linda Howard
Dr. Tom Kirkpatrick
Mr. Howard Rosenberg
Mr. Doug Seastrand
Mr. Tom Wiesner
Mr. Mark Alden
Mr. Steve Sisolak
Chancellor Jane Nichols
Vice Chancellor, Finance & Administration Dan Miles
Interim Vice Chancellor, Academic & Student Affairs Sherwin Iverson
General Counsel Tom Ray
President Ron Remington, CCSN
President Stephen Wells, DRI
Interim President Carl Diekhans, GBC
Interim President Rita Huneycutt, TMCC
President Carol Harter, UNLV
President John Lilley, UNR
President Carol Lucey, WNCC
President Richard Moore, NSCH
Chief Administrative Officer Suzanne Ernst
Also present were faculty senate chairs Mr. Ruell Fiant, CCSN; Mr. William Albright, DRI; Mr. John Patrick Rice, GBC; Dr. Eun-Woo Chang, TMCC; Dr. Arthur Broten, UCCSN; Dr. Stephen Carper, UNLV; Dr. Paul Neill, UNR; and Mr. Richard Kloes, WNCC. Student government leaders present included Mr. Calvin Hooks, CCSN; Ms. Elisa Goyeneche, GBC; Ms. Michelle Lacerda, TMCC; Mr. Paul Moradkhan, UNLV; Ms. Rana Koran, UNLV-GSA; Mr. Matthew Wolden, UNR; Mr. Carlos Ledon, UNR-GSA; and Ms. Leslie Carlen, WNCC.
Chair Thalia Dondero called the meeting to order at 12:15 pm on August 16, 2001 with all members present except Regents Alden and Sisolak.
1. Approved-Personnel Session - In compliance with NRS 241.030, a closed session was held for purposes of discussion of the character, alleged misconduct, professional competence, or physical or mental health of certain executive employee(s) of the UCCSN.
Regent Rosenberg moved approval of moving to a closed session. Regent Seastrand seconded. Motion carried. Regents Alden & Sisolak were absent.
The Board moved to a closed session at 12:20 p.m. and returned to open session at 1:35 pm with all members present except Regents Alden & Sisolak.
1.2 Information Only-Return to Open Session - The Board returned to open session.
2. Chair’s Report - Chair Dondero thanked UNR for hosting the Board meeting and welcomed new president, Dr. John Lilley. She announced that it was time to form the Chancellor Evaluation Committee. Members will include Chair Dondero and Regents Rosenberg, Derby, Seastrand, and Sisolak. She announced that, upon advice from General Counsel Tom Ray, the Chancellor’s Millennium Bound Outreach Center Task Force had become a Regent’s task force, with Regent Linda Howard as chair. The ACCT will hold its annual meeting in Las Vegas in June 2002. There will be an action item on the October meeting agenda to approve expenditures associated with participation at this conference. She announced that agenda items #5 (Handbook, UCCSN Code Amendment, UNLV), #19 (2001-2002 Merit/Equity Increases for UCCSN Presidents & UCCSN Executive Officers), #33 (New Committee Request) and Consent item #12 (Right of Entry, UNLV) had been withdrawn. She related that agenda item #20 (Appointment of Athletic Director, UNLV) would be heard first.
3. Approved-Appointment of Athletic Director, UNLV - President Carol Harter requested approval of the following items concerning the UNLV Athletics Program:
- A waiver of Handbook policy (Title 4, Chapter 10, Section 17 1C) to allow UNLV to make a joint appointment to the position of Director of Intercollegiate Athletics and coach of an intercollegiate sports program.
- The appointment of Mr. John Robinson as Director of Intercollegiate Athletics beginning January 1, 2002.
- An amended contract for Mr. John Robinson.
President Harter acknowledged this was an unusual request, but she felt the need to re-energize the positive value of athletics within the academic community. She stressed the integrity and academic success of UNLV students. She assured the Board that Mr. Robinson would work closely with her to further enhance the collegiate experience (the academic experience and graduation rates) of UNLV’s student athletes. She noted the importance of stressing community relations as well as external fundraising. She related that Mr. Robinson had made an extraordinary impact on the community in a very short time. She felt that Mr. Robinson could move the entire program forward for the institution, adding that he possessed an extraordinary set of skills.
Coach John Robinson greeted the Board. He promised to fulfill his 5-year commitment as football coach, adding that he would do the same as athletic director. He stated that UNLV had reached a pivotal point. He felt that UNLV’s athletic program could be energized to create an atmosphere that would move the athletic program rapidly forward.
He noted that his talent as a coach was to energize people and he proposed to do the same in this new capacity. He acknowledged the leadership position and the need to get people together as a team. He expressed the need to unite the individual coaches. He said that his most important responsibility was to the student athletes, adding that he hoped to enhance their college experience. He stated that he did not want to just concentrate on football, but also on the other sports. He voiced a desire to improve the academic environment and total university experience to prospective students. He acknowledged the need for revenue and fundraising so UNLV could expand. He expressed a desire to expand the academic facilities used by the athletes. He noted that UNLV now had national coverage of their football games, adding that it was also an opportunity to display what is good about UNLV. He expressed a desire to make use of that opportunity for the university as a whole. He felt that he could accomplish both jobs by energizing the other coaches. He intends to use all of the coaches to utilize their fundraising talents. He mentioned that he knows a lot about compliance, adding that it was not just adhering to a set of rules. He felt that compliance is a state of mind and a philosophy. He said that a component of compliance was adhering to the details. He observed that the compliance program setup by Mr. Cavagnaro and President Harter was a good one. He believed that any further compliance problems would be disastrous for UNLV.
Regent Gallagher acknowledged that athletics was not her area of expertise. She related that she agonized over this decision because she felt strongly that the Board had an obligation not to program someone for failure; not to assign someone a job that they could not possibly achieve. She asked for Mr. Robinson’s assurance that he would notify the Board if the job became too much to handle. Mr. Robinson thanked her for her concern, adding that he did not wish to die in the job. He stated that he was at his best when challenged. He felt this was a cause, adding that he knew what could be accomplished. He understands President Harter’s vision and what Las Vegas has. He recognized the magnitude of the task, adding that he had been in this business a long time and that he took it very seriously. He felt that he was the best person for the job. He expressed a desire to leave in 5 years, and say, “Yes, we did it!” He did not feel that he would be put in a position to fail. He observed that existing UNLV personnel could be energized to produce more than what they do now.
Regent Gallagher noted that, if the Board approved the appointment, UNLV would have two Athletic Directors until January 2002. President Harter replied that they were proposing Mr. Robinson be appointed January 1, 2002, adding that Mr. Cavagnaro would assist Mr. Robinson with the transition until his departure in June 2002.
Regent Hill noted that he too had agonized over this decision. He felt that UNLV had experienced some problems in the area of institutional control. He acknowledged that Mr. Robinson likely put in many long hours as the football coach and asked how Mr. Robinson would address the issue of institutional control, compliance, and consequences for non-compliance. Mr. Robinson felt that he was closer to the coaches, adding that he was also one of the people needing to comply. He said that the coaches would work together. He proposed bi-weekly meetings so the compliance issue would not be lost. He said there would be no feelings of separation between him (as Athletic Director) and the other coaches. He reiterated that, compliance was a state of mind. He stated that UNLV would do things
a specific way and any major violation would result in the immediate dismissal of the coach. He felt that President Harter’s dismissal of the former basketball coach had been extremely effective; got everyone’s attention. He assured the Board that the main priority was to focus on compliance and creating an environment to help UNLV win without cheating.
Regent Hill asked for specific examples of how Mr. Robinson would ensure people were in compliance and doing their job. Mr. Robinson stated that UNLV’s compliance officer was in place, Mr. Eric Tolliver. He explained that prevention (of breaking the rules) involved constant contact with the coaches. UNLV spent a significant amount of time ensuring that phone calls are reported, etc. He believed that Mr. Toliver was very committed to compliance and that President Harter had already ensured that the compliance officers were listened to. He gave the Board his word, adding that he had been in the compliance field all of his life, and that there were enough hours in the day.
Regent Hill stated that he was inclined to believe it a mistake to put Mr. Robinson in both positions. However, many people felt that Mr. Robinson was the right man for the job and that he could do the job and put the program back together again. Regent Hill noted that he actually favored the rule preventing one person from filling both positions. Mr. Robinson replied that he recognized the charge, adding that he had a chance to make the entire athletic program better.
Regent Kirkpatrick thought that Mr. Robinson was one of the top 2-3 coaches in the country. When he first heard about this appointment, Regent Kirkpatrick discussed the issue with Regent Wiesner. Regent Wiesner convinced him that Mr. Robinson was capable of doing both jobs. Regent Kirkpatrick noted that he also spoke with Mr. Robinson and President Harter about the appointment. He also called a former UNLV Athletic Director, the current UNR Athletic Director as well as the Athletic Director for the University of Tennessee. Everyone he spoke with expressed great admiration for Mr. Robinson, though many felt it was not wise to combine the two jobs due to the number of hours involved and problems with NCAA compliance. Some of the comments included:
- It is a bad idea; difficult if not impossible.
- Time demands are astronomical.
- Could lead to problems with NCAA compliance.
- Both jobs are full-time jobs. Strongly recommended against it.
- Duties of the Athletic Director cannot be delegated.
Regent Kirkpatrick stated that Regent Wiesner really believes that Mr. Robinson is capable of doing both jobs. Regent Kirkpatrick expressed grave concern about compliance with the men’s basketball program. He was also concerned about how Mr. Robinson would objectively allocate funds within the program. He related that he was unsure how to vote. Mr. Robinson replied that Joe Pitorno was the chief fundraiser at Penn State. He noted that the chief fundraiser at UNLV had been President Harter. He acknowledged that he would need to be a major fundraiser for UNLV whether he was the football coach or the Athletic Director. He voiced his intent to raise $10 million. He related that the football coach was the main fundraiser at most major universities. He related that the Board would need to trust his ability to say that other sports (i.e. Women’s Basketball, Women’s Softball, Women’s Volleyball) would not receive short shrift. He related that he came to Las Vegas and made an effort to do the extra things, beyond what a coach does, to warrant consideration for this position. He asked the Board whether they trusted him to do the job, adding that he would take the athletic department to another level, adding that it would be much different in 5 years.
Regent Wiesner stated that he felt that Mr. Robinson was the right person at the right time. He felt that Mr. Robinson was up to the challenge.
Regent Derby moved approval of waiving Handbook policy (Title 4, Chapter 10, Section 17 1C) to allow UNLV to make a joint appointment to the position of the Director of Intercollegiate Athletics and coach of an intercollegiate sports program.. Regent Seastrand seconded.
Regent Rosenberg asked whether President Harter recommended the appointment. President Harter replied that she did.
Motion carried. Regents Alden and Sisolak were absent.
Regent Kirkpatrick moved approval of the appointment of Mr. John Robinson as Director of Intercollegiate Athletics beginning January 1, 2002 and an amended contract for Mr. John Robinson. Regent Howard seconded. Motion carried. Regents Alden and Sisolak were absent.
Coach Robinson thanked the Board, promising not to disappoint them.
Regents Derby, Howard, and Seastrand left the meeting.
4. Introductions – President Lilley introduced faculty senate chair, Dr. Paul Neill, student body president, Mr. Matthew Wolden, and grad student body president, Mr. Carlos Ledon. President Wells introduced faculty senate chair, Mr. William Albright. President Ron Remington introduced student body president, Mr. Calvin Hooks. Chair Dondero welcomed Interim Presidents Carl Diekhans and Rita Huneycutt. Chancellor Nichols introduced her Reno assistant, Ms. Toni Odom-McNeil.
5. Chancellor’s Report – The Chancellor announced that UCCSN received positive news about several grant programs involving faculty and System staff. None of these grants would be possible without the campus faculty and staff that help write the proposals and carry out the activities in collaboration with System staff.
- Eisenhower Program - $347,819 in continuing funding for this fiscal year. This program was established under the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965 and provides funds for the professional development of teachers. The money is used to fund UCCSN faculty proposals to provide in-service and pre-service training of K-12 science and math teachers.
- The State of Nevada was awarded $26.1 million for the Reading Excellence Program. This grant program was designed to improve reading skills in grades K- 12 and establishes a statewide literacy education program.
- Teacher Technology Grant – Nearly $2.2 million was awarded over the next 3 years to a consortium that UCCSN belongs to along with several other national and state entities through the Education Commission of the States. The program involves preparing tomorrow’s teachers to use technology. Nevada, Illinois, and Texas will participate in the program, providing extensive policy research on how community colleges contribute to the preparation of future teachers.
- Nevada will receive a $10.8 million grant for Gear Up. This program reaches out to students who normally do not attend college and helps fund a variety of programs established to lower dropout rates, improve academic performance, and increase scores on the Nevada high school proficiency exam. The program will begin with high-risk 7th graders in Clark, Elko, Esmerelda, Humboldt, Mineral, Nye, and Washoe counties. Dr. Chris Chairsell will be working on the grant.
Chancellor Nichols announced that the Regents were invited to visit the Redfield Campus at the conclusion of Thursday’s meeting, adding that transportation would be provided. She noted that the Board would see a proposal to locate the TMCC High Tech Center at the Redfield Campus.
Mr. Van Weddle, Vice Chancellor for Technology, announced there would be a video to bring the Board up-to-date on progress with Internet 2.
Regent Seastrand entered the meeting.
The video was entitled “Research Connectivity for Nevada via the NevadaNet”. UCCSN researchers made it clear that, in order to participate in research, Nevada needs to be connected to the high-speed Internet 2. Researchers rely heavily upon the web to conduct their research (i.e. satellite data for weather updates). Eligibility for some grants also depends on Internet 2 connectivity.
6. Approved-Handbook Revision, Millennium Scholarship Policy and Procedures – The Board approved updates to the Regents’ policies on the Millennium Scholarship based on the first year of experience with this program. These changes resolve some questions of clarity and also promote a more equitable treatment of students (Title 4, Chapter 18, Section 17). (Ref. A on file in the Board office)
Dr. Richard Curry reported that several changes were suggested to the Millennium Scholarship draft including:
- No one institution can generate the eligibility list.
- Clarifications to help treat all Millennium Scholarship eligible students more equitably.
Regent Rosenberg moved approval of the Handbook revision (Title 4, Chapter 18, Section 17). Regent Kirkpatrick seconded. Motion carried. Regents Alden, Derby, Howard, and Sisolak were absent.
7. Approved-Handbook Revision, 2002-2003 School of Dentistry Tuition, UNLV – The Board approved tuition fees for the UNLV Dental School for 2002-2003 (Title 4, Chapter 17, New Section 4). (Ref. B on file in the Board office)
President Harter reported that UNLV was recommending tuition for the School of Dentistry, which would have its first class in August 2002. She stated that dental education was even more expensive than medical education. Given the level of state support (Estate Tax), the tuition recommendation was higher than they preferred it to be. She related that it was relatively high for Nevada tuition, but not in comparison to other dental institutions.
- $7,500/semester for in-state students.
- $14,000/semesters for nonresidents.
Regent Seastrand asked about tuition rates for WICHE students. President Harter replied that it was a very broad range with some institutions considerably lower than UNLV’s recommendation. She added that those institutions also had a higher level of state funding. The average subsidy for state supported dental programs ranges from $22,000/student to $96,000/student. For the first year, UNLV’s is in the $28,000 range (low end of the subsidy), which drives tuition higher. She explained that many Nevada students attend the University of Pacific’s dental school where the tuition is $50,000/year.
Dean Steven Smith, Interim Dean of Dentistry-UNLV, reported there were five committed WICHE slots from Nevada to Creighton, with state support at $14,700/student (20 students). Regent Seastrand asked whether it would be cheaper for students to attend under the WICHE program. Dean Smith replied that, if a student went to Creighton ($28,000-$29,000 tuition) the state would pay $14,000 and the student would pay $14,000. President Harter observed that it was extraordinarily expensive regardless of the method employed. Dean Smith related that students attend medical school for four years. In dental school the student actually starts patient care at the beginning of the third year with general dentistry at the clinics performed in the third and fourth years. He agreed it was very costly, but provided a great service to the community and better access for the patients.
Regent Rosenberg moved approval of the Handbook revision. Regent Kirkpatrick seconded. Motion carried. Regents Alden, Derby, Howard, and Sisolak were absent.
8. Approved-Handbook Revision, 2002-2003 School of Dentistry Distribution of Fees, UNLV – The Board approved the proposed distribution of fees for the UNLV School of Dentistry (Title 4, Chapter 10, New Section 15). (Ref. C on file in the Board office)
President Harter related that they used the same formula as was used for the law school.
Regent Rosenberg moved approval of the Handbook revision. Regent Kirkpatrick seconded. Motion carried. Regents Alden, Derby, Howard, and Sisolak were absent.
9. Approved-Revised Foundation Bylaws, UNR – The Board approved a change in the UNR Foundation Bylaws, (Article VI, Contracts, Loans, and Deposits). Both the Foundation Executive Committee and the Board of Trustees also approved this change. (Ref. D on file in the Board office)
President Lilley related that he brought the request forward at the request of the UNR Foundation. He clarified that the “president” referenced in the attachment referred to the Foundation president.
Regent Hill moved approval of the revised UNR Foundation Bylaws. Regent Gallagher seconded. Motion carried. Regents Alden, Derby, Howard, and Sisolak were absent.
10. Approved-Consent Agenda – The Board approved the Consent Agenda with the exception of item (12) (Right of Entry, UNLV), which was withdrawn by UNLV.
(1) Approved-Minutes – The Board approved the minutes from the special meetings held May 10, and June 8, 2001 and the regular Board meeting held June 14-15, 2001.
(2) Approved-Hire with Tenure, UNLV – The Board approved tenure upon hire for the following faculty members:
- Dr. Joan Howarth, Professor of Law, (effective August 1, 2001). Approved by faculty vote at October 13, 2000 faculty meeting. (Ref. C-2A on file in the Board office)
- Dr. Steve Johnson, Professor of Law, (effective August 1, 2001). Approved by faculty vote at February 2, 2001 faculty meeting. (Ref. C-2B on file in the Board office)
- Dr. Gabrielle Wulf, Associate Professor, Department of Kinesiology, (effective August 1, 2001). The department faculty voted unanimously to recommend tenure upon hire. (Ref. C-2C on file in the Board office)
- Dr. Stephen Miller, Professor, Department of Economics, (effective July 1, 2001). Dr. Miller is the incoming chair of the Department of Economics. The department faculty voted unanimously to recommend tenure upon hire. (Ref. C-2D on file in the Board office)
- Dr. Keong Leong, Professor, Department of Management, (effective August 1, 2001). Dr. Leong is the incoming chair of the Department of Management. The department faculty voted unanimously to recommend tenure upon hire. (Ref. C-2E on file in the Board office)
- Dr. Ken Fridley, Professor, Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering,(effective August 1, 2001). Dr. Fridley is the incoming Associate Dean of Research and Information Technology in the College of Engineering. The department faculty voted unanimously to recommend tenure upon hire. (Ref. C-2F on file in the Board office)
(3) Approved-Leave of Absence, UNLV – The Board approved a leave of absence for Professor Jay Bybee so he could accept the position of Assistant Attorney General of the United States for the Office of Legal Counsel. Professor Bybee’s leave will take effect November 2, 2001 and run for the term of his appointment. Professor Bybee will return to UNLV at the end of his appointment.
(4) Approved-Letter of Appointment, GBC – The Board approved issuing a part-time Letter of Appointment for Nadine Diekhans to tutor in the Great Basin College Writing Lab. Mrs. Diekhans has been employed in this position for the past eight years. Her salary per semester is approximately $4,500. There are no benefits associated with this part-time position.
(5) Approved-Capital Improvement Fee Funds, CCSN – The Board approved the use of capital improvement fee funds for the following projects at CCSN:
- Child Development Site (Cheyenne Campus). $2,500
- Deli Area Remodel (Western High Tech Center). $65,000
(6) Approved-Capital Improvement Fee Funds, GBC – The Board approved the use of capital improvement fee funds for the following projects at GBC:
- Dawson Child Care Facility Improvements. $4,000
- Fiber Optic Line. 9,000
- Music Annex Remodel 10,000
- Child Center Addition 5,000
- Various Minor Capital Improvements $31,000
(7) Approved-Handbook Revision, Addition of New Titles to the Administrative Salary Schedule – The Board approved the addition of the Director of Human Resources and Director of Facilities Planning positions to the System Administration Salary Schedule. These are new positions that should be listed as grade 4 on the salary schedule (Title 4, Chapter 3, Section 22). Other grade 4 positions include the Directors of Banking and Investments, Internal Audit and Budget.
(8) Approved-Handbook Revision, CSUN Constitution, UNLV – The Board approved proposed changes to the CSUN constitution (Title 5, Chapter 13). (Ref. C-8 on file in the Board office)
- Referendum 1 – Article IV, B.
- Referendum 2 – Article IV, C, 4b, 4c, 4d, 6.
- Referendum 3 – Article VI, B, 1a, 1b, 1c.
- Referendum 4 – Article IX, G.
(9) Approved-Handbook Revision, School of Dentistry Resident and Nonresident Status, UNLV – The Board approved language for inclusion of the UNLV School of Dentistry (Title 4, Chapters 15 and 17). (Ref. C-9 on file in the Board office)
(10) Approved-Additions to UCCSN Endowment Pool – The Board approved Fiscal 2001 additions to the UCCSN endowment pool. (Ref. C-10 on file in the Board office)
(11) Approved-Storm Drain and Maintenance Easement, DRI – The Board approved DRI to enter into an agreement between the Board of Regents/UCCSN, on behalf of DRI, and the City of Reno, State of Nevada, granting the City of Reno a storm drain and maintenance easement on parcel #035-011-01. The purpose of the easement is to grant maintenance access to the City of Reno to a storm drain, in connection with the development of the Washoe County’s Public Safety Training Facility. (Ref. C-11 on file in the Board office)
(13) Approved-Blanket Approval to Place Properties in White Pine and Lincoln Counties on Open Market, UNR – The Board approved placing undeveloped properties located in isolated, undeveloped areas of White Pine and Lincoln counties on the open market and UNR to negotiate with prospective buyers, the results of which would be presented to the Board for approval of the sale. (Ref. C-13 on file in the Board office)
(14) Approved-Placing Mining Claims and Mill Site on Open Market, UNR – The Board approved placing the five (5) patented mining claims and a mill site in the Saw Tooth Mining District in Alturas County, Idaho, gift deeded to UNR Mackay School of Mines in 1994, on the open market. The results of any negotiated sales would be presented to the Board for approval.
(15) Approved-Dedication of Land for Roundabout, WNCC – The Board approved the dedication to Carson City of approximately 11,479-sq. ft. of real property, as described in (Ref. C-15 on file in the Board office). The dedication is needed to allow the construction of a public access roundabout to be located at the present terminus of College Parkway at the entrance to WNCC. The entrance roundabout is part of the proposed WNCC “Campus Master Plan 2001.” Carson City has agreed to abandon its 57,360-sq. ft. of public right-of-way from the end of College Parkway to Murphy Drive, which would conflict with the construction of a library and student service center in the proposed master plan.
(16) Approved-Distribution of Tuition and Fee Revenues – The Board approved revenue distributions for the School of Medicine and the Boyd School of Law. (Ref. C-16 on file in the Board office)
Regent Gallagher moved approval of the Consent Agenda with the exception of item (12) (Right of Entry, UNLV), which was withdrawn by UNLV. Regent Hill seconded. Motion carried. Regents Alden, Derby, Howard, and Sisolak were absent. Regent Rosenberg abstained.
11. Approved-Board Meeting Calendar – The Board reviewed and discussed the proposed Board of Regents’ meeting calendar for 2002. (Ref. E and #11 on file in the Board office)
Ms. Ernst explained that she changed the 7-meeting calendar so as not to conflict with the June ACCT meeting.
Regent Hill related that he had problems with Wednesday-Thursday meetings. Regent Rosenberg agreed. Regent Seastrand expressed a preference for holding Board meetings in the middle of the week.
Regent Hill moved approval of the 7-meeting calendar with dates for Thursday-Friday meetings. Regent Rosenberg seconded.
Ms. Ernst asked whether the Board intended to hold committee meetings in the afternoon and convene the full Board meeting the following day. Regent Hill expressed a preference
for leaving the format as it was now (Committee meetings Thursday morning, full Board on Thursday afternoon and Friday).
Regent Gallagher related how difficult it was to leave town on Friday afternoons.
Mr. Carlos Ledon reported that many students would be unable to attend Wednesday meetings, adding that Thursday-Friday was better for the majority of the student government representatives.
Upon a roll call vote the motion failed. Regents Dondero, Gallagher, Hill, and Rosenberg voted yes. Regents Kirkpatrick, Seastrand, and Wiesner voted no. Regents Alden, Derby, Howard, and Sisolak were absent.
Regent Seastrand moved approval of the 7-meeting calendar, with dates moved to Wednesday-Thursday.
Regent Kirkpatrick moved to table and then withdrew his motion.
Chancellor Nichols explained that it was very important to establish a calendar that day.
Regent Seastrand moved approval of the 7-meeting calendar as proposed (Wednesday-Thursday meetings). Regent Kirkpatrick seconded. Upon a roll call vote the motion failed. Regents Gallagher, Kirkpatrick, Seastrand, and Wiesner voted yes. Regents Dondero, Hill, and Rosenberg voted no. Regents Alden, Derby, Howard, and Sisolak were absent.
Chancellor Nichols suggested alternating the meetings. Every other meeting would be on Wednesday-Thursday and the “other” meetings would be on Thursday-Friday. Regent Wiesner agreed it was a good idea.
Regent Hill moved approval of the 7-meeting calendar with meetings 1, 3, 5, and 7 held on Thursday-Friday and the remaining meetings held on Wednesday-Thursday. Regent Rosenberg seconded. Upon a roll call vote the motion carried unanimously. Regents Alden, Derby, Howard, and Sisolak were absent.
The meeting recessed at 3:10 p.m. and reconvened at 3:20 p.m. with all members present except Regents Alden, Derby, Howard, Sisolak and Wiesner.
12. Approved-Additional Building by Nathan Adelson Hospice, UNLV – The Board approved a request from Nathan Adelson Hospice to build an additional 13,254 sq. ft. structure on 4.1 acres of land leased by UNLV to the Hospice on Swenson Street. The Hospice is requesting approval of their land use application prior to presentation to the Clark County Department of Comprehensive Planning. Mr. Irwin Molasky appeared on behalf of the Hospice.
Mr. Molasky reported that he was asked to attend this meeting by the board of directors of the Hospice regarding an application for an addition to the Hospice. The Hospice currently occupies 4½ acres at UNLV. He indicated they were planning a 13,000-sq. ft. addition to provide bereavement services, counseling, and administrative staff. He reported that the hospice program began in Las Vegas in the mid-1970’s. They have treated 30,000 patients and counseled family members. The hospice program is for terminal patients and is used to teach patients about dignity in death. Volunteers, counselors, social workers, nurses, legal and religious advisors, are sent to patient homes to take attend to their needs. He stated that the Nathan Adelson Hospice was the only non-profit operation in Las Vegas. Last year they served 2,100 patients. They expect to counsel more than 3,000 family members this year. They are currently providing $1million/year in pre-care. The Hospice provides special training for physician residents, nursing students, social workers, and interns.
Regent Wiesner entered the meeting.
Mr. Molasky reported that the building was fully funded, with half being donated by a volunteer. Total cost of the building was estimated at $2½-$3 million. He presented drawings of what the building would look like and what would be housed in the new facility. He explained how the new building would fit on the property.
Regent Kirkpatrick asked how parking would be arranged. Mr. Molasky replied there was more than adequate parking available. The office building required 42 spaces to be provided and the Hospice has provided 86. Regent Gallagher asked whether the new building would be placed on an additional 4.1 acres. Mr. Molasky replied that it was not. The Hospice was told they required Board of Regents authority in order to build the new facility.
Regent Rosenberg moved approval of additional building to the Nathan Adelson Hospice, UNLV. Regent Gallagher seconded.
Regent Seastrand asked for clarification related to the lease of the land. General Counsel Ray stated it was a 50-year lease. In absence of a lease extension, the buildings would revert to the System. President Harter stated there were 30 years remaining on the lease.
Motion carried. Regents Alden, Derby, Howard and Sisolak were absent.
13. Approved-Appointment, Interim Executive Vice President/Provost for Academic Affairs, UNR – The Board approved the appointment of Dr. John Frederick as Interim Executive Vice President/Provost for Academic Affairs of the University of Nevada, Reno at a proposed annual salary of $157,000. For the past two years, Dr. Frederick has been serving as chair of the chemistry department at the university. Dr. Frederick’s salary will be prorated for fiscal year 2001-02. The effective date of this appointment coincides with the date of approval by the Board of Regents.
Dr. Lilley nominated Dr. John Frederick and reviewed his career and record for the Board.
Regent Rosenberg moved approval of the appointment. Regent Gallagher seconded.
President Harter congratulated Dr. Frederick.
Motion carried. Regents Alden, Derby, Howard and Sisolak were absent.
14. Approved-Nevada State College Proposal - President Richard Moore reported to the Board on the status of efforts to develop funding for the college for the planning year (FY 2002) and any alternatives available for the Board to act upon. The Board considered a proposal to authorize UCCSN to approach the Legislative Interim Finance Committee (IFC) for an allocation from the estate tax fund for the planning year.
President Moore recalled that the Board recommended a $3 million planning budget to the governor. The governor recommended that $1 million come from the state. In the last hours of the legislature, that did not pass. Dr. Moore was asked to bring forward a plan. He felt the plan could be accomplished with $2 million. Had the original plan been followed, it would not have been necessary to bring forward this secondary plan, but it provided an opportunity for cooperation with sister institutions. Dr. Moore reported that approximately $1,300,000 in services had been accumulated from different parties. He reviewed the services provided (3rd page of his handout). He expressed the need for an architect, a master plan for the BLM (Bureau of Land Management) land and the City land, and a design for the first building. He had planned to hire an architect, but the SPWB (State Public Works Board) perceives that as their responsibility. Mr. Dan O’Brien, SPWB Manager, served on the Board Task Force and will recommend the SPWB use the Board-selected architect (Field-Paoli).
Dr. Moore stated that the college would need an initial library collection. He related that he was attempting to find $250,000 to start the initial collection. He said that people had come forward to help select the books. Ms. Joan Kerschner (former State Librarian) suggested a public library startup. Dr. Steven Zink, Dean of UNR’s Getchell Library, has offered to assist Ms. Kerschner with that plan. President Remington has also offered CCSN’s librarian to help. Dr. Moore said he was looking for new partners and new ways to accomplish the task.
Dr. Moore expressed the need to create teachers. He reported that proper and complete licensure would be provided for the graduates. UNR’s Dr. Melisa Choroszy is helping with a plan to register students and arranging financial aid. UNR is handling quality control.
CCSN will help register students. He hoped the joint effort with CCSN would continue and that he would not need to hire people to provide those services.
Dr. Moore reported that the City of Henderson would lease a building to UCCSN for $1.00/year and remodel the building to UCCSN specifications not to exceed $225,000. Part of the plan involves the City of Henderson advancing the money to NSCH to conduct the remodel.
Dr. Moore concluded that $1.3 million in resources had been secured, adding that $700,000 was still required. He expressed the need to hire an Academic Vice President to help with the selection of faculty and course planning. He recommended a full-time employee to plan teacher licensure and a full-time employee to plan health professional courses. He also suggested that three employees be hired to help plan the freshman experience. Only freshman courses from UNR’s catalog will be offered. UNR has offered access to any of their distance education courses. He related that he intends to ensure the auditors are satisfied with the processes followed. UNR will train NSCH employees to run a community college enrollment program. Dr. Moore related that he has earmarked $90,000 to reimburse CCSN and UNR for their assistance efforts. He recommended that additional costs be funded as a loan from the Estate Tax. He thanked Chancellor Nichols for supporting the cooperative action between campuses. He thanked Vice Chancellor Curry for his information on fast-track teacher licensure.
Regent Seastrand asked whether the other institutions were comfortable with their level of support. Dr. Moore replied that they were actually his estimations. He indicated that he had spoken with UNR’s Dr. Pat Miltenberger regarding enrollment costs. President Remington replied that the numbers were new to him. He observed that, obviously, there were costs when one institution helped support another. He stated that CCSN would need to determine what those costs were, adding there would likely be costs associated with enrollment. He related that he was not interested in hosting freshman English courses at any of CCSN’s centers. Chancellor Nichols replied that the figures were estimates. Regent Seastrand asked whether the Board would be held to the numbers and categories presented. Dr. Moore replied that his request was $700,000. If internal adjustments were required, he would work them out with the institution presidents. Regent Seastrand asked whether the figures were reasonable.
Dr. Pat Miltenberger, Professor of Educational Leadership-UNR, stated that the Task Force on Finance arrived at preliminary figures of $3 million. She felt that Dr. Moore’s numbers were in line with those figures. She related that exact costs would not be known until it was determined how many students would be attracted. She felt they were reasonable figures.
Chancellor Nichols stated that SCS was in the process of setting up a new finance system for NSCH. She indicated that they did not know those costs either. She related that institutions were not run with budgets that were not approved by the Board. She suggested the Board view this as a budget that they could approve that day with revisions to follow. Regent Seastrand asked whether they were reasonable, good faith estimates. Dr. Moore replied that they were. Regent Seastrand asked whether the total figure would be adjusted in the future. Chancellor Nichols replied that they knew that it was under funded. She advised the Board that the request was to loan $700,000 from the Estate Tax to the new college. There was no anticipated plan to return with a request for an increase, adding that the college would have to operate within that amount.
Regent Hill expressed his appreciation for the assistance offered by CCSN and UNR. He encouraged all of the institutions to cooperate and help one another as much as possible in this endeavor. He felt it was unfortunate that the legislature did not fund the college this year. He remained firm in his belief that the new institution should go forward, based on Nevada’s need for a second tier of education. He said that, with the growth in this state, there would be others. He felt that now was the time to get this college going.
Regent Hill moved approval of approaching the IFC to use $700,000 from the Estate Tax fund for the planning year as a loan to be repaid on a schedule that was workable for the college and approved by IFC. Regent Gallagher seconded.
Regent Gallagher asked whether this request should go before the Estate Tax Committee to be approved. Chancellor Nichols replied that it had not been the practice. Regent Gallagher said that she could have a problem with that. Since the Estate Tax Committee was charged with those responsibilities, she felt it would be a good idea. Chancellor Nichols replied that the only problem would be one of timing. Waiting for a meeting of the Estate Tax Committee would bring the issue to the October Board meeting. Regent Gallagher felt that the Committee should concur on this expense. Chancellor Nichols stated that an Estate Tax Committee could be held prior to the next IFC meeting in September. Regent Gallagher agreed with Regent Hill that it was time to get the ball rolling. She observed that the Estate Tax fund was already in jeopardy, adding that the state could take from the Estate Tax fund or reduce the System budget by what was in the Estate Tax fund. She was in favor of spending Estate Tax funds in the manner the Board desired.
Regent Kirkpatrick expressed anger that the Board had approved the startup of a new college and the president was begging for donations. He felt the State should have provided adequate funds. He asked what was so critical about starting the college in Fall 2002-2003. Dr. Moore replied that the urgency was in the critical need for teachers and health professionals, adding that many people hoped the college would open sooner. Regent Kirkpatrick wondered about starting the college a bit later since the State had failed to provide the funding. He observed that it would reduce the amount required from donations as well as the need for a loan. He was worried that President Moore would use the $250,000 for purposes other than remodeling the building. He acknowledged the critical shortage of teachers and nurses. He said that NSCH would not be able to train nurses for less cost than UNLV or other institutions. He noted that CCSN was critically short of support personnel, and Dr. Moore was using CCSN to help get NSCH started. He did not want another institution hurt just to get the new college started. He felt that President Remington had been put in a bad position. President Remington stated that CCSN would help to the extent that they could, adding that when he said “no” it would mean no. He did not want others (i.e. Regents, System officers) intervening on Dr. Moore’s behalf. He felt the effort would involve more people to accomplish success, adding that it was critical for the Board to acknowledge that.
Regent Gallagher was afraid the System would lose momentum and did not want the Board to appear indecisive. She thought they should get the college going. She said that the people of Henderson were waiting for the Board to do something they could get behind, adding that there had been too many unknowns. Chair Dondero stated that the Board had taken a positive stand by voting for it, adding that the legislature also voted for it. She agreed the college should move forward since it was so desperately needed. Regent Gallagher said that doing something new was always very difficult, but not impossible.
Regent Kirkpatrick stated that, in January 1999, Mayor Gibson and Ms. Thelma Bartlett appeared before the Board to convince them the citizens were ready to support this college. At the April 1999 meeting, the Henderson community pledged support and felt it would be no trouble to raise $15-20 million. At the December 1999 meeting, Assemblyman Richard Perkins told the Board that support was so great they felt $30-50 million could be raised. He wondered why we were having problems raising $1 million. He surmised that, either the citizens were not sincere, or they don’t want this college to succeed. He felt the college would open and was surprised that donors had not made a more prominent appearance. He reminded Dr. Moore that his major function would be fundraising. The citizens of that community have not responded in the manner in which they said they would, yet the Board was asked to loan $700,000 from the Estate Tax with no collateral. Dr. Moore replied that the citizens were volunteering their time and working very hard to move this effort forward. He was not aware of any public college trying to raise money for the president’s and/or administrator’s salaries. He said that people typically give money for scholarships and buildings. He said that he prays the relationships will last, adding there was a chance that a better form of governance would result from this.
Regent Kirkpatrick read in the newspaper that Dr. Moore was planning on using classroom space at CCSN-Henderson. He asked how that space was used last year and how it would be used this year. He did not want NSCH to negatively impact CCSN. President Remington replied that one of the things yet to done was to see how hosting NSCH would impact enrollments and overhead. He stated that funding was based upon enrollments, which could be negatively impacted with some of this assistance. He indicated that, to this point, all conversations had been preliminary. He said he wanted and believed in a state college, but he would need to determine the level of assistance that CCSN could provide. Regent Kirkpatrick asked about the arrangement with the high school and asked whether they could move. President Remington replied that an agreement could be developed to utilize some of that space. He said they might opt to look at offices downtown or district facilities. He noted that CCSN-Henderson had more FTE than all of GBC. He acknowledged that CCSN would need to gain enrollment just to get out of the hold harmless condition. He said that he had a duty to protect CCSN.
Regent Rosenberg expressed concern for releasing Estate Tax funds because the endowment was comprised of those funds. He noted that everyone had agreed that the need was there. The collateral is the students. He suggested doing this as right as possible
so as not to provide a disservice to the students. He stressed the importance of the students.
Regent Kirkpatrick asked how Dr. Moore proposed to repay the loan. Dr. Moore replied that he would be advised by the IFC. Regent Kirkpatrick asked whether such a loan was legal. Chancellor Nichols stated that it was, adding that this was the only fund that could loan money. The terms of payback would be 5-10 years because it would take that long for the college to begin operating profitably.
Regent Kirkpatrick agreed with Regent Gallagher about use of Estate Tax funds. He noted that the System spent over $130 million from that fund in the last two biennia. He estimated there would be $100 million in the Estate Tax fund at the end of this biennium. Vice Chancellor Miles replied that recent federal legislation would have a deteriorating impact on the income to the endowment. He felt it would be substantially less than $100 million at the end of the biennium. He stated there was no way to predict the annual income. He emphasized there were only projections because one could not predict deaths, how much would be in the Estate Tax, and the market value of the endowment. Regent Kirkpatrick felt it essential for a balance to be maintained in order to provide money for student loans and EPSCoR. He was unsure the state would provide funding for those uses. He expressed concern for allowing any other expenditures from the Estate Tax fund, adding that he did want to help Dr. Moore.
Regent Gallagher stated that, if the Board requested a payback in 10 years, the payback might be all that is left of the Estate Tax.
Motion carried. Regents Dondero, Gallagher, Hill, Rosenberg, Seastrand, and Wiesner voted yes. Regent Kirkpatrick voted no. Regents Alden, Derby, Howard, and Sisolak were absent.
Chancellor Nichols noted that General Counsel Ray informed her that any action taken by the Estate Tax Committee would require subsequent Board approval. She asked the Board for permission to go directly to Interim Finance to avoid the delay. Regent Gallagher agreed. She felt it would be more appropriate for similar items to be taken before the Estate Tax Committee in the future.
15. Approved-Amendment to Interlocal Agreement, NSCH – The Board approved an amendment to the interlocal building lease agreement between the City of Henderson as lessor and the UCCSN on behalf of Nevada State College at Henderson as lessee. (Ref. F on file in the Board office)
President Moore reported the City of Henderson had agreed to remodel a building for $225,000 at their expense. NSCH will handle the planning, supervision, and construction of the project. President Moore stated that it was a sound proposition, adding that NSCH was willing to accept the responsibilities of planning and managing the remodel. Chair Dondero asked whether the project would go through the SPWB. President Moore replied that it would not, adding that the Board of Regents would approve the project.
Regent Gallagher moved approval of the amendment to the NSCH Interlocal Agreement. Regent Hill seconded.
Regent Kirkpatrick asked whether the money could be used for anything other than remodeling. President Moore replied that NSCH agreed to complete the remodeling by June 2003 or return the funds.
Motion carried. Regent Kirkpatrick voted no. Regents Alden, Derby, Howard, and Sisolak were absent.
16. Approved-Foundation Appointments, NSCH – The Board approved the following NSCH Foundation appointments:
- Bill Martin, Foundation Chair 2001-2002
- Sherry Colquitt
- Cliff Findlay
- Marydean Martin
- Phil Peckman
President Moore reported that the trustees of Nevada State College Foundation had been meeting to discuss fundraising efforts for NSCH and recommended expansion of the Foundation for fiscal year 2001-2002.
Regent Hill moved approval of the NSCH Foundation appointments. Regent Gallagher seconded. Motion carried. Regents Alden, Derby, Howard, and Sisolak were absent.
17. Approved-2001 Master Plan, WNCC – The Board approved the Campus Master Plan 2001 for Western Nevada Community College-Carson City Campus (on file in the Board office). The primary purpose of the campus master plan is to define a framework of opportunities within which the college can make decisions on upgrading existing facilities and systems and on accommodating new infrastructure and facilities, thus creating a beautiful and inviting campus environment.
President Carol Lucey introduced Mr. Max Hershenow of Hershenow & Klippenstein Architects. He reported that the master plan represented a 20-year vision for WNCC. He emphasized that the plan had been an inclusive process involving WNCC administration, faculty, staff, students, Carson City residents, Carson City agencies, and State of Nevada representatives. He stressed the importance of providing for future growth and change. The plan arose from the need to determine a site for the library and student center (35,000-sq. ft.), as well as a desire for buildings and streets to be planned logically. Prior to this, the campus had been randomly developed. Major considerations included:
- Developing a concept.
- Improving the campus’ front door.
- Creation of more congenial spaces for student interaction.
- Consolidation of the campus (academic and vocational), where all students have access to all of the resources.
Mr. Hershenow reported that the college sits on 195 acres with steep topography. He displayed areas designated for development, major drainage and watersheds, as well as identified earthquake faults. He reported there is currently only entrance/exit to the campus (College Parkway), and that parking had been developed on land better suited for buildings. He explained that the concept was to create a more pedestrian campus with a collegiate atmosphere; a tightly knit campus where students can walk from one building to another. They want to provide more access points onto campus. They placed importance on landscaping with trees, shrubs, and vegetation. A number of projects have grown out of the plan:
- Library and student center.
- Performing arts center.
- Physical education/wellness center and possible development of athletic facilities.
Mr. Hershenow reported that the master plan provided a tool for WNCC to grow sensibly and be proud of the institution.
Ms. Helaine Jesse, Vice President of Institutional Advancement-WNCC, reported that the college had been involved in a series of conversations with multiple organizations regarding complex issues such as drainage, right-of-way, public utility easements, shared facilities, and bike paths. She reported that Carson City’s agreement to abandon the right-of-way near the college was a huge win for WNCC, adding that the college could now be developed cohesively. She noted they were trying to develop a campus that would attract more full-time students.
Regent Kirkpatrick moved approval of the 2001 WNCC Master Plan. Regent Rosenberg seconded.
Regent Kirkpatrick noted that approval of the Master Plan did not include approval of the 4-year degree programs she included in the plan. President Lucey replied there were many issues yet to be addressed.
Motion carried. Regents Alden, Derby, Howard, and Sisolak were absent.
18. Approved-Procedures for Periodic Presidential Evaluations – Chancellor Nichols presented proposed amendments to the Board’s procedures for periodic presidential evaluations (Ref. G on file in the Board office)
Chancellor Nichols reported that the existing process was approved by the Board in September 1999 and was modeled on a successful program used by the Utah Board of Regents. It represented a major change in the manner in which periodic evaluations were conducted for presidents and the Chancellor. The process adopted in September 1999 was used to conduct mid-term evaluations of President Carol Harter, President John Richardson, and President Ron Remington. With transitions in the Chancellor’s office, no post assessment of the new periodic review process was undertaken. In anticipation of periodic evaluations due in Spring 2002, she solicited feedback on the current process from all of the presidents, with special emphasis given to comments from those presidents evaluated in Spring 2000. The proposed changes reflect a clean-up/consolidation of several documents (adopted in 1999) into one document, the addition of procedures used in Spring 2000 but not codified in the original document, and suggestions from the presidents based upon their experience. Dr. Nichols reported that the most significant new recommendations included:
- Clarifying that the periodic evaluation occurs at the midpoint of the president’s contract period. The former language (“following the first three years”) conflicted with contracts that could be awarded for less than 3 years.
- Allowing the president under review to submit a list of potential individuals to serve as evaluation committee chair. The final selection of the chair remains the decision of the Board Chair. This would expand the size of the evaluation committee from 4-5 members by adding an additional community representatives. The committee would be comprised of an external member (chair), 2 Regents, and 2 community members.
- Adding an assessment measure under external relations to indicate presidential involvement in the community.
- Adding an assessment measure under student affairs to indicate evidence of successful retention efforts.
Chancellor Nichols requested an additional assessment under personnel to indicate evidence of success in meeting institutional goals for hiring, mentoring, and promoting opportunities for the upward mobility of underrepresented groups (students, faculty, and staff). She related that all of the other changes reflected consolidation measures.
Regent Hill moved approval of the procedures for periodic presidential evaluations with the addition proposed by the Chancellor. Regent Rosenberg seconded.
Regent Gallagher cautioned about requesting feedback from too many community members who may not be in a position to evaluate the president.
Regent Rosenberg felt that presidential (and Chancellor) evaluations should be totally private and confidential. He asked whether there was a way to secure such information since he was constantly approached by news organizaitons. General Counsel Ray replied that it had always been the position of the legal department and the System that personnel documents are confidential and purely a matter between the employer and the employee. He said that he had always denied media requests for access to personnel evaluations. Regent Rosenberg asked whether it would include information from the faculty, adding that he felt it should be completely confidential. General Counsel Ray agreed with his perception, adding there was an obligation to those responding to maintain that confidentiality.
Regent Seastrand recalled that concern had been expressed for having evaluations too far away from the period being evaluated and asked about the timeframe for evaluations. Chancellor Nichols repled there was a regular, annual review of all System employees
including presidents. The Chancellor prepares annual presidential reviews which are presented to the Board. She noted that this evaluation was intended to be broader, not time limited, and a measurement of success of the presidency. She noted that there would be a minimum of three years since their last periodic evaluation.
Motion carried. Regents Alden, Derby, Howard, and Sisolak were absent.
19. Approved-Memorandum of Understanding, WNCC – The Board approved a Memorandum of Understanding between the Carson City Board of Supervisors, the Carson City School District, and Western Nevada Community College regarding park, recreation, and athletic facilities. (Ref. N on file in the Board office)
President Lucey reported that WNCC would like to involve the city with development of certain areas since no state funds would be provided for athletic activities. She related that Assistant General Counsel Brooke Nielsen had reviewed the document. Chair Dondero asked whether Carson City had approved this yet. President Lucey replied that they had not.
Regent Rosenberg moved approval of the WNCC Memorandum of Understanding. Regent Hill seconded. Motion carried. Regents Alden, Derby, Howard, and Sisolak were absent.
Chancellor Nichols requested a headcount of those Regents planning to visit the Redfield Campus with Presidents Lilley and Huneycutt, to see the proposed TMCC High Tech Center site.
The meeting recessed at 5:00 p.m. and reconvened on Friday, August 17, 2001 at 8:08 a.m. with all members present except Regents Alden, Derby, Hill, Howard, and Sisolak.
1. Approved-Personnel Session – (Cont’d.) In compliance with NRS 241.030, a closed session was held for purposes of discussion of the character, alleged misconduct, professional competence, or physical or mental health of certain executive employee(s) of the UCCSN.
Regent Rosenberg moved approval of moving to a closed session. Regent Kirkpatrick seconded. Motion carried. Regents Alden, Derby, Hill, Howard, and Sisolak were absent.
The Board moved to a closed session at 8: 10 a.m. and returned to open session at 9:10 a.m. with all members present except Regents Alden, Derby, Howard, and Sisolak.
1.2 Information Only-Return to Open Session – (Cont’d.) The Board returned to open session.
4. Introductions – (Cont’d.)
Regent Hill introduced his eleven year old daughter, Ms. Adrienne Ariel Hill.
20. Information Only-AB 378 and the Nursing Shortage in Nevada - Mr. Bill Welch, President, and Ms. Doreen Begley, Nurse Executive, of the Nevada Hospital Association (NHA) provided a report on the nursing shortage in Nevada, the impact of AB 378, and the role of UCCSN. Dr. Michael Harter, UCCSN Health Education Coordinator concluded the presentation with information on UCCSN plans to implement AB 378. (Ref. I on file in the Board office)
Mr. Bill Welsh introduced Ms. Doreen Begley, Nurse Executive, hired to bring focus to the issue. He expressed hope of increasing focus on the need to address the nursing shortage in Nevada. He reported it would require a partnership of the educational system, the health care industry, as well as the community and citizens of Nevada. He said there were many components to address. Currently, the health industry cannot employ the number of nurses necessary to meet patient needs. Consequently nurses must work overtime. A 1999 report identified the serious and growing shortage of nurses. Nursing graduates have not increased since then. There are many vacant positions due to the shortage. It is a national and international concern. The Nevada Nurse Task Force was established in 2000 to address Nevada’s nursing shortage. The Board’s Health Care Education Committee asked this task force to work closely with the deans of System institutions to develop further strategies. The task force requested one university and one community college representative (UNR and CCSN). The task force performed the Packham Study(on file in the Board office) which analyzed the nursing workforce and nursing education in Nevada.
Ms. Doreen Begley reviewed the statistics, adding that many people do not truly realize the ramifications of the nursing shortage. Nevada has the worst nurse to population ratio in the nation. The national average is 782; Nevada averages 520. There are currently 989 vacancies in hospital positions in Nevada. There has been a rapid increase in the number of vacancies. Currently, the national nurse vacancy rate is 9%; Nevada’s is 12-14%. Nevada ranks as the fastest growing state in the nation; Las Vegas the fastest growing metropolitan area; and Clark County the fastest growing county. Nevada also has the fastest growth of elderly population. It is expected to double in the next 30 years and the elderly are also the greatest users of the health care system. The average age of Nevada nurses is 45 and continues to rise. The shortage will compound as the workforce ages and the population increases. She reported that the average age of student nurses was also rising. Nursing students are often single parents requiring flexible schedules and are more dedicated to the path they have chosen. Some are seeking their second degree. Nevada will need an additional 662 nurses through 2008. She concluded that nurses are an endangered species.
Mr. Welch reported that the nursing shortage was contributing to a very serious problem in Clark County. Hospitals and ambulances are overloaded due to lack of beds and staff. He related that new hospitals were being built, including five in Nevada in the next few years. Existing facilities will be raided for staff. Nursing is predominantly a female profession, yet today there are more female students going to school to become doctors and lawyers than men. He expressed a need to make the nursing profession more visible. The original intent of AB378 included:
v Recognition that the average student age (mid-20’s) not eligible for Millennium Scholarship. “Special consideration” to include provision of scholarships for those graduating from a Nevada high school from 1985 to present and pursuing educations in the health care or education fields.
- Revitalize the nursing profession with funding for a media campaign.
- Create a student funding/loan forgiveness program for nurses who remained in the community and worked in the profession.
- Double the enrollment of nursing programs in Nevada.
He indicated that AB 378 was a weaker version of what was originally intended. The Governor withdrew the age component after becoming concerned with the stability of the Millennium Scholarship. Budget restraints prevented legislation for funding a media campaign. Two components survived:
- $90,000 provided in financial support for loans to nursing students (efforts are underway to amend the bill to a loan forgiveness program).
- UCCSN shall develop a plan toward to double the enrollment of the nursing programs from the 2000 enrollments.
He offered the NHA’s support to help develop that plan. He felt it important to include the clinical rotation component with the education and asked that NHA be included in the planning process. He hoped to ensure that the medical community would provide the necessary clinical rotation. He also asked that the NHA be involved in meetings regarding development of the loan program. He stressed the need to access the funds allocated. He acknowledged there were more qualified students applying for the nursing program than there were slots available due to an insufficient number of seats being funded. Sunrise Medical Center has expanded their programs to help UNLV keep pace with the number of students.
President Harter stated that she did not know why UNLV was not mentioned on the chart. She reported there were 112 slots available (56/semester) and only 40 qualified students for Fall. She indicated that UNLV also wanted to expand, but required the students to fill the slots. Mr. Welch replied that they were aware that UNLV did not have excess qualified students. The Nevada Nurse Task Force has created several subcommittees to initiate a campaign about the nursing profession for grades K-12. What NHA is doing to help address the issue:
Mr. Welch related there were several opportunities lost over the past year. Forty-eight qualified students were not admitted to the Orvis School of Nursing program. NHA offered to put up half of the money required by Orvis ($750,000) to admit those students. Unfortunately, UCCSN could not match the other half due to budget constraints. He indicated that NHA’s offer remained. He offered to fund half the cost of one faculty member in order to bring 9 more students into the process. NHA raised $25,000 in 3 weeks for a summer program, but missed the window of opportunity. He reported that some hospitals were doing things on their own; Sunrise Hospital is working with UNLV and CCSN. The Universal Health System is discussing funding with UCCSN. NHA is asking every hospital in Clark County to contribute money for expanding the nursing programs by next semester. He related that NHA was committed to being a partner with UCCSN, providing mentoring, scholarships, and joint appointments to collaboratively address the nursing shortage issues and requirements.
Regent Kirkpatrick asked about the lack of cooperation to identify clinical internships. Mr. Welch replied there was no formal mechanism in place to bring health care providers into an organized process. Regent Kirkpatrick asked the directors of Orvis School of Nursing, UNLV Health Sciences, and the community colleges to discuss the problems with clinical internships at the next Board meeting.
Regent Wiesner asked how Nevada’s pay scale compared with the rest of the country. Mr. Welch replied that a 2000 study revealed that Nevada was fairly competitive with California.
Regent Hill asked whether NHA was having difficulty interfacing with the various nursing schools and how the Regents could help. Mr. Welch replied that having UCCSN representation on the Nevada Nursing Task Force had resolved many challenges. He acknowledged that they don’t always agree on everything, but there was a good forum with good collaboration. Regent Hill stated that he would like to be notified if the Board could intervene with any problems within the System. He asked about the different nursing degrees and programs and whether there was a shortage in all areas. Mr. Welch replied that today there is a shortage of registered nurses, adding that it made little difference what their degrees were. The industry is moving toward a requirement for a higher level of education for the nurses due to technological developments. The shortage is so severe they would like to focus on increasing community college enrollments in nursing due to quicker degree attainment. He said that they also need bachelor degreed nurses in the workplace. Regent Hill asked whether it was an impediment for nursing students who had completed a community college program to start over again for a 4-year degree. Mr. Welch agreed there were challenges with articulation. Regent Hill asked about NHA’s expectations. Mr. Welch replied that he would like to see funds redirected toward expanding the nursing programs. He asked the Board to provide one more slot for Orvis so the 9 nursing students could enroll. He expressed excitement for plans regarding NSCH, adding that everyone needs to be creative.
Chair Dondero recommended that Dr. Mike Harter and Regent Doug Seastrand be considered for their committee. Mr. Welch replied that NHA recently became aware of a Southern Nevada Task Force on Nursing originated by Sunrise Hospital, adding that Dr. Harter participated on that task force.
Regent Seastrand asked whether funds were available that could be redirected. Chair Dondero preferred to wait until after Dr. Harter’s presentation.
Dr. Mike Harter, UCCSN Health Education Coordinator, described the systems planned to address AB 378. He reported that UCCSN supplies health care professionals for Nevada, adding that Nevada was the fastest growing state in the union and that it was difficult to keep pace with demand. Existing programs include:
- CCSN entry-level RN (associate degree) - 160 students
- CCSN LPN (associate degree) - 20 students
- GBC entry-level RN (associate degree) - 28 students
- TMCC entry-level RN (associate degree) - 85
- UNLV entry-level RN (bachelor degree) - 192
- UNR entry-level RN (bachelor degree) - 96
- WNCC RN (associate degree) - 62
- Total = 643 students
- NSCH plans an entry-level RN program beginning 2002.
AB 378 Section I - Loan Program:
- 25% of interest earned on the trust fund for public health (tobacco settlement).
- Estimated biennial total $90,000.
- Board of Regents shall establish a policy for administration of loan funds.
- IFC must approve Board-developed policy.
Nevada State Nursing Loan Program:
- Policy drafted by a committee of System nursing faculty and financial aid staff, System Staff (Dr. Mike Harter and Ms. Lori Tiede), one business officer and a representative from NHA.
- Policy to be presented to the Board for consideration at the October meeting.
- Projected start September.
Dr. Harter stated that the committee’s interpretation of the legislation referencing NRS 396.890-396.898 was that it is a loan forgiveness program if that is what the Board desires. Dr. Harter expressed hope that Mr. Welch and the NHA would help the committee ensure that feature was included. Once the policy is approved by the Board and the IFC, it will be implemented in Spring 2002.
AB 378 Section II - Double the capacity of the System:
- Board of Regents will develop a plan.
- Double the capacity of System nursing programs.
- Based on 2000-2001 enrollments.
As part of the regular budgeting process, the Board of Regents needs to include the plan as a separately identifiable component of the proposed biennial budget. The plan needs to include a cost estimate for doubling the capacity of the programs.
Double the Capacity Schedule:
- Appoint committee to include nursing faculty, business staff, System staff (October 2001).
- Develop survey instrument (costs for: personnel, facilities, equipment, supplies, goals, objectives, potential constraints).
- Distribute survey to campuses (November 15, 2001).
- Submit plan to Board of Regents (February 1, 2002).
Dr. Harter reported that the committee intends to meet the legislative intent and AB 378 mandate in a timely manner.
Regent Gallagher requested an estimated cost for doubling the capacity. Dr. Harter replied that the campuses had provided some costs, ranging from several million dollars to several hundred thousand dollars, mostly due to capital construction. He reported that on-going costs would be approximately $12 million/year. Regent Gallagher clarified that those were the costs for the additional students. Dr. Harter agreed.
Regent Seastrand asked about the survey. Dr. Harter replied that the Board would require up-to-date information to assist with a request for nursing funding from the legislature (i.e. costs and objectives to be achieved by adding funding to the System).
Chancellor Nichols attempted to address Regent Seastrand’s question regarding whether there were any new resources to devote to the NHA’s matching offer or other efforts. She reminded the Board that this was exactly what they are facing in the teaching area too. The System did send a proposal to the legislature to increase teaching capacity and received no support from the legislature. She felt that support from the NHA and the medical community would be critical to obtaining legislative support. She noted that the System could not create on-going programs, with commitments to students and faculty, unless there was a guarantee for on-going state funding. She said the System did not have funding to re-direct, even considering the Estate Tax fund. She related that all campuses were critically under funded. She acknowledged that the NHA had made a wonderful offer and was concerned about not being able to match it.
President Harter stated that UNLV was in a hold harmless situation (with the same budget as the previous year). Since they were unable to add new positions, the provost allowed both the College of Education and the College of Health and Sciences to hire new people. UNLV filled 3 of 11 available nursing slots; 2 with the help of Sunrise Hospital. Virtually no nursing faculty responded. It is very difficult to get faculty with advanced degrees in this field. UNLV had difficulty filling the 56 available seats with only 40 qualified students. She noted that it was a multifaceted problem. UNLV has done many things to recruit new students into the program. UNLV has tripled the number of teachers being produced in the last 6 years without any new state funds. They have also doubled (70% increase) the nursing output by reallocating positions within the university. She was not sure UNLV could do any more.
President Lilley reported that the commitment to match temporary dollars by June 30th was unattainable since he was not president then. He noted that UNR has a major challenge of resources with the anticipated growth. UNR is undertaking a strategic planning process that will review resource reallocation and state needs. The nursing program may benefit from that effort. The nursing school says that, at this late date, they are unable to increase the capacity this year. He expected that UNR would be a responsive part of solving the problem in the long term.
Regent Wiesner asked whether the Council of Presidents had addressed this issue. President Harter replied that they had talked about it. Regent Wiesner suggested the Council of Presidents return with a recommendation for the Board.
President Lucey acknowledged the support of Carson-Tahoe Hospital for helping WNCC address the nursing shortage. She reinforced the importance of making K-12 aware of the issue. WNCC now has an online RN to BSN program. Two distance learning projects (Fallon and Yerington) will begin in the Fall. She agreed it was a complex problem involving at least three factors:
- Nevada high school students do not go directly to college.
- Older students cannot complete an RN in two years.
President Lucey affirmed that they would make progress.
President Moore stated that he was working closely with NHA to bring a specific plan to begin July 1, 2002.
Interim President Diekhans stated that GBC had been unable to fill a faculty vacancy for a year, adding that the last offer made had been declined. Chair Dondero summarized that the System needs faculty, students and funding.
Regent Seastrand asked about the duration of the funding offer from NHA. Mr. Welch replied that they would commit to raising the money to allow those 9 students to complete the program. Regent Seastrand observed there were a number of long-term problems, adding that the Board’s hands were tied.
Regent Rosenberg observed that the 9 nursing students involved more than an additional teacher at Orvis. Those students would need to attend other classes within the program. UNR has been directed not to turn away students and figure a way to get them into a program. Dr. Harter stated that the director of the program would need to address faculty requirements. Normally, when you add 8 students to a program it requires the addition of one faculty to supervise in a clinical setting. President Lilley commented that UNR had hired one new faculty to the Orvis School of Nursing this year. He felt it was a very tempting offer and asked to speak with Mr. Welch.
Ms. Pam Schueler, Assistant Professor, Nursing-UNR, confirmed that Orvis could absorb those 9 students in a classroom setting, adding that a clinical setting required additional faculty coverage per State Board of Nursing mandates.
President Lucey suggested that the Board could help with the community college faculty salary schedule, which made it difficult to recruit trained nurse educators. She noted that clinical obligations were the same for community colleges. She felt it important for the clinical ratio to be equitable between RN and BSN programs.
Chair Dondero observed there were three task forces working simultaneously (Sunrise, NHA, Health Care Education), adding that she would like to see cooperation and coordination between the groups and a recommendation for the Board.
Regent Hill asked whether the requirement of one faculty supervisor for every 8 students in a clinical setting was reasonable. Ms. Schueler replied that it was, since the students were often spread over several floors. Regent Hill asked whether that process could be made more efficient. Ms. Schueler replied they could not expand the number of students even if they were all in one place. Dr. Harter stated that the 1:8 ratio was for clinical settings, adding that the supervising faculty had other groups to supervise.
Chair Dondero stated that the Health Care Education Committee had a large task to accomplish. She requested recommendations for the October Board meeting and asked the other task forces to work together. Dr. Harter related that he also serves on an NHA subcommittee to attract students to the System.
21. Approved-Resolution, Reynolds Foundation Proposal, DRI – The Board approved a resolution authorizing DRI’s submission of a grant proposal to the Donald W. Reynolds Foundation for the construction funding of the Tahoe Basin Environmental Science and Policy Center on the Sierra Nevada College(SNC)campus at Incline Village, Nevada. The Donald W. Reynolds Foundation required a resolution from the governing board of the institution as part of the grant application package. President Wells provided an update on the status of the Tahoe Basin Environmental Science and Policy Center. The Center (a joint effort of DRI, SNC, and RAND, as well as other participating universities and agencies)will house unique teaching, research and policy development programs. The Center conforms to the strategic and facilities master plans of DRI and SNC.
The Board of Regents of the University and Community College System of Nevada do hereby resolve that the Tahoe Basin Environmental Science and Policy Center proposed by the Desert Research Institute, in cooperation with Sierra Nevada College and RAND, conforms to the Institute’s strategic plan and facilities master plan. Be it resolved that the governing board approves the submission of the Donald W. Reynolds Foundation Summary Proposal being prepared by the Desert Research Institute.
President Wells introduced Dr. Jim Ash, President of Sierra Nevada College. He stated that cooperation was the goal of this center, adding it would be a joint use facility for SNC, DRI, RAND Corporation and other key participants. The proposed 45,000-sq. ft. facility on the SNC campus will house research laboratories, classrooms, offices, a strategic planning area, and an auditorium. Dr. Wells noted that SNC was also strapped for land, adding that it was quite an honor for them to include this building in their master plan. Agencies and policy makers will use the strategic planning area to work with scientists to improve watersheds including Lake Tahoe and others around the world. Students will be able to view the planning process from windows in the classrooms and laboratories. Collaboration has been demonstrated with two Memoranda of Understanding:
- The TESS Agreement – Tahoe Environmental Science System-integrating the research facilities to assist in environmental management and signed by the presidents of UNR, DRI, and the Chancellor of the U.C. Davis System.
- DRI, SNC, and RAND MOU – working to create a partnership towards developing the center and ensuring its success.
President Wells requested Board support of Resolution 01-02 and agreement that the proposal is consistent with DRI’s strategic directions and included in their facilities master plan.
Regent Hill asked whether the facility would belong to the System or revert to SNC. President Wells replied that details on the lease would be brought back to the Board. Initially the building would be DRI’s, but would revert back to SNC after a period of time.
Regent Gallagher strongly supported the proposal, adding that she thought it was an outstanding partnership with SNC.
Regent Seastrand asked whether the Thunderbird Lodge was a different venture. President Wells replied that, as part of the TESS agreement, the lodge served as a premier site for lake access in environmental monitoring. The DRI/SNC site has laboratories, visiting scholar space and a strategic planning room, complementary to the U.C. Davis plan. He related they were attempting to develop a non-competitive environment for research and he believed they were complimentary. Regent Seastrand asked why they selected this location. President Wells replied they were seeking the best site. The opportunity with SNC provided a great location and the college was also looking for talent from DRI to help with their teaching program. He related that urban infringement was not present, it was the best location to carry out DRI’s goals as well as SNC’s and include the RAND corporation.
Regent Kirkpatrick moved approval of Resolution 01-02 for DRI. Regent Rosenberg seconded.
Regent Hill stated that, this was a tremendous advantage for SNC, there should be a provision for an extension. Regent Seastrand concurred. SNC President Ash stated that SNC was open to that because of the synergy between partners.
Chair Dondero asked whether UNR was part of the proposal. President Lilley replied that UNR was a modest, but hopefully significant, partner. President Wells related that Tahoe newspapers would be announcing the partnership. He hoped that the next phase would include U.C. Davis as well. Chair Dondero observed that the same cooperation was necessary with Lake Mead.
Motion carried. Regents Alden, Derby, Howard, and Sisolak were absent.
22. Information Only-Update on Student Government, CCSN - President Ron Remington and Student Body President Calvin Hooks provided an update on student government activities at CCSN. Vice Chancellor Miles described current Board policies governing student government expenditures. The Board discussed any reports or actions related to student government policies it wishes to have placed on the agenda of future meetings.
President Remington related that an article appeared in the newspaper regarding CCSN student government activities and expenditures. In providing better oversight, he has assigned specific personnel to work with student government:
- Mr. Dan Morris, Business Services-CCSN.
- Ms. Bobbie Heath, Student Government Advisor-CCSN.
Vice Chancellor Miles provided an overview of Board policy. Each student organization is financed by a portion of student fees:
- UNR $2.56/credit hour.
- UNLV $2.40/credit hour.
- GBC $0.75/credit hour.
- TMCC $0.50/credit hour.
- WNCC $0.50/credit hour.
- CCSN $2.00/credit hour.
Mr. Miles related that these fees (undergraduate) produce an estimated $2.5 million System-wide annually for student government issues. NRS 396.547 addresses student government organizations. The Board has also established a set of policies that govern student government (Title 4, Chapter 20, Student Association Finances). The constitution of each student government guides the expenditure of funds. Board policy also indicates that established rules and procedures shall be followed when processing funds through the system. The institution president may delegate business manager functions for the student organization to a full-time professional employee, which has occurred at the two universities. He related that the student advisor usually provides this function for community college student organizations.
Regent Seastrand asked about responsibility for oversight and auditing. Mr. Miles replied that Board policy requires that, if there is a business manager, an audit must occur every three years. He noted that some institutions employed that method while others did not. Most student advisors are helping with the advisability of expenditures. Regent Seastrand asked about reporting authority. Mr. Miles replied that the policy mandated that the student association must report annually to their own student body, adding there was no requirement for them to report to the Board.
Regent Kirkpatrick was surprised with the varying amounts dedicated to student government. Mr. Miles replied that increases had occurred over time. He surmised that the two universities had a larger student body, that was present for a longer period of time, offering more programs and functions than the community colleges. Regent Kirkpatrick said that he was aware that President Harter was in disagreement with the student body regarding the amount devoted to student government. President Harter stated there was no argument and they were working well with that issue. Chancellor Nichols stated that CCSN has a much higher per-credit fee than the other community colleges. She related that the Board approves those amounts when they review distribution of student fees each biennium.
Regent Hill felt that, as a part of the Board’s function of oversight, there ought to be an annual reporting to the Finance or Audit Committee, or the Board. He asked the Chancellor to review the most appropriate reporting method. Additionally, he was interested in developing a policy delineating appropriate expenditures since it was taxpayer money. Mr. Carlos Ledon felt that was a misinterpretation because the funds came from student fees. He added that most organizations already adhere to the policies.
Ms. Patty Charlton, Interim Associate Vice-President, Finance & Administration-CCSN, reported that student government funding started at $0.50/credit hour and had grown (over 20 years) to the current $2.00/credit hour. She reported the following distribution of those fees:
- $1.30 – Student Government General Fund (equating to $550,000 this fiscal year).
- $0.70 - Support to various student programs (tutorial services, childcare program, athletics, student lecture series; $280,000 total this year).
Ms. Charlton reported that President Remington had assigned Mr. Dan Morris as the business manager, adding that he has a thorough understanding of Board guidelines and polices. She indicated that CCSN administration was working cooperatively with student government to develop solid process, procedures, and guidelines to help them use their money effectively, efficiently and in compliance with the Handbook. She introduced Ms. Bobbi Heath, Interim Director of Student Activities and Student Advisor-CCSN, who will be working with the president and the student government organization.
Ms. Bobbi Heath reported that CCSN held a retreat where students added policies and procedures that were not in place with the prior student government. She related that it was now a more responsible student government at CCSN.
Mr. Calvin Hooks, CCSN student body president, reported that the student government had been in the news for unwise expenditures in past administrations. They have plans to change how things are done by student government in the future:
- Spending more money on scholarships.
- Services that need to be addressed.
- Transportation between the West Charleston and Cheyenne campuses.
- Health insurance improvements.
- Transportation between the West Charleston and Cheyenne campuses.
Mr. Hooks related that the main issue had been parties, adding that he had taken a lot of heat for parties he never attended. Some student government representatives feel that the experience should be fun. He regretted that the parties were held, adding that they were not well attended. He assured the Board that this student government would not have over financed parties funded by student government. He related that checks and balances were being implemented, as well as changes to their bylaws, to avoid this unfortunate circumstance in the future. He provided a list of worthwhile projects funded by student government in the past, adding that student government had been a responsible steward of those funds. He acknowledged that the students had an expectation for how those funds were expended. He stated that the current student government representation was very diverse, adding that they hoped to provide good, common sense leadership. He felt the news article cast CCSN and past student governments in a dim light. He related that President Remington was a very cooperative administrator. He felt that the deeds of past student government were linked somewhat to bad leadership, adding that they now had good leadership. He concluded that it is a new day at CCSN, and they would prove that to the Board. They presented “new day” t-shirts for the Regents (not funded by student fees).
The meeting recessed at 11:15 a.m. and reconvened at 11:30 a.m. with all members present except Regents Alden, Derby, Howard, and Sisolak.
23. Information Only-Study of Administrative Structure, CCSN - President Ronald Remington reviewed the legislatively mandated study of the administrative structure of the Community College of Southern Nevada.
President Remington reported that CCSN is the 3rd or 4th largest community college in the country. Legislators and community members have expressed concern about the different CCSN campuses. The Henderson campus is about the size of WNCC. The Cheyenne and West Charleston campuses have more students individually than all of TMCC. Each campus serves a different community. A recent assembly bill (AB 454) requested an assessment of how to effectively manage such a large and diverse community college. He asked the Board to consider persons suggested for the committee on compliance in response to AB 454. He related that the college would pay for a consultant if necessary.
Chair Dondero announced the individuals who agreed to serve on the CCSN Organizational Advisory Committee with her:
- Mrs. Gloria Banks Weddle
- Mrs. Hannah Brown
- Mr. Domingo Cambeiro
- Rev. Caesar Caviglia
- Mr. John Cummings
- Mrs. Kami Dempsey
- Mr. Ruell Fiant
- Mrs. Rose Hawkins
- Mr. Calvin Hooks
- Mr. Steven Horsford
- Regent Linda Howard
- Regent Tom Kirkpatrick
- Maj. General Billy McCoy
- Mr. Tony Sanchez
- Regent Doug Seastrand
She thanked the members for agreeing to serve.
24. Information Only-Status of KUNV Radio, UNLV - UNLV provided an update of the status of KUNV radio station. (Ref. J on file in the Board office)
President Harter introduced Dean Martha Watson, Greenspun College of Urban Affairs-UNLV, who led the project bringing the KUNV radio station into the academic framework. Dean Watson reported that she had been busy developing a plan to integrate KUNV into the educational mission of the College of Urban Affairs and exploring ways to satisfy the student request for a student-managed, student-focused radio station. She related she has worked closely with student body president Paul Moradkhan to accomplish those goals. Dean Watson reported that the proposal had been endorsed by CSUN (student government), the KUNV advisory board, as well as the faculty of the Hank Greenspun School of Communications. She guided the faculty in developing a flexible curriculum that would allow many students to take classes and intern at the radio station. They developed three internship tracks: General Management, Operation, and News Director. She reported they have begun integrating KUNV staff into the Hank Greenspun School. An operations manager and program director have been hired. He will teach the basic radio course and work with interns. Students can earn educational credits by working at KUNV. She introduced Mr. Paul Moradkhan to discuss the Rebel Radio proposal.
UNLV Student Body President Mr. Paul Moradkhan reported there had been a flurry of activity in student government offices regarding the establishment of a student-run radio station. Student government has been working with UNLV administration to ensure the new student endeavor would be successful and a source of pride. Policies and job descriptions have been established. He expressed gratitude for the help received from Dean Martha Watson, Dr. Patricia Mills, and Dr. Juanita Fain. The Alumni Association donated funds and President Harter donated campus resources and funds for the project. Bids have been requested for the production and control room equipment. KUNV donated their entire rock collection to the student government. CSUN is confident that Rebel Radio will satisfy the need for a student-run, student-activity-based radio station, while KUNV will meet the academic requirements of the students.
Regent Kirkpatrick noted that Regent Rosenberg spent a great deal of time working with the students on this issue. Regent Rosenberg said he was thrilled with the results. He thanked Dean Watson and Mr. Moradkhan, adding that he hoped it was successful.
Regent Seastrand asked about CSUN being the sole authority over the Rebel Radio station (programming, funding, staff). He observed that the Board holds the FCC license. President Harter established that the Board holds the license for KUNV radio and not for Rebel Radio. Mr. Moradkhan reported that Rebel Radio was non-FCC licensed due to its size.
Ms. Rana Koran stated that the Graduate Student Association extended congratulations to the undergraduates and thanked them for extending an invitation for graduate students to participate.
President Harter related she was overjoyed that it is was completed.
25. Approved-SNSC Phase II Lease, DRI – The Board approved DRI entering into a lease agreement between the Board of Regents/UCCSN, on behalf of DRI, and the United States General Services Administration(GSA), on behalf of the Department of Energy (DOE), leasing to the GSA rentable office space in the to-be-constructed DRI SNSC (Southern Nevada Science Center)Phase II building from April 15, 2003 to April 14, 2023. During the twenty-year term of the lease GSA’s total net rent is not to exceed $8,600,000 exclusive of interest. (Ref. K on file in the Board office)
President Wells announced the successful completion of the lease negotiation for SNSC Phase II. He introduced Ms. Roxanne Day, Department of Energy, who was a critical participant in the successful negotiations. President Wells provided a description of the project:
- Joint use partnership with DOE.
- 3-story, 61,000-sq. ft. facility in Las Vegas.
- Space for DRI research programs, Test Site museum, DOE/NV document collection, artifact curation facility.
President Wells reported that the project has been reviewed by many federal agencies and includes the following key elements:
- 20- year lease with DOE; renewable for O&M costs.
- $10.1 million project cost prorated between DRI and DOE (DRI 35%, DOE 65%).
- Multiple funding sources:
- $1.5 million from the 99-01 legislative session.
- $1.2 million from the 2001 legislative session.
- $1.8 million DRI bank loan.
- $8.6 million in revenue bonds.
- $1.5 million from the 99-01 legislative session.
25. Approved-SNSC Phase II Lease, DRI – (Cont’d.)
- Groundbreaking requires the signing of a lease between the Board of Regents and the federal government (GSA).
- All issues have been resolved by UCCSN Assistant General Counsel Brooke Nielsen and GSA.
- Board approval of lease.
- Bank loan.
- Bond issue.
- Construction documents and bidding.
- Groundbreaking and construction.
Regent Rosenberg moved approval of the SNSC Phase II lease for DRI. Regent Kirkpatrick seconded. Motion carried. Regents Alden, Derby, Howard, and Sisolak were absent.
President Lilley reported that he had accepted Mr. Welch’s proposal for the 9 nursing students, who would be admitted to the Orvis School of Nursing the following week.
26. Approved-Resolution, Reynolds Foundation Proposal, UNR – The Board approved a resolution authorizing the College of Engineering at the University of Nevada, Reno for submission of a capital grant proposal to the Donald W. Reynolds Foundation for the construction funding of the Earthquake Engineering Laboratory and Education Center on the University of Nevada, Reno campus. The Donald W. Reynolds Foundation requires a resolution from the governing board of the institution as part of the grant application package. President Lilley will provide an update on the status of the Earthquake Engineering Laboratory and Education Center. The Lab and Center will house unique teaching, research, and outreach programs in earthquake engineering. The Lab and Center conform to the strategic and facilities master plans of the University of Nevada, Reno.
The Board of Regents of the University and Community College System of Nevada do hereby resolve that the Earthquake Engineering Laboratory and Education Center proposed by the University of Nevada, Reno Foundation and the College of Engineering conforms to the University of Nevada, Reno’s strategic plan and facilities master plan. Be it resolved that the governing board approves the submission of the Donald W. Reynolds Foundation Proposal being prepared by the University of Nevada, Reno Foundation and the College of Engineering.
President Lilley reported that the program was one of the most successful in the nation. The lab is a member of the network for earthquake engineering simulation, which includes U.C. Berkley, UCLA, and seven other outstanding universities. It is an accelerated research program. The experimental lab has two very large, high-performance, 50-ton shake tables that simulate earthquakes and is funded by FEMA. A recent National Science Foundation award will enable upgrade of the two tables, as well as the addition of a third shake table. Additional funding from the Department of Housing and Urban Development and the Department of Energy for simulation equipment will make this facility the only one of its kind in the world. The laboratory has conducted work for Nevada Department of Transportation, Caltrans, Federal Highway Department and the National Science Foundation.
Regent Kirkpatrick moved approval of Resolution 01-03 for UNR. Regent Rosenberg seconded.
Chair Dondero asked whether such tests could damage neighboring buildings. Dr. Ted Batchman, Dean, College of Engineering-UNR, replied that such tests would not negatively affect existing buildings. He reported that a massive amount of concrete went into the flooring structure so as not to shake other areas of the campus.
Motion carried. Regents Alden, Derby, Howard, and Sisolak were absent.
27. Approved-Property Purchase Negotiations, GBC – The Board approved a request to begin negotiation and acquisition talks on two properties that are adjacent to the campus that would serve as dormitories. (Ref. L on file in the Board office)
- Town Park Apartments (611 Walnut Street and 1691 College Parkway, West of Campus).
- Heritage Apartments (701Walnut Street, West of Campus).
Interim President Diekhans reported that GBC began serious discussions about obtaining residence halls for the college two years ago. GBC’s recruiter has reported that the most frequently asked question is whether GBC has safe, secure housing for prospective students. The GBC Foundation made fundraising for the dormitories their main priority for this year. Two years ago, the college hired an architect to prepare a rendering and basic floor plan for a 200-bed facility. Their estimate for a 100-bed wing with commons was $5 million. A 100-bed wing addition was estimated for an additional $4 million. Former Vice President Stan Aiazzi (prior to his retirement) negotiated a contract with the High Desert Inn to use one of the floors in the motel as dormitories for the college at a cost of $1,800/semester, double occupancy. President Diekhans reported that the hotel was approximately 2 miles from campus and also had a bar in the facility, which caused some parents concern. In July, GBC was approached by both the Heritage Center (a 91-bed assisted care center) and Group West (a 48-unit, 120-bed complex) with offers for GBC to purchase these properties for only the cost of the bank loans. The Heritage Center has a lien of approximately $1 million and the Group West properties have a lien of $1.7 million. Both properties are adjacent to the campus. President Diekhans felt it appeared to be an exceptional opportunity to obtain residence halls at a substantial savings. The Group West properties are currently available for occupancy; however, the Heritage Center will require some minor renovation before students are able to reside there. These properties would provide the housing required for college and program expansion, and would also conserve college property for instructional facilities.
- Could offer private room for $1800/semester (normal price for double occupancy).
- Group West (120 beds) - = $564,000 at 100% occupancy.
- Heritage Center (70 beds) - $329,000 at 100% occupancy.
- Rent to fire crews in summer months when student population is lower.
- 20-year loan at 5.5% + $140,000 operating = $387,644.
- 30 year loan = $344,000 expense.
President Diekhans reported that the 75% occupancy projection would cover the loan payments.
Regent Seastrand asked about student demand for dormitories. President Diekhans replied that GBC anticipated accommodating approximately 190 dormitory residents with these two properties. While the demand is not currently that high, he anticipated being able to fill the units. Regent Seastrand asked about the current number of students that could be drawn upon for dormitory living. President Diekhans stated he would return with more accurate figures for the Board.
Regent Seastrand expressed concern for not having sufficient demand to keep the dormitories full and the revenue projections up. President Remington explained that GBC offered unique programs including a condensed diesel mechanic program. Many non-residents have expressed interest in those programs but were deterred by the lack of living facilities. President Diekhans reported that recruitment reports indicate there is interest in these technical programs (48 week programs), but lack of housing was a barrier. Regent Seastrand felt the location was ideal. He asked that the business plan be reviewed for accuracy.
Regent Kirkpatrick established there were existing tenants at one of the sites. President Diekhans replied there were in the Group West properties and expressed a desire to move all non-students to one or two of the buildings.
Regent Kirkpatrick moved approval of the GBC property purchase negotiations. Regent Seastrand seconded.
Regent Rosenberg asked about the age of the assisted living facility. President Diekhans replied that the older portion was likely 40 years old. Regent Rosenberg asked about asbestos abatement, with President Diekhans promising to get that checked. Regent Rosenberg asked about buying the facilities in phases, with President Diekhans promising to return with three proposals for Board consideration.
Motion carried. Regents Alden, Derby, Howard, and Sisolak were absent.
28. Approved-Property Purchase, UNLV – The Board approved UNLV to purchase the Boulder Dam Area Council, Boy Scouts of America property located at 1135 University Road on the southeast perimeter of the UNLV campus (Clark County Assessor’s Parcel #162-22-801-003). This property consists of 2.2 acres of land and a building of approximately 9,000 gross square feet (such property to be acquired by Purchaser, together with any other improvements and fixtures thereon, collectively the “Property”). (Ref. M on file in the Board office)
President Harter reported that the Boy Scout building was located on the UNLV campus and had been the #1 acquisition project for many years. Originally, UNLV negotiated with the understanding that the building was completely useable. After discovering that asbestos abatement and bringing the building up to code would cost more than it was worth, UNLV persuaded the Boy Scouts they would only buy the land for $1.5 million. She noted that the UNLV Foundation real estate committee felt the price was reasonable. The Foundation has committed $1 million for acquiring the property. UNLV will pay the remaining $500,000 as well as fees for appraisals and demolition of the building. She reported that UNLV would initially develop the property for parking and later build upon it.
Regent Seastrand asked whether the parking area would be paved. President Harter replied that it would be paved. She clarified that $1.5 million was just to purchase the property.
Regent Rosenberg moved approval of the UNLV property purchase negotiations. Regent Seastrand seconded.
Regent Kirkpatrick indicated his approval for the purchase. He asked about plans for an easement for the state motor pool to be located next to the Bubba Building. President Harter replied that discussions were under way and would be brought before the Board at a later date. Regent Kirkpatrick was upset that the State would ask UCCSN to use such critical property for the state motor pool. He noted that parking places gained from this transaction would be lost with the motor pool venture. President Harter stated that it had been a delicate issue for UNLV.
Chair Dondero cautioned that the issue was not on the agenda. General Counsel Ray stated that it could only be discussed to the extent that it was relevant.
Motion carried. Regents Alden, Derby, Howard, and Sisolak were absent.
29. Approved-Property Purchase Negotiations, UNLV – The Board approved a request for authority for UNLV to negotiate opportunities for the purchase of land and building(s) for the UNLV Dental School and Biomedical Research Facilities.
Justification: At the March meeting, the Board authorized UNR and UNLV to negotiate opportunities for development of the Academic Medical Center (AMC) with the City of Las Vegas and various developers. Due to the short timeframe dictated by the opening of the Dental School in Fall 2002, this request is to focus negotiations on imminent opportunities for housing the Dental School. These opportunities may or may not involve locations associated with the future Academic Medical Center, but are in no way intended to preclude the development of the envisioned UNLV/UNR partnership of the AMC.
President Harter reported that 75 dental students would begin classes August 2002, adding there was no space on the main campus to accommodate those students. She related that UNLV was trying to identify appropriate space. UNLV has been approached by several developers to consider developing a plan with them to accommodate the dental school. She requested permission to discuss a variety of different options with different developers for the location of the dental school on at least a transitional basis.
Regent Rosenberg moved approval of the property purchase negotiations for UNLV. Regent Seastrand seconded.
Chair Dondero asked whether UNLV would lease property. President Harter replied that leasing was a possibility. She related that legislation for the capital funds had been written to provide flexibility for the manner in which the money was spent. Regent Gallagher asked about the number of properties under consideration. President Harter replied there were three properties under consideration. Regent Kirkpatrick asked about three possibilities for one location. President Harter replied that UNLV was considering three separate possibilities. Regent Kirkpatrick asked about the amount of space. President Harter replied they were estimating 120,000 sq. ft. due to the clinical aspects. She noted that it did not have to be all in one place, adding that ideally, it would be all in one place attached to the Academic Medical Center.
Motion carried. Regents Alden, Derby, Howard, and Sisolak were absent.
30. Approved-Fire Science Academy, UNR - General Counsel Tom Ray provided an update on the status of the Fire Science Academy (FSA) litigation and presented a motion for approval of the terms of the settlement agreement.
President Lilley thanked Regent Gallagher for using her influence regarding a federal grant for water and sewer. He thanked the legal counsel of Mr. Tom Ray and Mr. Mark Ghan, who worked very long hours. He extended a special thanks to Judge Whitehead for superb leadership. He also thanked the UNR alumni representing the opposing side. He noted that while there was a legal agreement, UNR has an immense fiscal challenge: $30, million payout, $5 million accumulated deficit, and startup costs. He has moved the Fire Science Academy from the development area of the university to the College of Extended Studies, where all other continuing education programs are housed. He related they were in the process of developing a realistic business plan. President Lilley stated they were working to ensure this is a quality continuing education facility.
General Counsel Ray introduced Assistant General Counsel, Mr. Mark Ghan, noting that Mr. Ghan had a great deal of experience in complex litigation and had been lead counsel on this case. Mr. Ray provided a brief background:
- 3 separate lawsuits:
- 1 brought on behalf of UNR/UCCSN against the developer.
- 1 brought by the developer against the UCCSN/UNR relating to alleged breeches on the lease/purchase agreement.
- 1 brought by the lender against UCCSN for stopped payments.
- 1 brought on behalf of UNR/UCCSN against the developer.
Mr. Ray related that all of the suits were consolidated into one action before Judge Ames in Elko. Judge Ames ordered all parties to a mandatory settlement conference, and retired Judge Whitehead was appointed to serve as the master in the proceedings. They met in Elko for 5 days with 20-30 people representing the various parties. Also participating was All-Star Investments (developer), Clark & Sullivan Construction, Granite Construction, StanTech (designers), and GMAC (lender). The settlement reached included:
- All lawsuits amongst all parties were dismissed.
- Developer/design/construction parties will pay $4.7 million to enhance the facility to address the design and construction deficiencies in the facility. All enhancements will address the environmental issues so the facility can operate without harming the environment.
- Work must be completed prior to May 1, 2002 when the facility will reopen for classes.
- The developer (All Star) has agreed to release its interest in the lease/purchase agreement so the agreement can be cancelled. They were entitled to receive $17,000/month over the life of that lease/purchase agreement ($3.8 million).
- All Star agrees to relinquish the $3.8 million.
- GMAC has agreed to allow UNR to obtain new financing.
- Pre-payment penalty waived = $2.8 million.
- Waived late charges, default increased interest accrued due to stopped payments $200,000-$300,000.
- GMAC accrued $300,000 in attorney fees. They are holding an All-Star deposit of $230,000 in payment thereof.
- Pre-payment penalty waived = $2.8 million.
- UNR must obtain new financing.
- GMAC has agreed to accept, in full satisfaction of its claims, the amount of principal due plus any interest accrued from the time payments were stopped until new financing is obtained = approximately $29 million.
- UNR will receive $150,000 cash.
Mr. Ray explained that the legislature authorized UNR to seek revenue bonds to finance this project. There will be a significant reduction in the monthly payment compared with what they were paying. He related that he had hoped for a larger cash settlement, but acknowledged that is the nature of a settlement; no one gets everything. He felt the settlement achieved far outweighed what could have been achieved in a lawsuit. He recommended Board approval of the settlement.
Regent Rosenberg moved approval of the terms of the settlement agreement. Regent Gallagher seconded.
Regent Hill asked about the revenue bonds. General Counsel Ray replied that someone from UNR could better answer that question. No one was present to do so.
Regent Rosenberg asked about the current status. General Counsel Ray replied that the end result was the facility, with $5 million in enhancements to address the environmental issues, and a lower payment structure. President Lilley stated that it was highly unlikely the FSA was a break-even operation. He promised to bring as much discipline to it as possible to lower the costs and maximize the income. Chair Dondero asked when students would be accepted. President Lilley replied that they hoped to be open in May, since that is when the Western States Petroleum Association said it had to be open or they would make other long-term commitments.
Regent Gallagher thanked everyone involved for doing such a wonderful job in a very difficult situation.
Regent Kirkpatrick felt the in-house attorneys had done a tremendous job.
Motion carried. Regents Alden, Derby, Howard, and Sisolak were absent.
31. Approved-Academic, Research & Student Affairs Committee Report – Regent Rosenberg reported the Academic, Research & Student Affairs Committee met August 16, 2001.
- Dr. Shannon Ellis, Vice President, Student Services-UNR, presented information and recommendations regarding academic advising across the UCCSN. The report was compiled by an academic advising task force. Students receive advising at formal campus advising centers and academic departments, also informally after class with faculty members, through the class schedule, on the web, and in various other forums. Campuses address advising as one of the top three issues and continually make improvements. The report recommended areas of improvement that the campuses will work together on as a System-wide effort.
- The Committee recommended that national models of reward structures for advisement be explored and that proposals for rewarding advisement at UCCSN institutions be included in the report. Additionally, the Committee requested that a process be developed to assure that leadership continually assesses advisement issues and improves advisement processes. These recommendations and revisions to the report will be submitted to the Committee for review at the next meeting. Additional work on this project will continue under the leadership of the current academic advising task force in cooperation with Vice Chancellor Curry.
- UNLV reported that six centers were eliminated due to lack of activity and funding.
- TMCC reported that six AAS emphases and certificates were eliminated due to lack of student interest.
- Dr. James Coleman, Vice President, Research & Business Development-DRI, presented an overview of the “technology transfer” plan, developed by an American Association for the Advancement of Science review team funded by the National Science Foundation through Nevada’s ESPCoR program. The review team found that DRI as an institution is “unique…and exemplary”. The team evaluated DRI’s stakeholders and made recommendations for technology commercialization, the research park/incubator, and institutional infrastructure.
Regent Rosenberg requested Board action on the following Committee recommendations:
- New Departments – The Committee reviewed requests for the following new departments:
- Management Information Systems (MIS), UNLV
- Department of Nutritional Sciences, UNLV
- Management Information Systems (MIS), UNLV
- New Center-Center for Applied Statistics and Statistical Advising (CASSA), UNLV - The Committee reviewed a request for the establishment of a new center at UNLV.
Regent Rosenberg moved approval of the Committee recommendations and acceptance of the report. Regent Hill seconded. Motion carried. Regents Alden, Derby, Howard, and Sisolak were absent.
32. Approved-Audit Committee Report – Regent Gallagher reported the Audit Committee met August 16, 2001 and received an update from Mr. Tom Judy, Associate Vice President and Controller-UNR, on the status of the University of Nevada School of Medicine Practice Plan. The Practice Plan is estimated to have a profit of $500,000 as of June 30, 2001. They will be addressing two opening issues regarding the organizational structure of the Practice Plan and contracts by the end of December 2001. Mrs. Sandi Cardinal, Director, Internal Audit, reported the institution bank reconciliations were up-to-date. Regent Gallagher requested Board action on the following Committee recommendations:
- Internal Audit Reports – The Committee reviewed the following Internal Audit reports: (Ref. P on file in the Board office)
- Presidential Exit Audit, UNR
- Summer Band Camp, UNLV
- Transportation Research Center, UNLV
- Presidential Exit Audit, TMCC
- Presidential Exit Audit, UNR
- Audit Exception Report – The Committee discussed the Audit Exception Report for the six-months ending June 30, 2001.
Regent Gallagher moved approval of the Committee recommendations and acceptance of the report. Regent Rosenberg seconded. Motion carried. Regents Alden, Derby, Howard, and Sisolak were absent.
33. Approved-Campus Environment Committee Report - Chair Doug Hill reported the Campus Environment Committee met August 16, 2001.
- Dr. Chris Chairsell, Associate Vice Chancellor, Academic and Student Affairs, presented the history and accomplishments of the Committee. The Committee’s charge includes: status of women, diversity, and safety.
- Dr. Chairsell recommended the Committee focus on enhancing the strategic plan, making “quality access” the theme. The Committee requested the campuses report on completion rates, outreach and retention programs. The Committee will then take action to establish the goals of the Committee. Dr. Chairsell will provide a copy of the CEC history and recommendations to all of the Regents and Presidents.
- The Committee heard childcare reports from UNR, UNLV, CCSN, TMCC, and GBC. WNCC will present its childcare report at the next meeting.
Regent Hill requested Board action on the following Committee recommendations:
- Amendment to System Diversity Goals – The Committee amended the System Diversity Goals.
- Childcare/Women’s Centers Reports – The Committee heard update reports concerning childcare and women’s centers.
Regent Hill moved approval of the Committee recommendations and acceptance of the report. Regent Rosenberg seconded. Motion carried. Regents Alden, Derby, Howard, and Sisolak were absent.
34. Accepted-Finance & Planning Committee Report - Chair Tom Kirkpatrick asked Vice Chancellor Miles to provide an update on Budget Director Mr. Larry Eardley’s condition. Mr. Miles reported that Larry Eardley underwent bypass surgery about one month ago and was recuperating well. He exercises twice daily, beginning a cardiac rehabilitation program, and meeting with his doctors. Mr. Miles expressed hope to hear soon about Mr. Eardley’s return.
Regent Kirkpatrick reported the Finance & Planning Committee met August 16, 2001 to review four reports required by current Committee procedures and to comply with recommendations of the Legislative Counsel Bureau.
- The Committee reviewed the FY 2000-2001 Annual Budget Revisions Report for self-supporting budgets. All revisions exceeding 10% of the budget or $50,000 must be approved by System Administration. Revisions are necessary when revenues or expenditures are significantly higher or lower than budgeted. The Committee reviewed those revisions required to be reported.
- The Committee also reviewed the FY 2000-2001 Annual Budget Transfer Report for state funded budgets. All transfers between state-appropriated functions exceeding $25,000 must be approved by System Administration. Only one institution required such a transfer to cover their utility cost shortfall.
- The Committee reviewed the FY 2000-2001 Report of Transfers of Non-State Budget Expenditures to state funds after May 1st. All such transfers must be reported to the Board. These transfers normally occur to properly account for expenditures.
- Finally the Committee reviewed the 4th Quarter Fiscal Exception Report for 2001. Any self-supporting budget that is in deficit or a negative cash position must be reported to the Committee.
There were no action items on the Committee agenda.
Regent Kirkpatrick moved acceptance of the report. Regent Rosenberg seconded. Motion carried. Regents Alden, Derby, Howard, and Sisolak were absent.
35. Approved-Investment Committee Report - Regent Rosenberg reported the Investment Committee met August 8, 2001.
- Mr. Lindsay Van Voorhis, Cambridge Associates, reviewed the asset allocation and performance for the pooled endowment and pooled operating funds of the UCCSN for the quarter ended June 30, 2001. Endowment investments returned 3.4% for the quarter compared to its benchmark of 4.2%, and –1.7% for the fiscal year compared to its benchmark of –6.9%. The total return for the pooled operating funds was 2.1% for the quarter compared to its benchmark of 2.2%, and 4.9% for the fiscal year compared to its benchmark of 2.0%.
- Mr. Louis Navalier, Navalier & Associates Inc., gave a report on the performance of the investments with his firm. The portfolio returned 18.0% for the quarter and 18.8% for the fiscal year ended June 30, 2001.
- The Committee received a report on the issuance of a RFP for custody services. The RFP was issued in July with responses due on August 9, 2001. A committee has been formed to review the responses and bring a recommendation to the Investment Committee at a future meeting.
Regent Rosenberg moved approval of the Committee recommendation and acceptance of the report. Regent Kirkpatrick seconded. Motion carried. Regents Alden, Derby, Howard, and Sisolak were absent.
36. Public Comment – None.
37. New Business – Chancellor Nichols apologized for the late delivery of a document distributed to the Board. She reported that it was the latest version of the master plan for higher education in Nevada for the workshop scheduled for the following week. It had just arrived in the Reno office from WICHE. She said she looked forward to meeting with them next week to work on this.
The meeting adjourned at 12:55 p.m.
Chief Administrative Officer to the Board