October 18-19, 1990
BOARD OF REGENTS
UNIVERSITY OF NEVADA SYSTEM
October 18-19, 1990
The Board of Regents met on the above date at Mt. Charleston Inn,
Nevada, for Fall Retreat.
Members present: Mrs. Dorothy S. Gallagher, Chairman
Mrs. Shelley Berkley
Dr. Jill Derby
Mr. Joseph M. Foley
Dr. Lonnie Hammargren
Mr. Daniel Klaich
Mrs. Carolyn M. Sparks
Mrs. June Whitley
Members absent: Dr. James Eardley
Others present: Mark H Dawson, Chancellor
Dr. Warren Fox, Vice Chancellor
Mr. Ron Sparks, Vice Chancellor
Mr. Donald Klasic, General Counsel
President Anthony Calabro, WNCC
President Joseph N. Crowley, UNR
President John Gwaltney, TMCC
President Robert Maxson, UNLV
President Paul Meacham, CCCC
President Ron Remington, NNCC
President Jim Taranik, DRI
Ms. Mary Lou Moser, Secretary
Also present were Faculty Senate Chairmen Paula Funkhouser, TMCC;
Isabelle Emerson, UNLV; Mike Mc Farlane, NNCC; Don Carlson, WNCC;
Robert Brown, UNR; Steve Mizell, DRI; Alan Balboni, CCCC; and
Karen Steinberg, UNS; Sue Baker, UNS; and Pamela Galloway, UNS.
Chairman Dorothy Gallagher called the retreat to order at 10:40
A.M. on October 18, 1990, explaining the purpose of the retreat
was an exchange of ideas for the University of Nevada System.
Session I - Communications within UNS
Mrs. Gallagher introduced Mr. George Janik, Association of
Governing Board's Board Mentor Program. Mr. Janik explained
that he had served as a member of the Kent State Board of
Trustees for over 13 years, and as a Professor of Business
at that Institution.
In reviewing the higher education movement, Mr. Janik stated
that in the 1960's enrollment was high, hiring of faculty
was at an all-time high, money was readily available, and
tenure was the motivating factor of faculty. The 1970's
showed a drop of employment with less dollars available.
In the 1980's the "baby boom" was gone, enrollments slowed,
Campuses began to adjust to older students, and were faced
with a growing senior faculty. Currently, higher education
is faced with higher tuition costs and students are asking
for quality education.
Discussion centered on:
Policy making vs. Administration.
The relationship between Regents and the CEO. The
Chancellor as a coordinator, or as the conduit from
President to Chancelor to Board. Presidents need to
make the Chancellor aware of all situations, but should
be able to contact Regents individually.
Board relationships with other constituencies.
Education is an industry that doesn't measure itself.
There is no trouble grading students; but teaching
quality is never assessed.
Board committee structure. A Board should work through
its committees; should trust the actions of the commit-
tee. committees should not meet the day of the Board
meeting, or, if they do, discuss information at one
meeting to place on the agenda of the following Board
meeting. Chancellor and his staff should be the staff
to committees, provide the information and background
materials, and interpret those materials to the com-
mittee and Board, and should be trusted for the input
The Community College and University missions/philoso-
phies are different, should be recognized as being
different, and UNS might consider holding separate
Opposed to students and faculty as members of a Board
and having voting privileges. Board must listen to
their concerns, but only listen, and refer the matter
to the President and/or the Chancellor.
Planning is essential to good management of higher
education. Academic and facilities planning must be
long range and must be updated constantly. Long range
planning is a joint responsibility of the Board and its
Board responsibilities are the making of policy, hiring
the CEO and Presidents, Board organization/job descrip-
tions for Officers including the Vice Presidents/Chan-
cellors (seond in command), and assessing the effective-
ness of the Board.
New Board members must be given a thorough orientation.
The group divided into breakout sessions for Regents, Pres-
idents and Faculty Senate Chairmen for discussions on ef-
fective communications and reported in general session the
Board of Regents:
The committee structure needs to communicate more ef-
fectively to Board members. (If used effectively, the
Board then is supposed to "rubber stamp" the actions of
The Board needs to get information for decision making
in a more timely manner. The staff should interpret
the information in a succinct manner, and the informa-
tion must be of quality.
The Board needs to agree on the committees of the Board
as the appropriate body for deliberation on issues vs.
bringing issues to the full Board.
The Board needs to schedule committee meetings at dif-
ferent times to provide for communication (trustee to
trustees) and ensure time for input from all constitu-
encies prior to the full Board meeting.
Standing committee meetings on different days than the
One day Board meeting and fewer Board meetings.
Audit Committee meeting once a year, combined with Budget
Education/orientation for Regents on 1) University is-
sues, 2) Community College issues, 3) DRI issues; possi-
bly hold one day workshops on each.
Consensus that there is a critical success factor in
the informal line of communications between Chancellor
and Presidents. Mutual satisfaction with current
The Chancellor's Office will distribute the results of
each agenda item appearing on the Council of the Presi-
dents' meeting agenda immediately following that meeting.
Have social events on Thursday evening of Board meetings
to provide a means for interaction/communication.
Seek a diversity of opinions on academic issues; use
informal workshops; discussions in an academic setting
vs. a parliamentary setting.
Increased Community College meetings; Regent meetings
on Community College Campuses is appreciated. There is
a concern that understanding cannot be obtained only
through items that appear on the agendas.
Increase faculty presentations such as the presentations
made by the NNCC faculty; presentations be issue orient-
Review annually the recommendations from the Community
College Faculty Relations Committee.
Insure release time for Faculty Senate Chairmen, includ-
ing the Unit Senate Chairman.
The three groups, Regents, Presidents and Faculty Senate
Chairmen, reviewed the goals set at the 1989 retreat and
established goals for 1990-91. These are on file in the
Discussions were held on the following:
Regent Foley expressed a need for UNS to be involved
in educating prisoners confined in Nevada. Presidents
Calabro (WNCC) and Remington (NNCC) reported on their
programs being conducted within the prisons. It was
agreed that this is very costly education, that new
sources of revenue must be found for its support, and
that a committee should be established to investigate
Vice Chancellor Warren Fox reviewed academic planning
in the System, stating that in 1981 the publication
"Nevad 2000" was established and is updated every two
years for presentation to the Nevada State Legislature.
In 1983 all Campuses submitted plans. In 1986 the Board
adopted a policy for the regular submission of academic
plans, which were due in July, 1990. There is now un-
derway a comprehensive academic Master Plan for UNS.
Consultants were hired and have visited the State and
Institutions. The Campus plans will be reviewed by the
consultants and when their comments become available,
they will be sent to the Board. Some Campuses are re-
vising their recently adopted facilities plans to con-
form to these new academic plans.
A questionnaire had been sent to retreat participants
on UNS goals and issues for 1990-95. The results, dis-
cussed by Dr. Fox and Ms. Karen Steinberg, showed re-
sources such as funding budgets and for administration
and communication, faculty, accountability/assessment,
minority education, Community College concerns, mission
and goals of the Institutions, articulation, economic
development, access, quality/excellence, admissions re-
quirements and developmental education. UNS issues
were tallied by groups as follows:
Regents: Resources - funding, budgets and facil-
ities; planning; and growth.
Presidents: Resources - funding, budgets, and
faculty issues; accountability/assess-
Faculty Senate Chairmen: Resources - funding, bud-
gets, and facilities;
growth; faculty issues.
Chancellor's Office Staff: Planning; resources;
funding, budgets and
President Crowley was given a four-month Presidential
leave in 1989, at which time he did research at Brasenose
College at Oxford. He discussed his report to the Board
(see attached) and the recommendations of 1) adoption of
a policy; 2) include eligibility criteria and obliga-
tions upon return, 3) assignment of presidential respon-
sibilities during leave, 4) assisting with replacement
of President while on leave, and 5) informing the public
of the leave.
A Chancellor's Committee will draft a policy for Board
The retreat adjourned at 1:15 P.M.
Mary Lou Moser