11/20/1975

UCCSN Board of Regents' Meeting Minutes
November 20-21, 1975








11-20-1975

Pages 70-103

BOARD OF REGENTS

UNIVERSITY OF NEVADA SYSTEM

November 20-21, 1975



The Board of Regents met on the above dates in The Center, 1101

N. Virginia, Reno.



Members present: Fred M. Anderson, M. D.

Mr. James L. Buchanan, II

Mr. John A. Buchanan

Mrs. Lilly Fong

Mrs. Molly Knudtsen

Louis E. Lombardi, M. D.

Miss Brenda Mason

Mr. John Tom Ross

Miss Helen Thompson



Others present: Chancellor Neil D. Humphrey

President Donald H. Baepler, UNLV

President Charles R. Donnelly, CCD

President Max Milam, UNR

President Lloyd P. Smith, DRI

Mr. Procter Hug, Jr., General Counsel

Dr. Eugene Grotegut, UNR Faculty Senate

Miss Delia Martinez, Unit Faculty Senate

Dr. Henry Sciullo, UNLV Faculty Senate

Mr. Robert Rose, WNCC Faculty Senate

Mr. Joseph Warburton, DRI Faculty Senate

Mr. Patrick Archer, ASUN

Mr. Joseph Karaffa, CSUN

Mr. Sergio Jaramills, USA (WNCC)



The meeting was called to order on Thursday, November 20, at

1:45 P.M. by Chairman James Buchanan.



1. Approval of Minutes



The minutes of the regular session of October 17, 1975

were submitted for approval.



Mrs. Knudtsen moved approval. Motion seconded by Miss

Thompson, carried without dissent.



Upon motion by Mrs. Fong, seconded by Miss Thompson, two addi-

tional items were added to the agenda.



2. Report of Gifts and Grants



Acceptance of the gifts and grants as reported by the

Division Presidents was recommended. (Report identified

as Ref. 2 and filed with permanent minutes.)



Dr. Lombardi moved approval. Motion seconded by Miss Mason,

carried without dissent.



3. UNLV Affirmative Action Officer



At Regent Fong's request, President Baepler reported on the

status of recruiting for an affirmative action officer for

UNLV. He stated that the position had been readvertised

with a February deadline for application. He pointed out

that the process required by the affirmative action regu-

lations makes it necessary sometimes to take a longer time

to fill positions. He noted that the position is being

advertised locally and nationally in the Chronicle of

Higher Education and in seven professional journals. Mrs.

Fong requested that if the advertisement does not already

appear in the AAUW Journal, it should be placed in that

publication.



4. Approval of Fund Transfers, UNLV



President Baepler requested approval of the following fund

transfers:



From Contingency Reserve, State Appropriated Funds



#76-034 $6,040 to Dean, College of Arts and Letters, to

fund one-half of the salary of an Associate Dean

to be appointed effective January 1, 1976.



#76-035 $3,988 to Physics to create a .25 FTE professional

position for the remainder of the academic year.



#76-038 $3,800 to Dean, College of Arts and Letters, to

provide additional funds in wages and operating

for balance of fiscal year.



From Ending Fund Balance, Estimative Budget Accounts



#76-039 $15,583 to Classified Salaries of Conferences,

Institutes and Off-Campus, to provide for a new

position required by the expansion of Continuing

Education.



Chancellor Humphrey recommended approval.



Miss Thompson moved approval. Motion seconded by Dr.

Lombardi, carried without dissent.



5. Request for Approval of Budget Augmentation, UNLV



President Baepler reported that UNLV revenues are expected

to exceed the amount budgeted for 1975-76 by approximately

$500,000. Of this total, $211,000 will come from nonresi-

dent tuition, $87,000 from registration fees, $70,000 in-

direct cost collections, and $75,000 from interest income.

He requested augmentation of the approved 1975-76 UNLV

budget by $500,000 in order to accomplish the following:



Library microfilm of journals plus book acquisition $78,000

Temporary, part-time and overload teaching positions 50,000

Operating budgets, various Departments 20,000

Utilities (due to increases in costs and use) 32,000

B & G alterations and improvements 90,200

Furniture and equipment for new positions in 1976 10,000

Instructional and research equipment 150,000

Audio-visual student wages 5,000

Audio-visual equipment 40,000

Quick-print machinery 24,000



Chancellor Humphrey recommended approval, noting that aug-

mentation of the budget also required approval of the Budget

Director and the Governor.



Dr. Lombardi moved approval. Motion seconded by Mrs. Fong,

carried without dissent.



6. Approval of Fund Transfers, CCD



President Donnelly requested approval of the following fund

transfer:



#1053 $7,000 from the Contingency Reserve, NNCC, to Part-

Time Instruction, Operating, for personnel services

provided by White Pine County Schools in lieu of

building use charges.



Chancellor Humphrey recommended approval.



Mrs. Knudtsen moved approval. Motion seconded by Miss

Thompson, carried without dissent.



7. Estimative Budget for WNCC United Students Association



President Donnelly requested approval of the following

estimative budget for WNCC United Students Association

for 1975-76:



Source of Funds

Opening Cash Balance $ 4,275

Student Fees 20,500

Concessions 200

Total $24,975



Application of Funds

Wages $ 1,500

Travel 2,200

Public Relations 1,000

Social and Recreational 1,500

Organization Funds 1,000

Activities 4,000

Publications 2,800

Athletics 4,995

Grants-in-Aid 1,792

Equipment and Furniture 1,500

General 800

Reserve for Contingencies 1,888

Total $24,975



Chancellor Humphrey recommended approval.



Mr. Ross moved approval. Motion seconded by Mrs. Fong,

carried without dissent.



8. Revision of Estimative Budgets, CCD



President Donnelly requested approval of the following

revisions to estimative budgets for CCCC for 1975-76:



A. Food Services

Current Revision Revised

Source of Funds Budget Requested Budget

Opening Cash Balance $ 5,000 $ 4,635 $ 9,635

Sales Revenue 168,000 ( 57,750) 110,250

Total $173,000 $( 53,115) $119,885



Application of Funds

Classified Salary $ $ 8,300 $ 8,300

Wages 3,500 3,500

Fringe Benefits 996 996

Travel 2,650 2,650

Operating 164,500 ( 62,811) 101,689

Ending Fund Balance 8,500 ( 5,750) 2,750

Total $173,000 $ (53,115) $119,885



B. Child Care Center



Source of Funds

Opening Cash Balance $ 2,500 $ 1,818 $ 4,318

Fees 6,500 20,475 26,975

Total $ 9,000 $ 22,293 $ 31,293



Application of Funds

Professional Salary $ 4,000 $ 12,000 $ 16,000

Classified Salary 4,000 4,000

Wages 2,500 2,500

Fringe Benefits 476 2,024 2,500

Travel 500 500 1,000

Operating 3,500 500 4,000

Ending Fund Balance 524 769 1,293

Total $ 9,000 $ 22,293 $ 31,293



Chancellor Humphrey recommended approval.



Mrs. Fong moved approval. Motion seconded by Miss Thompson,

carried without dissent.



9. Report of Overdue Student Loans, CCD



President Donnelly requested that $316.25 in emergency

loans at NNCC and $3,564.90 at WNCC be written off the

University's books as uncollectible and a hold placed on

the records of each of the 31 students involved. He noted

that the loans are still due and the student's records will

not be released until his loan is paid. Chancellor Humphrey

recommended approval.



Miss Thompson moved approval. Motion seconded by Mrs. Fong,

carried without dissent.



10. Uncollected Receivables, CCD



President Donnelly recalled that in April, 1975 due to

failure of staff to follow Board policy on deferred payment

of student fees, he had requested and the Board approved a

writeoff of $24,989.55 for FY 1974. At that time President

Donnelly also stated that he anticipated that although

corrective measures had been initiated, the problem would

continue into FY 1975.



President Donnelly requested approval of a writeoff of

$9,264.92 at WNCC and $14,119.14 at CCCC in uncollected

deferred student fees for FY 1975. Chancellor Humphrey

recommended approval, noting that holds would be placed on

the student's record pending collection of the amount owed.



Mrs. Fong moved approval. Motion seconded by Miss Thompson,

carried without dissent.



11. Revision of Estimative Budget, UNR



President Milam recommended approval of the following re-

vision to the ASUN estimative budget for 1975-76, as re-

quested by ASUN to accommodate a proposed addition of one

professional position and to more accurately reflect actual

revenues and expenditures:



Associated Students - UNR



Current Revision Revised

Budget Requested Budget

Source of Funds

Opening Cash Balance $ 15,245 $( 357) $ 14,888

Student Fees 211,152 7,348 218,500

Student Organs. Act Bd. 122,003 ( 3) 122,000

Refrigerator Rentals 6,000 6,000

Total $348,400 $ 12,988 $361,388



Application of Funds

Professional Salaries $ $ 5,952 $ 5,952

Classified Salaries 15,052 1,548 16,600

Wages 3,341 1,059 4,400

Fringe Benefits 2,149 1,051 3,200

Publications 86,360 86,360

Activities 102,350 102,350

Intramurals 16,000 16,000

General Fund 99,000 3,378 102,378

Contingency 24,148 24,148

Total $348,400 $ 12,988 $361,388



Chancellor Humphrey recommended approval.



Mrs. Knudtsen moved approval. Motion seconded by Miss

Mason, carried without dissent.



12. Request for Interfund Loan, UNR



President Milam requested approval of an interfund loan of

$3,625 from the Parking Permit Fund to the Bureau of

Governmental Research to provide funds for the reprinting of

3,000 copies of a revised edition of "Sagebrush and Neon",

a booklet used in UNR classes. The loan will be repaid by

November 1, 1977, from the sale of the booklet. Chancellor

Humphrey recommended approval.



Miss Thompson moved approval. Motion seconded by Mrs. Fong,

carried without dissent.



13. Approval of Fund Transfers, UNR



President Milam requested approval of the following fund

transfers from the Contingency Reserve, State Appropriated

Funds:



#199 $8,530 to Political Science Department to provide

coverage for professional salaries.



#209 $4,200 to the Music Department to provide funds to

cover the balance needed in the graduate assistant

category.



#211 $8,935 to the Art Department to cover several letters

of appointment.



#212 $420 to the Chemistry Department to cover the balance

needed for professional salaries.



#214 $1,781 to the Physical Education Department to cover

letters of appointment for instructors.



#217 $6,667 to the Speech and Theatre Department to cover

graduate assistant salaries.



#218 $22,550 to the Biology Department to cover salaries

for additional graduate assistants.



#220 $3,400 to the Foreign Language Department to provide

coverage in the graduate assistant category and $1,750

to cover the estimated amount needed for the fiscal

year for a Japanese student to assist in teaching a

course in Japanese.



#221 $5,715 to the History Department to cover graduate

assistant salaries and to provide funds for a two week

(1/2 time) overlap for a classified employee.



#222 $8,966 to the Mathematics Department to cover profes-

sional salaries and $1,800 to cover graduate assistant

salaries.



#223 $3,200 to the Psychology Department to cover the bal-

ance needed in professional salaries.



#233 $15,500 to the Library to provide for student wages

and operating requirements ($11,000 to student wages

and $4,500 to operating).



Chancellor Humphrey recommended approval.



Mrs. Fong moved approval. Motion seconded by Miss Thompson,

carried without dissent.



14. Bid Opening, UNR



President Milam reported that bids were opened November 13,

1975 by the State Public Works Board for the purchase and

installation of furniture and equipment for the Chemistry

building, with the following results:



Bidder Base Bid Alt #1 Alt #2 Alt #3 Alt #4



Johnson-Mape $104,214 $ 7,468 $ 7,889 $ 7,559 $ 4,359

Allen Galloway 108,098 7,752 8,049 7,860 4,400

Capriotti 128,280 10,451 11,049 10,442 4,378

CHS Inc. 130,650 8,500 8,500 7,500 4,200

Johnson & Golt 133,563 8,831 9,157 8,831 6,558



President Milam noted that available funds total $125,864

(construction budget, $114,300; contingency, $5,700; balance

of gym boiler project, $5,864). Dr. Milam recommended and

Chancellor Humphrey concurred that the Board of Regents

concur in the award by the State Public Works Board of the

bid to Johnson-Mape for the base bid plus alternates #1 and

#2 for a total contract of $119,571.



Mrs. Fong moved approval. Motion seconded by Dr. Lombardi,

carried without dissent.



Chairman Buchanan noted the inclusion on the Information

Agenda of the results of a bid for the purchase of lobby

furniture for the Concert Hall at UNLV, with the low bid

coming from a Los Angeles firm and the second bid from a

Nevada firm. He suggested that the in-state preference be

reinstated.



Chancellor Humphrey recalled that action had been taken at

the previous meeting to change the University's policy on

purchasing so that it conformed with State law affecting

other agencies, noting that the State law had been changed

by the 1975 Legislature and the in-state preference had

been removed. He requested that the Board allow sufficient

time for staff to make a recommendation concerning the

University's policy before it took action.



Dr. Lombardi moved that this matter be referred to staff

and that a report and recommendation be returned to the

next meeting. Motion seconded by Miss Thompson, carried

without dissent.



15. Report of Overdue Student Loans, UNR



President Milam requested that $5,770 in uncollectible

student loans be written off the University's books and a

hold placed on the records of each of the 56 students in-

volved. Chancellor Humphrey recommended approval.



Mr. Ross moved approval. Motion seconded by Miss Thompson,

carried without dissent.



16. Faculty Payroll Withholding, UNR



President Milam reported that the UNR Senate has requested

authorization for withholding of contributions by faculty

to a "Faculty Senate Extraordinary Expense Fund", to be used

to provide independent legal advice to Senate and faculty

members. President Milam and Chancellor Humphrey recommend-

ed approval.



In the discussion following, Dr. Grotegut of the Senate,

stating that the withholding would be voluntary and that the

fund would not be used for litigation or advice for individ-

ual faculty members. He stated that it was the intention

of the Faculty Senate that the attorney retained would

serve as counsel to the Senate only and not to individuals.



Mrs. Knudtsen moved that authorization be granted for vol-

untary withholding of contributions by UNR faculty to a

"Faculty Senate Extraordinary Expense Fund", to be used to

provide independent legal advice to the Senate. Motion

seconded by Dr. Lombardi, carried without dissent.



17. Far West Lab Agreement



President Milam noted that the Board of Regents and the

Nevada State Board of Education are parties to a 1966

contract with California and Utah in the establishment and

management of the Far West Laboratory for Educational

Research and Development. The Lab is funded by Federal,

State and local agency grants and is headquartered in

San Francisco.



Dr. Milam reported that Dr. John K. Hemphill, Laboratory

Director, has requested amendment of the agreement as

follows:



The Agency shall have no power or authority to incur

any obligations for itself or on behalf of any signa-

tory party in excess of the amount appropriated to its

use by a funding source except those loans that would

be completely collateralized by existing contractual

commitments to the Agency, or secured by long term

leases of Agency-owned real property.



Dr. Milam also noted that Dean E. J. Cain, the University's

representative to the Far West Lab, had requested approval

and the amendment had been reviewed and approved by Univer-

sity Counsel. President Milam and Chancellor Humphrey

recommended approval.



Mr. Ross moved approval. Motion seconded by Mrs. Fong,

carried without dissent.



18. Proposed Calendar for 1976



The following calendar, as an alternate to the calendar

proposed at the October meeting, was presented:



Interval Between

Meetings Meeting Date Location



7 weeks January 9, 1976 Las Vegas

6 weeks February 20, 1976 Reno

6 weeks April 2, 1976 Las Vegas

6 weeks May 14, 1976 Reno

5 weeks June 18, 1976 Las Vegas

5 weeks July 23, 1976 Reno

6 weeks September 3, 1976 Las Vegas

5 weeks October 8, 1976 Reno

6 weeks November 19, 1976 Las Vegas

8 weeks January 14, 1977 Reno



Mr. Ross moved approval of the above alternate calendar.

Motion seconded by Mrs. Fong, carried without dissent.



19. Report of Investment Advisory Committee



Dr. Lombardi, Chairman of the Investment Advisory Committee,

presented the minutes of a meeting of that Committee of

October 17, 1975 and requested confirmation of the actions

of the Committee as indicated in the minutes. (Minutes

identified as Ref. 21 and filed with permanent minutes.)



Miss Thompson moved approval. Motion seconded by Miss

Mason, carried without dissent.



Mrs. Fong reported that while in Washington, D. C. the

first week of November, she had an opportunity to speak to

Senator Paul Laxalt and she had reminded him of the Univer-

sity's request to not approve any legislative proposal

which would eliminate or reduce charitable contributions to

organizations such as the University of Nevada System. Mrs.

Fong stated that Senator Laxalt was most cooperative and

will work to oppose any such legislation.



20. Revision of Estimative Budgets



Chancellor Humphrey requested approval of the following re-

visions to estimative budgets for 1975-76:



A. University Press Sales



Current Revision Revised

Source of Funds Budget Requested Budget

Opening Cash Balance $ 9,500 $ 8,144 $ 17,644

Outside Sales 52,000 (4,000) 48,000

Total $ 61,500 $ 4,144 $ 65,644



Application of Funds

Operating $ 55,750 $ 4,144 $ 59,894

Out-of-State Travel 750 750

Ending Fund Balance 5,000 5,000

Total $ 61,500 $ 4,144 $ 65,644



B. Whited Endowment



Source of Funds

Opening Cash Balance $ 5,609 $ 1,746 $ 7,355

Endowment Income 2,500 2,500

Total $ 8,109 $ 1,746 $ 9,855



Application of Funds

Operating $ 5,000 $ 2,000 $ 7,000

Ending Fund Balance 3,109 (254) 2,855

Total $ 8,109 $ 1,746 $ 9,855



Chancellor Humphrey also requested approval of the following

estimative budget not previously submitted for the Univer-

sity Press. He noted that it was anticipated that the

University Press Gift Fund would be closed at the end of

fiscal 1974-75; however, two unanticipated grants have been

received by the Press and the following estimative budget

has been developed to provide for expenditure of the grant

funds for publication of books during 1975-76 and support of

bicentennial programs as specified by the donor:



Gift Fund



Source of Funds

Opening Cash Balance $ 1,182

Bicentennial Grants 7,973

Total $ 9,155



Application of Funds

Operating $ 8,973

Ending Fund Balance 182

Total $ 9,155



Miss Thompson moved approval. Motion seconded by Mrs.

Knudtsen, carried without dissent.



Mr. John Buchanan entered the meeting at 3:15 P.M.



21. Proposed Change in Timing for Consideration of Personnel

Actions



Chancellor Humphrey noted that it has been the practice of

the Board (based upon a recommendation of the Board's

Administrative and Personnel Committee in 1967) to consider

recommendations for promotion and award of tenure at the

January meeting and to act upon these recommendations at

the February meeting.



He reported that the UNR Academic Council, Faculty Senate

and President Milam have recommended that promotion and

tenure recommendations be submitted to the Board in Febru-

ary or March with action in April.



Chancellor Humphrey recalled that this recommendation was

included on the October Information Agenda for referral to

the other Divisions and no reaction was received. He recom-

mended approval, effective this academic year with all pro-

motion and tenure recommendations to be made to the Board

at the February, 1976 meeting with action to be taken at

the April, 1976 meeting.



Dr. Anderson moved approval. Motion seconded by Miss

Thompson, carried without dissent.



22. Employment Contracts



Chancellor Humphrey recalled that in May, Regent Thompson

requested that a policy statement be developed whereby a

certain time would be established within which faculty em-

ployment contracts must be returned in order to remain

valid. This request was referred to Division Administra-

tions and to Senates for recommendations, and action was

scheduled for November.



Dr. Humphrey reported that the Unit Senate has recommended

that the policy be as follows: "The hiring authority shall

issue contracts to the individuals within seven calendar

days following the Board of Regents meeting approving the

issuance of contracts. This offer shall remain valid for

thirty calendar days."



He also reported that the DRI Senate recommended the fol-

lowing policy: "Unless other arrangements have been made

in writing in advance, contracts shall be returned by an

individual 30 calendar days after they are issued; and

contracts shall be issued without unreasonable delay by the

Administration."



Dr. Humphrey reported that discussion of this matter by the

Cabinet had indicated a consensus that if such a policy is

to be adopted it should be included in the Code, and the

possibility of discontinuing the use of contracts except

for the initial year of appointment should be explored.



Chancellor Humphrey recommended that these problems be re-

ferred to the System Salary and Fringe Benefits Committee

for recommendation, which would be in turn referred to the

Division Senates.



Miss Thompson moved approval. Motion seconded by Mrs. Fong,

carried without dissent.



Dr. Grotegut requested that for purposes of the record, he

wished it noted that UNR supports the Unit Senate recom-

mendation.



It was agreed that a report from the System Committee on

Salary and Fringe Benefits would be placed on the February

agenda.



23. Proposed Code Revision Regarding Lie Detector Tests



Chancellor Humphrey recalled that in April, 1975 the UNR

Faculty Senate proposed an amendment to the University Code

to add to Section 5.3.25 the following paragraph:



(i) Lie Detector tests shall not be used in conjunction

with University of Nevada personnel proceedings nor in

relation to University of Nevada personnel matters.



In accordance with Code provisions for amendment, this

proposal was referred to all Senates for recommendation,

and action by the Board was scheduled for the July meeting.

Action was then further deferred to allow time for further

consideration by the Senates. Dr. Humphrey reported the

following responses:



(1) DRI Faculty Senate did not wish to take formal action

on the proposed amendment to the Code regarding the use

of lie detector tests in conjunction with personnel

matters and proceedings. The consensus was that the

wording of the amendment, as presented, was ambiguous.

However, the Senate favored a general stand which

would not preclude an employee from requesting the use

of lie detector findings to aid his case in conjunction

with personnel matters and proceedings, if he so

desired.



(2) The Unit Senate would endorse the proposal with the

following changes: Substitute the word "used" with

the word "required".



(3) The UNLV Senate voted to recommend against the adop-

tion of the proposed revision and the Senate was

strongly opposed to adopting the proposal as it was

presented primarily because it would prohibit any

faculty member at UNLV from requesting a lie detector

examination should he so desire. The Senate then con-

sidered a possible amendment to the proposal which

would recommend that the use of lie detectors not be

required. After much discussion, this was also re-

jected. Since it was felt that the University could

never require a lie detector examination as it would

be an abridgment of a person's civil rights, and since

it was also felt that faculty members are clearly al-

ready protected legally in this area, it would be su-

perfluous to write into the Code protections which are

already afforded faculty members. Furthermore, the

Senate was not convinced that present policy, which

does not require lie detector examinations, was being

abused.



(4) No response has been received from the CCD Senates.



Chancellor Humphrey added that subsequent to the agenda

being mailed, he had been informed that the UNR Faculty

Senate has modified its request and now endorses the Unit

Senate position. In view of that change in position, he

suggested that the matter be allowed to lay over until the

next meeting and a report be brought back in January.



Dr. Grotegut agreed that the UNR Faculty Senate had revised

its original resolution and has adopted the Unit Senate re-

commendation. He stated that the faculty feels strongly

that the Board needs to reaffirm a position supporting the

faculty member's right not to submit to such an examination.



Mr. Warburton, DRI Faculty Senate Chairperson, stated that

DRI had not changed its position. Dr. Sciullo, UNLV Senate

Chairperson, also reported that UNLV had not changed its

position and he did not believe there was any reason for

such an amendment, pointing out that the faculty member is

already legally protected from a requirement to submit to

such an examination. Mr. Rose, WNCC Faculty Senate Chair-

person, agreed that a faculty member could not be legally

required to take such an examination but stated that the

faculty would respond very well to an affirmative action by

the Board which would reaffirm this protection.



Mr. Hug, General Counsel, offered the advice that a person

cannot be compelled to take a lie detector test and that

normally it is used when a person would seek such an exam-

ination to clear himself from a charge.



Mrs. Fong moved that the proposed Code amendment be denied.

Motion seconded by Miss Thompson.



Dr. Grotegut stated that there is a difference of opinion

as to whether or not the taking of the lie detector test

was voluntary.



Mr. Ross moved to table further discussion of this proposed

amendment until after the Executive Session. Motion second-

ed by Mrs. Knudtsen, carried without dissent.



24. EEO-AA Grievance Procedure



Chancellor Humphrey recalled that in February, 1975 the

Board adopted an "Equal Employment Opportunity Policy State-

ment and Affirmative Action Program for the University of

Nevada System", which became Chapter 5 of Title 4 of the

Handbook. He further noted the following provision of

Section 8 of that chapter:



Complaints of discrimination or noncompliance with

Equal Opportunity in Employment and Affirmative Action

must be filed in writing with the appropriate Equal

Opportunity Officer by the employee. Each Division

shall institute procedures which shall be uniform

Systemwide for resolution of such complaints.



Dr. Humphrey reported that the Division Equal Opportunity

Officers have developed a proposed procedure which was

advanced to the Chancellor's Advisory Cabinet in September

that action would be requested at the November meeting. He

noted the inclusion of the proposed procedures in the agenda

(identified as Ref. 30 and filed with permanent minutes),

pointing out that the DRI and Unit Senates have approved

these procedures, as has UNLV Senate Grievance Committee.

Mr. Hug stated that he had reviewed the proposed procedures

and endorsed them for adoption at this time.



Chancellor Humphrey recommended adoption of the proposed

procedures as substituting for the present Section 8,

Chapter 5, Title 4 of the Handbook (to be renumbered Section

11 and present Sections 9, 10 and 11 to become 8, 9 and 10).

He further recommended two additional courses of action be

considered:



(1) The possibility of developing a single grievance pro-

cedure to be used by the Divisions for all professional

personnel regardless of the type of complaint; or, in

the alternative,



(2) The replacement of this EEO-AA grievance procedure by

alternative procedures included in Division Bylaws.



Mrs. Knudtsen moved approval. Motion seconded by Mrs.

Fong.



Mr. Ross moved to amend the motion to provide that the

proposed procedures be amended to shorten the period during

which a complaint might be filed from 180 days to 90 days.

Motion to amend seconded by Dr. Anderson, failed by the

following roll call vote:



Yes - Dr. Anderson, Dr. Lombardi, Mr. Ross, Miss

Thompson.

No - Mr. John Buchanan, Mrs. Knudtsen, Mr. James

Buchanan.

Abstain - Mrs. Fong, Miss Mason



Main motion carried by the following roll call vote:



Yes - Mr. John Buchanan, Mrs. Fong, Mrs. Knudtsen,

Dr. Lombardi, Miss Mason, Mr. Ross, Mr. James

Buchanan.

No - Dr. Anderson.

Abstain - Miss Thompson



25. Appointment of Independent Auditor



Chancellor Humphrey noted that the Bylaws of the Board of

Regents provide that the Chancellor shall "provide for in-

ternal and independent audits; however, his appointment of

independent auditors shall be subject to approval of the

Board of Regents." He also noted that in conformity with a

policy adopted in 1970, independent audit firms are engaged

for a three-year period, and the FY 1973, 1974 and 1975

audits have been performed by Harris, Kerr, Forster & Co.



Dr. Humphrey noted that a new firm should be designated now

for the next three audits. He cited four firms of Certified

Public Accountants which have offices in both Reno and Las

Vegas: (1) Harris, Kerr, Forster & Co.; (2) Elmer Fox,

Westheimer & Co.; (3) Alexander Grant & Co.; and (4)

Kafoury, Armstrong, Turner and Co. All of the above firms,

he stated, are excellent with good reputations and sound

experience in governmental and University accounting and

auditing. Dr. Humphrey recommended approval of the appoint-

ment of Kafoury, Armstrong, Turner and Co. as independent

auditors for FY 1976, 1977 and 1978, at a fee of $36,400 for

1976, with the fee for the next two years subject to nego-

tiation based primarily on any change in the cost of living

index.



Mrs. Fong moved approval. Motion seconded by Mrs. Knudtsen,

carried without dissent.



26. Request to Sell Stock, UNLV



President Baepler reported the receipt of a gift of 200

shares of Combustion Equipment Associates, Inc. stock,

presently valued at $16 each, from Wonderworld, Inc., for

the benefit of Intercollegiate Athletics. He requested

permission to sell the stock in order that the proceeds may

be deposited to the appropriate account. Chancellor

Humphrey recommended approval.



Miss Thompson moved approval. Motion seconded by Mr. Ross,

carried without dissent.



27. Delegation of Authority to Purchase



President Milam reported that the Department of Biology, UNR

wishes to purchase a used Scanning Electron Microscope with

a guaranteed resolution of 300 Angstroms and has located a

Model MINI-SEM-II which was owned by IBM Corporation, is

approximately two years old, and is available at an estimat-

ed cost of $8,900. Bids have been advertised and will be

opened December 1. Dr. Milam requested that authority to

approve the purchase be delegated to the UNR Administration

so that acquisition of the equipment will not be jeopardized

during the interim between the opening of bids and the

January Board meeting. Chancellor Humphrey recommended

approval.



Mrs. Knudtsen moved approval. Motion seconded by Dr.

Lombardi, carried without dissent.



28. New Business



Mrs. Fong requested a report at the January meeting concern-

ing the University's progress on developing a Health

Manpower Plan.



29. Professional Salary Program



For purposes of review, Chancellor Humphrey presented the

following summary of discussion and action on this matter:



The UNS Code (Section 4.6) provides that there shall be

three salary schedules developed and reviewed at least bi-

ennially by joint efforts of faculty, Presidents and the

Chancellor, subject to final approval of the Board of

Regents. It also provides that there shall be: (1) one

rank-related schedule applicable to faculty at UNR, UNLV

and the Office of the Chancellor and special or service

units (i. e., University Press and Computing Center); (2)

a second schedule for DRI faculty; and (3) a third sched-

ule for CCD faculty. The Code specifies that the contracts

for Vice Presidents, Deans, Assistant and Associate Deans,

Directors of Libraries, Registrars, Directors of Admissions,

and all heads of administrative units including academic

Departments, shall state what part of their annual salary

is subject to reconsideration should they be discontinued

as Administrators.



The UNR, UNLV, Unit rank-related salary schedule has tradi-

tionally had certain characteristics. It has specifically

stated steps for each rank; the top steps of each rank

significantly overlap the lower steps of the next higher

rank; there is a top stated step for professors which may

be exceeded for merit but not for longevity purposes; and,

the differential for 12-month ("A") appointments is 20% more

than the same step for academic year ("B") appointments.



In 1972, a Senate proposal was advanced to the Board to

change the "A" to "B" differential to 27%. The Board took

this proposal under advisement and instructed the Adminis-

tration to develop an alternative plan which would compen-

sate non-teaching, non-research faculty according to their

individual positions. A plan to do this was substantially

completed in 1973 but, with the Board's concurrence, was

not implemented. In 1974, the Board instructed the Admin-

istration to update the plan with the objective of imple-

menting it in 1975-76. In April, 1975 the UNR Senate

raised the question of the propriety of implementing the

plan unless the Code was amended. The Senates were invited

to address this problem and respond by November 1, 1975.



The UNR Senate voted that "amendment of the Code should be

postponed until such time as an acceptable salary admin-

istration program is developed for all professional employ-

ees with the University of Nevada System" and "that the

Administrative Salary Program proposed is not acceptable."



The DRI Senate found the Administrative Salary Program

"inappropriate to the mission and mode of operation of the

Desert Research Institute and should not apply thereto."



The UNLV Senate voted that "the proposed Code change to

permit establishment of an Administrative Salary Program

should be rejected...".



The Unit Senate had a tie vote of 3-3: one group finding

the proposal unacceptable and the other giving qualified

approval.



No response has been received from the CCD Senates.



Chancellor Humphrey noted that arguments advanced against

the plan included disagreement with: the positions excluded

(e. g., Deans, Librarians, CCD Counselors, Cooperative

Extension Agents); the number of salary grades and width of

salary ranges; and general dissatisfaction on the part of

those affected with being treated differently from teaching

and research faculty.



In view of the positions taken by the various Senates,

Chancellor Humphrey stated, he recommended that the Board

not amend the Code, that the salary program for non-teach-

ing, non-research faculty not be implemented, and that the

problems related to salary equity for this group be handled

administratively by the Presidents within the existing Code

and policy statements.



Dr. Lombardi moved approval. Motion seconded by Miss Mason,

carried without dissent.



The meeting adjourned at 4:25 P.M. and reconvened in regular

session on Friday, November 21, 1975 at 9:10 A.M.



Discussion resumed on Item 23, Proposed Code Revision Regarding

Lie Detector Tests



Chairman Buchanan stated that it appears that everyone is

agreed that under the law no individual may be required to

take a lie detector test and that it further appears that

at least two of the Division Senates believe that an amend-

ment dealing with this subject is not necessary or desir-

able. Mr. Buchanan further noted that a motion had been

made the previous day that the proposed Code amendment be

denied and that motion had been tabled until the meeting

reconvened on Friday morning. He ordered the motion removed

from the table.



Chancellor Humphrey again recommended that since the UNR

Faculty Senate, which had originated the proposed amendment,

has changed its position and now endorses the Unit Senate

position for substitution of the word "used" with the word

"required", it would be appropriate to provide an additional

month for consideration of this position by all Senates.

Mrs. Fong withdrew her motion. However, the second was not

withdrawn and the Chair requested a roll call vote.



Yes - Mrs. Fong, Mrs. Knudtsen, Dr. Lombardi, Mr. Ross,

Miss Thompson, Mr. James Buchanan

No - Dr. Anderson, Mr. John Buchanan, Miss Mason



The Chair declared the motion carried and the proposed Code

amendment therefore was denied.



Mr. Ross moved that the word "used" be substituted for the

word "required" and the reworded amendment be tabled pend-

ing Senate review. Motion seconded by Mrs. Knudtsen,

carried without dissent.



30. Proposed Amendment to University Code



Chancellor Humphrey submitted the following proposed Code

amendment which he requested be referred in accordance with

the provision for such amendments and that action be sched-

uled for the second meeting in 1976.



Addition to Chapter 5, Section 5.1:



SECTION 5.1 - RULES



The following forms of conduct, being incompatible with the

purposes of an academic community, are prohibited for all

members of that community and lead to sanctions and pro-

cedures as hereafter described.



5.1.13 The participation or knowing assistance in any

initiation rite, membership orientation, pledge

proceeding, or other ceremony or event into any

organization, club, fraternity, sorority, secret

society, or other organized group composed primar-

ily of students, if such rite or proceeding in-

volves or consists in whole or in part of any of

the following:



(a) Forced or otherwise involuntary consumption of

any alcohol, drug or controlled substance;



(b) Forcing the continued involuntary participa-

tion of any initiate or pledge who has stated

his or her desire to withdraw therefrom;



(c) Physical or mental abuse of any human being;



(d) Cruelty to any animal;



(e) Begging, panhandling, or any other unauthor-

ized public appeal for funds;



(f) The invasion or intrusion upon any student

dormitory, fraternity or sorority house, or

other student living quarters without explicit

prior written permission.



The proscriptions of this section apply to all

conduct whether on Campus or off Campus and to all

groups, whether or not officially recognized by the

University.



Any student found in violation of this section shall

be suspended for the remainder of the academic sem-

ester in which he is then enrolled for the first

offense, and expelled from the University upon a

second violation.



Mr. Ross moved that the matter be deferred until the next

meeting. Motion was not seconded.



At Chairman Buchanan's invitation, statements were presented

by Mr. Rafael Lara and Mr. Joe Karaffa on behalf of CSUN,

and by Mr. Pat Archer and Mr. Paul Hollis on behalf of ASUN.

(Transcripts of taped statements are on file in Chancellor's

Office.) The position expressed by the student representa-

tives, although concerned about the circumstances which had

prompted the proposed Code amendment, was that in adopting

such an amendment the Board would be violating an earlier

policy statement, the Student Bill of Rights, and would find

itself with an unenforceable policy in that the Board could

not legally control the activity of a student while that

student was off Campus and not engaged in a University

activity.



Mr. Hug agreed that approval of this amendment would be a

change in policy from the approach the Board has followed in

the past, that is, that the University has taken the posi-

tion that it does not wish to regulate the off-campus activ-

ities of its students. This, he pointed out, is an attempt

to deal with a particular problem which was brought about

by the death of a student. The purpose in drawing this

particular amendment was to structure a talking point from

which an attempt could be made for a talking procedure

which would be acceptable. He pointed out that there is

a very real problem which must be dealt with and such a

provision as is being proposed would be legally permissible

even if there is a problem with enforcement. Any activity

which has an effect on the University's educational process

must be considered a problem with which the Board of Regents

must deal.



President Baepler stated that he would not want responsi-

bility for enforcing such a policy, adding that students in

non-academic pursuits must have a degree of freedom equal

to other individuals. The University should not have ju-

risdiction over off-campus activities.



President Milam stated that he recognized the problems of

enforcement but he also recognized that there are certain

activities which are not compatible with University pro-

grams. He suggested that this proposed amendment would

provide a tool which the Administration could use in deal-

ing with this kind of problem.



Chancellor Humphrey stated that he was not arguing for this

particular Code amendment; rather, he believed that it pro-

vided a starting point for discussions within the University

community in an effort to find an answer to the problem. He

urged the Division Senates to commence these discussions and

to invite student body officers to participate in these

discussions to see if there is something the University

should do and can do to resolve a problem which came to a

conclusion with the death of John Davies.



A discussion among the Board members followed, during which

there appeared to be consensus that the first step in re-

solving the problem was to encourage the discussions within

the University community as suggested by the Chancellor.



31. Proposed Code Amendment Regarding Tenure



Chancellor Humphrey recalled that on May 19, 1975 the

Legislature, at the request of CCD faculty organizations,

adopted SB 494 (now Chapter 573, 1975 Statutes of Nevada).

That bill states that the Board of Regents shall adopt

regulations establishing a probation system for CCD faculty,

a "fair dismissal system" for faculty who have completed the

probation period, and the "regulations shall provide that no

professional employee who has successfully completed his

probationary period is subject to termination or nonrenewal

of his contract except for good cause shown"."



Chancellor Humphrey also noted that by Code provision all

faculty except those in DRI and CCD have long been covered

by tenure regulations which are based very closely on the

standards established by the American Association of

University Professors (AAUP) and which have the advantage

of years of experience and numerous court tests nationally.

In the belief that the provision of a probationary period,

and dismissal only for cause after the completion of a

probationary period are vital elements of a tenure system,

Chancellor Humphrey recalled that he and President Donnelly

had proposed that the UNS Code be amended to include CCD

faculty in the existing tenure regulations. That proposed

amendment was presented to the Board at the May 30, 1975

meeting of the Board for referral to the Division Senates

in accordance with the Code amendment procedure and was

scheduled for action two months following its introduction;

however, at the request of the CCD Faculty Senates, action

was postponed until November. The proposed amendment was

again included with the agenda (identified as Ref. 19B

and filed with permanent minutes).



Chancellor Humphrey also commented that the Community

College Division Senates have requested that this amendment

not be adopted and have proposed adoption of their proposal

entitled "Fair Dismissal and Due Process for Community

College Division Faculty". This proposal was included with

the agenda (identified as Ref. 19C and filed with permanent

minutes).



Guidelines for implementation of the proposed Code amendment

as recommended by President Donnelly, were also included

with the agenda (identified as Ref. 19D and filed with perm-

anent minutes). President Donnelly recommended that the

Board adopt the proposed Code amendment reflected in Ref.

19B, and the guidelines for implementation reflected in

Ref. 19D. Chancellor Humphrey concurred.



President Donnelly spoke concerning the proposals before

the Board, recalling that because of the enactment of SB

494, he had recommended on May 30 and repeated that recom-

mendation today, that the Community College faculty come

under the University tenure policy which incorporated all

of the provisions detailed in SB 494. Dr. Donnelly pointed

out that this bill, referred to as a "Fair Dismissal" bill,

is in effect a "Tenure" bill. By definition, he stated,

tenure provides for a system of probation and that is con-

tained in Section 2 of the bill, and it also provides on

completion of a probationary period that a faculty member

cannot be dismissed except for cause, and that is included

in Section 3 of the bill.



Dr. Donnelly continued by noting that the CCD Administration

had had discussions with faculty regarding salary schedules

and the length of the present probationary period; however,

he pointed out, there have not been any discussions with the

Administration of the fair dismissal or hearing provisions

contained in the CCD faculty proposal nor, to his knowledge,

have there been any requests for discussion of these par-

ticular items.



President Donnelly reported that his recommendation that CCD

faculty be included in the University tenure policy had been

reviewed and endorsed by the three CCD Advisory Boards.



Statements in support of the CCD Faculty proposal were made

by Mary Wardlaw, President of the WNCC Chapter of NSP,

Robert Rose, Chairperson of the WNCC Faculty Senate, Amy

Emerson, Secretary of the NNCC Faculty Senate, Sergio

Jaramillo, representing WNCC student government, and Neal

Ferguson, President of the UNR Chapter of NSP. Each of

the above responded to questions from the Regents. A com-

plete transcript of the statements and the discussion fol-

lowing is on file in the Chancellor's Office. Additionally,

Dr. Eugene Grotegut, speaking on behalf of the UNR Faculty,

recommended a delay to final action to provide for an oppor-

tunity for additional discussion.



State Assemblyman Albert Wittenberg, Chairman of the Educa-

tion Committee, requested an opportunity to speak to clari-

fy for the Board the question of legislative intent in the

adoption of SB 494. Mr. Wittenberg stated that SB 494 did

not, in his opinion, anticipate or require the granting of

University type tenure to Community College faculty and

that if the Board adopted a tenure plan for Community Col-

leges that he was certain the Legislature would take addi-

tional action at the next session.



The meeting adjounred for lunch and reconvened at 1:30 P.M.



Discussion resumed on Item 31, Proposed Code Amendment Regarding

Tenure



Miss Thompson moved that this matter be referred to the

Chancellor's Advisory Cabinet with a strong recommendation

that an ad hoc committee be established by enlarging the

Cabinet to include for this purpose representatives from

the concerned Campuses and other interested parties in this

question and that they work out some kind of dialogue and

come back to the February meeting. Motion seconded by Miss

Mason, carried without dissent.



Mr. Hug stated that he believed it important that the Board

of Regents fully understand their legal and constitutional

position which places the responsibility for management and

control of the University upon the Board of Regents. SB 494

has to be interpreted as advisory, he stated. Any other

interpretation would be unconstitutional.



32. DRI Reorganization



Chancellor Humphrey recalled that when Dr. Lloyd Smith was

first appointed as Acting President of DRI, he had been

requested to prepare a position paper concerning the Insti-

tute, to consider whether it should remain as a separate

Division, and, if it should, what changes, if any, should be

made in its structure. Dr. Humphrey noted that his request

to Dr. Smith was in response to suggestions made by Admin-

istrators, faculty and others. Accordingly, at the May,

1975 Board meeting, Dr. Smith presented his position paper

in support of his conclusion that DRI should continue as a

not-for-profit research and development Division of UNS.

That paper enumerated ten changes in operations, organiza-

tion and financial structures which he recommended and that

report was referred to all other UNS Divisions for review.

(Position paper identified as Ref. 3A and filed with perm-

anment minutes.) Dr. Humphrey also recalled that in May,

Dr. Smith had recommended a change of names for some of the

DRI laboratories and in September, had expanded this recom-

mendation (identified as Ref. 3B and filed with permanent

minutes). This expanded recommendation was also referred

to all other Divisions for review.



On September 23, the Chancellor's Advisory Cabinet, expanded

to include designees of the Presidents who are particulary

knowledgeable concerning this problem, met to review Dr.

Smith's proposals. Minutes of the meeting were included

with the agenda (identified as Ref. 3C and filed with

permanent minutes).



Chancellor Humphrey continued by noting that it was agreed

at that September meeting of the Cabinet that UNR and UNLV

would present reaction papers by October 20 and that these

would be discussed by the Cabinet and submitted to the

Board. Accordingly, President Baepler's paper on behalf

of UNLV was included with the agenda (identified as Ref. 3D

and filed with permanent minutes). In addition, a report

of a UNR Senate ad hoc committee which had been approved by

the Seante and by President Milam was also included with

the agenda (identified as Ref. 3E and filed with permanent

minutes).



Chancellor Humphrey commented on the two options presented

in the paper by Dr. Baepler. The first would dissolve DRI

as a separate Division and establish research administration

units at both UNLV and UNR reporting to the respective

Presidents. The second option would continue DRI as a

separate Division. Dr. Baepler emphasized in his paper

that if option two is followed, there must be greatly in-

creased cooperation between DRI and the other Divisions

and that DRI should abstain from projects in areas already

being pursued by UNR or UNLV.



Chancellor Humphrey continued by noting that the UNR ad hoc

committee's transmittal memorandum had stated as follows:



"...we recommend that DRI remain for now as a separate

Division of the UNS, but that it take a much more active

role in the stimulation of cooperative research programs

with UNR and UNLV. A number of steps are proposed that

in our opinion will serve to strengthen the relationship

between the academic Divisions and the Institute, and

that will improve the ability of DRI, UNR and UNLV to

participate as coequals in Systemwide research programs.

These steps would require modification of some proce-

dures and administrative attitudes within the 3 Divi-

sions, but no major structural changes. If within a

2-year period UNR and UNLV take the steps required to

improve their research posture, and if the DRI in the

meantime does nothing to assist the development of re-

search on the academic Campuses, then we recommend that

the Institute be restored into the academic Divisions."



Chancellor Humphrey noted that President Smith had filed a

response to the reaction papers and his response was in-

cluded with the agenda (identified as Ref. 3F and filed

with permanent minutes). He also noted that the DRI

National Advisory Board had met in Reno on November 6-8,

1975 and had issued a report upon completion of that meet-

ing which was also included with the agenda (identified

as Ref. 3G and filed with permanent minutes).



Chancellor Humphrey recommended that the Board of Regents

reaffirm the status of the Desert Research Institute as a

separate Division of the University of Nevada System, and

further recommended that the Board direct that:



(1) There be no change in DRI laboratory and center names

or missions at this time, but that the material pre-

sented to date be considered equivalent to a Phase I

proposal and President Smith be authorized to prepare

a Phase II proposal for consideration;



(2) The recommendation that DRI "take a much more active

role in the stimulation of cooperative research pro-

grams with UNR and UNLV" be aggressively implemented

by President Smith with the cooperation of Presidents

Baepler and Milam and Chancellor Humphrey;



(3) The use of joint UNR-DRI and UNLV-DRI professional

appointments be expanded in 1976-77; and



(4) The progress of these efforts be assisted and monitored

by a four-person committee consisting of representa-

tives of Presidents Baepler, Milam and Smith and

Chancellor Humphrey, which committee shall periodically

report to the Chancellor's Advisory Cabinet.



President Smith commented on his recommendations and made

the following statement in response to the Chancellor's

recommendations:



Members of the Board of Regents - You have read my

position paper on the future role, status and program

reorientation of DRI in the University of Nevada System,

and the position papers of Presidents Milam and Baepler

with respect to the future of DRI and my comments and

recommendations in response to the positions of the two

Universities and their faculties. Also, you have read

the strongly expressed recommendations of the DRI

National Advisory Board and you have the resulting

recommendations of the Chancellor.



Altogether many, many man months have been spent on

the subject and I would hope that in retrospect the

effort will have produced a structure and mode of

operation that will strengthen the research posture,

not only of the DRI, but the total University of Nevada

System and increase the System's contributions to the

more and more complex and important State, federal and

international technical, economic and social problems.



I wish particularly to comment on the Chancellor's

statement in paragraph 2 of Item 3 on the agenda with

respect to the change of names of the research units

in the DRI which I have recommended. It is stated

that "implicit in the change of names was a change of

mission." I do not consider that the changes of names

constitutes a change of mission of DRI. The mission

was set forth in the enabling legislation which es-

tablished DRI and the change of names does not change

this. What the change of names is intended to accom-

plish is a reorientation of fields of research which

would enable the Institute to more nearly fulfill its

mission which is stated in paragraph 3 of the UNR

position paper.



With respect to the Chancellor's specific recommenda-

tions, I want to comment as follows:



First - I concur completely in the recommendation that

the Board of Regents reaffirm the status of the DRI as

a separate Division of the University of Nevada System.



Second - I fully concur with the aims of the provisions

for achieving constructive cooperation among the three

Divisions and the assumption of a more active DRI role

in stimulating and strengthening research throughout

the University of Nevada System as set forth in para-

graphs numbers 2, 3, 4.



Third - In order that DRI be able to fulfill its mis-

sion and achieve the research stimulation and coopera-

tion delineated in paragraphs 2, 3 and 4, the DRI Senate

and I take exception to the recommendation stated in

paragraph 1. Not to permit an R & D organization to

change its internal organization and program emphasis

in a timely way to meet the needs of the times is to

guarantee its slow demise by administrative strangula-

tion. The recommended changes in program emphasis are

long overdue. Information concerning the name changes

and outline of the corresponding program emphasis has

been before the faculties of the three Divisions for

several months and further delay in approval can only

be disadvantageous to the Institute and the University

System financially and technically.



I strongly recommend your approval of the name changes

so that the DRI can fulfill the role for which it was

intended. I am confident that the University System

as a whole has much to gain by approval of the requested

changes and I will personally make every effort to see

to it that this is the case.



Mr. Herbert Grier, Chairman of the National Advisory Board

of the Desert Research Institute, commented on the Board's

recommendations concerning the Institute, noting that the

Board recommends strongly that the Institute be continued.

He stated that, in his opinion, the change in names is not

a big issue; rather, the issue is that DRI must settle down,

adopt a mode of operation and stick with it. He commented

on the appointment of Dr. Smith as a positive action which

would result in "the pieces being picked up" and suggested

that Dr. Smith would hold the Institute together while the

search for a new President proceeds. Mr. Grier also ex-

pressed the opinion that care must be taken in determining

the kind of person the Institute needs at this stage of its

development and in selecting the right person for the job.



Mr. Warburton, DRI Senate Chairperson, stated that the

Senate has reviewed the documents included with the agenda

and read the following statement for the record:



1. The Senate fully supports the Reorganization Plan of

President Smith and agrees with his several basic rea-

sons for implementing such a plan at this time.



2. The changes in names of centers within the Institute

do not represent a change in mission of DRI. The role

of DRI as set forth in the enabling act remains the

same. Certainly some of the research programs have

undergone metamorphosis in the last 5 years. Individ-

uals who previously worked entirely in Atmospheric

Physics, e. g., are now finding that the specialities

they developed in that field can be applied in energy

storage and in air pollution. Faculty previously en-

gaged in Oral Histories of Nevada are now working on

problems of alcohol abuse and rehabilitation. As the

national and state societal requirements change, so

scientists' research activities adapt. This is pre-

cisely what we are observing in the Institute and it

is a healthy sign.



3. The Institute has become much more involved in State

problems than heretofore. In most cases, this has

occurred through close interactions with and stimuli

from State offices and departments. This is reflected

in the DRI State appropriation, which is composed

principally of funds earmarked for specific projects

for the benefit of the State.



The Institute has become well known in the State as well

as nationally and internationally. Most of the senior

scientific staff have developed close personal ties

with State departments and with scientific groups in

other states and other countries who are working in

allied research areas.



The Institute has played a significant role in identi-

fying this University has having authoritative faculty

who can respond to the societal needs of the State and

the nation.



4. We agree with the Chancellor's recommendation to main-

tain the Institute as a separate Division of the Univer-

sity of Nevada System.



We are not a large Division of the University, but we do

believe we have made significant contributions to the

University, the State and the nation. We do not appre-

ciate the repeated review of our very existence, nor do

we enjoy having to respond to position papers, etc.

Such activities are very time consuming and lead to con-

siderable loss in productivity. The time spent on these

issues is usually coming straight out of our grants and

contracts whereas that of the faculty of other Divisions

is being paid by the State.



5. The faculty would like to see renewed and revitalized

cooperation with the research-oriented faculty at UNLV

and UNR. We believe that all Divisions will benefit

from such cooperative activities.



There have been many instances of successful coopera-

tion in the past and a variety of spin-offs which we

believe have benefited the other Divisions. Among these

are the spawning of the Medical School, the Computer

Sciences Program, the Oral History Program, and the

Basque Studies Program. The Institute has done impor-

tant work in specific academic areas and has contributed

to the accreditations of graduate programs in several

academic Departments. There is still a need for spe-

cific matters to be resolved such as the financial ar-

rangements for joint appointments, for graduate and

undergraduate training programs, and for released time

for teaching faculty to participate in research proj-

ects. Some of the mechanisms for handling these mat-

ters are available, but their implementation still

leaves much to be desired. We trust that the 3rd and

4th recommendations of the Chancellor will assist in

this regard.



6. And finally, we would like to comment on the types of

research to be conducted in the Institute. The DRI fac-

ulty are always willing to enter into multidisciplinary

programs and to involve faculty from other Divisions in

such programs, but as in the past, we feel that our

ability to compete successfully with other institutions

or with industry in the large field oriented programs,

is strongly related to the competitive scientific edge

we have achieved through individual grant supported

research (e. g., from the National Science Foundation).

We are anxious that this edge can be maintained through

continued involvement in individual basic and funda-

mental research as well as in the broader multidisci-

plinary type programs.



Dr. Baepler stated that he supported the Chancellor's recom-

mendation with the recommendation contained in #1 being the

key ingredient.



At Dr. Milam's request, Dr. Ryall spoke concerning the UNR

Senate Committee report, emphasizing the recommendations

contained in the report. Dr. Milam then endorsed the

Chancellor's recommendation.



Mr. Warburton spoke of the concerns expressed by UNR and

UNLV that DRI was perhaps moving into areas of research

which were of interest to the Campuses and pointed out

that DRI is also concerned that the Campuses are perhaps

moving into areas of interest to DRI. He suggested that

the Campuses generate research information so that faculty

members can be identified who might be interested in cooper-

ating in joint programs.



Mrs. Knudtsen moved that the Board reaffirm the status of

DRI as a separate entity of the University System. Motion

seconded by Mr. Ross, carried without dissent.



Dr. Lombardi moved approval of the name changes as pro-

posed by Dr. Smith. Motion seconded by Mrs. Knudtsen,

carried with the following roll call vote:



Yes - Dr. Anderson, Mrs. Knudtsen, Dr. Lombardi, Miss Mason,

Dr. Ross, Mr. James Buchanan

No - Mr. John Buchanan, Miss Helen Thompson

Abstain - Mrs. Fong



Mrs. Ross moved approval of the Chancellor's recommenda-

tions as contained in (2), (3) and (4). Motion seconded

by Mrs. Fong, carried without dissent.



Mr. Ross suggested that Dr. Grier report to the National

Advisory Board that the Board of Regents had unanimously

reaffirmed DRI's status. Mr. Ross also asked if the pre-

vious motion implied that a Phase II proposal would be

brought back to the Board by DRI.



Miss Thompson moved that a Phase II proposal be required at

the January meeting. Motion seconded by Mrs. Fong, failed

by the following roll call vote:



Yes - Dr. Anderson, Mr. John Buchanan, Mrs. Fong, Miss

Thompson

No - Mrs. Knudtsen, Dr. Lombardi, Miss Mason, Mr. Ross,

Mrs. James Buchanan



33. Faculty Work Load Proposal



Chancellor Humphrey presented the following summary of

action on this matter:



(1) In December, 1974 the Board adopted Resolution 74-3.

This resolution referred draft regulations concerning

faculty work loads to the various Faculty Senates and

to the Administration for review and recommendation in

order that adoption of a set of regulations might be

accomplished prior to the issuance of 1975-76 faculty

contracts.



(2) In March, 1975 the Board agreed to schedule this

subject for action in April.



(3) Following the March meeting, The Chancellor, the

Presidents of the instructional Divisions (or their

designees), and Senate Chairpersons met to discuss

Resolution 74-3 and alternatives. No consensus was

reached; however, in an attempt to interpret possible

areas of agreement a revision was developed by Chancel-

lor Humphrey and was submitted to the April meeting.

(Entitled "Faculty Responsibility Prospectus", that

document was included with the agenda, identified as

Ref. 27A and filed with permanent minutes.) An alter-

nate document prepared by President Milam was also

submitted to the April meeting (also included with the

agenda, identified as Ref. 27B and filed with permanent

minutes).



(4) It was reported at the April meeting that President

Donnelly, President Baepler and the UNLV Senate had

endorsed the Faculty Responsibility Prospectus docu-

ment. The Unit Senate declined to take action since

the documents affected only instructional Divisions.



At the April meeting, the Chairman of the WNCC Faculty

Senate reported that the Senate endorsed the Faculty

Responsibility Prospectus document with minor changes

in wording.



The Chairman of the UNR Faculty Senate reported that

he had been directed to request the Board not to adopt

any regulations but stated that if regulations were

adopted the faculty wished to propose a number of

changes to the Faculty Responsibility Prospectus

document.



Action was then deferred until May to allow the UNR

Faculty Senate to forward its recommendations.



(5) In May the Board agreed to further defer action on

this matter until November.



Chancellor Humphrey commented that although there appears

to be consensus concerning the desirability of using some

instrument to record and quantify faculty work load, both

for assignment and evaluation purposes, this consensus is

not unanimous. Reservations appear to be centered around

assumed administrative misuse in evaluation of individual

faculty.



Chancellor Humphrey also noted that as this discussion has

progressed within UNS, the National Center for Higher

Education Management Systems (NCHEMS), a unit of the Western

Interstate Commission for Higher Education (WICHE), com-

pleted work on the long-awaited Information Exchange Pro-

cedures (IEP). IEP includes forms, procedures and computer

software for gathering and analyzing information concerning

an institution, which would assist faculty, Administration

and Regents in institutional management. Included with the

IEP materials is a "Faculty Activity Survey" form which, if

completed by each professional staff member once each sem-

ester, would describe faculty activities in a manner which

would enable UNS to participate in IEP and would develop

information and experience upon which future efforts to more

adequately describe faculty assignment before the fact

could be based. A draft of the survey form was included

with the agenda (identified as Ref. 27C and filed with

permanent minutes).



Chancellor Humphrey recommended that this "Faculty Activity

Survey" be utilized by all UNS faculty for Fall, 1975 and

Spring, 1976 assignments and that further discussion of

faculty work load proposals be postponed until that exper-

ience is gained and evaluated. Dr. Humphrey also noted that

agreement had been reached within the Cabinet that a uniform

time for the survey forms to be returned for compilation was

desirable and one month before the end of each semester was

determined to be satisfactory.



Mr. Ross moved approval of the Chancellor's recommendation.

Motion seconded by Dr. Anderson, carried without dissent.



34. Nevada Council of Student Governments



Mr. Archer and Mr. Karaffa, representing ASUN and CSUN

respectively, requested an allocation of $1,000 from the

Board of Regents Special Projects Fund to assist in payment

of travel expenses for a meeting of the members of the

Nevada Council of Student Governments in Tonopah.



Miss Thompson moved approval. Motion seconded by Mrs.

Knudtsen, carried with Mrs. Fong opposing.



35. Foreign Language Requirement



Mr. Archer reported that a number of students who wish to

complete their requirements for graduation in May, 1975,

but have not yet completed their foreign language require-

ment, are anxious that the Board take some action to deal

with their problem. He spoke of discussions with Dean

Gorrell concerning establishment of a committee to develop

recommendations for consideration by the College of Arts

and Science, stating that Dean Gorrell had agreed to this

procedure and Mr. Archer wished to ask the Board's approval.

Dr. Milam stated that he had not been informed of this by

Dean Gorrell, and he further believed that it was a matter

for the College to deal with and could be handled adminis-

tratively. The Board concurred and no action was taken.



36. New Business



Mrs. Knudtsen asked for a complete report at the February

meeting on the Sundowners' activities on Campus and request-

ed that Dean Barnes, former Dean Basta, Associate Dean

Kinney, and University Police Chief Shumway be present,

along with any other individuals who were informed about

this matter and wished to be present. Paul Hollis, who

identified himself as a Sundowner, agreed to present a

report on behalf of that organization.



The action agenda was completed and the information agenda

was submitted. That agenda is on file in the Chancellor's

Office and contains the following items:



1. Nepotism (to be referred to the January meeting)

2. Board of Regents Special Projects Fund

3. Report of Fund Transfers

4. Report of Purchases in Excess of $8,000

5. Report of Foreign Travel

6. Progress of University Projects

7. Mackay School of Mines Press Release

8. Recommendations of UNS Salary and Benefit Committee

(to be referred to January meeting)

9. Report of Purchase in Excess of $8,000, UNLV

10. State Public Works Board Status Report



Chancellor Humphrey commented on the recommendations of the

UNS Salary and Fringe Benefit Committee (item 8 of the in-

formation agenda) requesting that the Division Senates look

at these recommendations and communicate to this committee,

with all information then to come back to the January meet-

ing of the Board. If the Division Senates do not agree with

the UNS Salary and Benefits Committee, they should communi-

cate that fact both to the committee and to the Board of

Regents.



The meeting adjourned at 4:25 P.M.



Bonnie M. Smotony

Secretary to the Board

11-20-1975