December 2-3, 1993
12-02-1993
Pages 132-195
BOARD OF REGENTS
UNIVERSITY AND COMMUNITY COLLEGE SYSTEM OF NEVADA
December 2-3, 1993
The Board of Regents met on December 2-3, 1993 in the Pine
Auditorium, Jot Travis Student Union, University of Nevada,
Reno.
Members present: Mr. Madison Graves, II, Acting Chairman
Mrs. Shelley Berkley
Dr. Jill Derby
Mr. Joseph M. Foley
Mrs. Dorothy S. Gallagher
Dr. Lonnie Hammargren
Mr. Daniel J. Klaich
Mrs. Nancy Price
Mrs. Carolyn M. Sparks
Mrs. June F. Whitley
Others present: Interim Chancellor John Richardson
President Anthony Calabro, WNCC
President Joseph Crowley, UNR
President John Gwaltney, TMCC
President Robert Maxson, UNLV
President Paul Meacham, CCSN
President Ronald Remington, NNCC
President James Taranik, DRI
General Counsel Donald Klasic
Vice Chancellor Ron Sparks
Interim Vice Chancellor Karen Steinberg
Secretary Mary Lou Moser
Members absent: James Eardley
Also present were Faculty Senate Chairmen Alan Balboni (CCSN),
Phil Boardman (UNR), Chris Gaub (Unit), Scott Hawkins (NNCC),
Dan Mc Clure (TMCC), Alan Mc Kay (DRI), Mark Melrose (WNCC),
and John Swetnam (UNLV), and Student Association Officers.
Acting Chairman Graves called the meeting to order at 2:00 P.M.
Thursday, December 2, 1993, with all Regents present except
Regent Eardley.
1. Approved Consent Agenda
Approved the Consent Agenda (identified as Ref. A, filed
with the permanent minutes), containing the following:
(1) Approved the minutes of the regular meeting held
October 21-22, 1993.
(2) Approved the gifts grants and contracts, listed in
Ref. C-1, filed with the permanent minutes.
(3) Approved the following appointment to the Western
Nevada Community College Advisory Board:
Robert Quisenberry, Fallon
Elmo De Ricco, Fallon
(4) Approved the following appointments to the UNLV Minor-
ity Engineering Program Advisory Board:
Ed May, Las Vegas
Judi Schuhmacher, Las Vegas
James E. Clark, Las Vegas
John Cleary, Las Vegas
Aurora Jose Wong, North Las Vegas
(5) Approved the following appointments to the TMCC Ad-
visory Board:
Fred Boyd
Dotti Gallagher
Bob Jones
Re-appointments for a 2-year term beginning December,
1993:
Robert Barengo Bob Lewis
Fritsi H. Ericson Kathleen Olson
Denis Graham Peter Sferrazza
Timothy Grant Jim Thompson
Richard Harjo Shirlee Wedow
Karen Kunkle Hans Wolfe
NOTE: There were two motions made: 1) to exclude
item 5 of the Consent Agenda until further discussion
(Chancellor's Report), found in item 4; and 2) to
accept item 5 of the Consent Agenda found after item
25. A lengthy discussion was held during the DRI
Research Foundation meeting, regarding elected of-
ficials serving on advisory boards and foundation
boards. Minutes of the DRI Research Foundation meet-
ing are filed in the Regents' Office.
(6) Approved the following Handbook addition to Title 4,
Chapter 17, Section 11, Special Course Fees, WNCC:
RPED 199B Special Topics (Weight Lifting) $60.00
(7) Approved the following Handbook change to Title 4,
Chapter 17, Section 7.6, Deferred Payment Policy, WNCC
effective for the Spring semester, 1994:
Contracts for deferred payments of registration fees
are available to students who register for five (5)
or more semester credit hours in a Fall or Spring
semester. Application for admission fees, laboratory
fees, and costs of community service credits and
courses may not be deferred. Special fees, i. e., lab
fees, insurance, etc., and approximately 1/2 of the
registration and tuition fees are payable at registra-
tion. The unpaid balance is due and payable no later
than Friday of the 6th week of instruction. If pay-
ment for deferred fees has not been made by the pre-
scribed date, the account will be considered delin-
quent and the student will be placed on financial
hold for future registration, grade, transcript,
diploma, and certificate privileges. A penalty fee
of $10 per $100 (or fraction thereof) will be charged
on all delinquent accounts. The Registrar is author-
ized, if necessary, to officially withdraw a student
from classes for non-payment with the unpaid balance
treated as a student receivable.
(8) Approved the following Handbook change to Title 4,
Chapter 17, Section 12, Special Use Fee, UNLV:
The following fees shall be applicable for recrea-
tional use of the Lombardi Recreation building, UNR,
the Mc Dermott Physical Education Complex, UNLV, and
the Frank and Vicki Fertitta Tennis Complex, UNLV:
(The following section is added at the end of the Mc
Dermott Physical Education Complex section and before
the UNR, Lombardi Recreation building section:)
UNLV, Frank and Vicki Fertitta Tennis Complex
Recreational Use Fee
Faculty/Staff/Students No Charge
Guests
Individuals $300 per year (9/1 to 9/1)
Family (4 or less) $500 per year (9/1 to 9/1)
Each additional
family member $200 per year (9/1 to 9/1)
(9) Approved a Handbook deletion in Title 4, Chapter 10,
Section 18(P), Intercollegiate Athletic Tradeouts,
UNLV. Item P. states, "A minimum 15% gratuity should
accompany meal tradeouts; gratuities are not reim-
bursable." As stated, item P. requires a minimum
15% accompanying meal tradeouts, but does not allow
the gratuity to be reimbursed, meaning the Coach who
may be entertaining a prospective donor or a prospec-
tive student athlete must pay the gratuity. This is
not fair to the Coach. Elimination of the item will
allow the gratuity to be included in the cost of the
tradeout. Ref. C-2 is filed in the Regents' Office.
(10) Approved the following Handbook change to Title 4,
Chapter 17, Section 8.1, Refund Policy, NNCC:
1. The following policy is effective for NNCC, ef-
fective Spring 1994:
a. The refund for all students, in all programs
with the exception of Summer Session, for
withdrawal of net credit load shall be:
(1) One hundred percent (100%) if initiated
by the end of the first week of the term;
(2) Fifty percent (50%) if initiated the
second week of instruction and before
the end of the third week of the term;
(3) No refund after the third week of in-
struction;
(4) No refund shall be given for the appli-
cation for admission fee.
(11) Approved the Handbook change to Title 5, Chapter 1,
Community College of Southern Nevada Bylaws, as con-
tained in Ref. C-3, filed in the Regents' Office.
(12) Approved authorization to utilize Capital Improvement
Fees at NNCC in the amount of $31,000 to pay archi-
tectural and engineering fees for the Mark Dawson
Child Care Facility at NNCC.
(13) Approved authorization to utilize Capital Improvement
Fees at WNCC in the amount of $5,170 for the instal-
lation of communications equipment between the Stewart
and Carson Main Campuses. This request will allow the
Stewart Campus to communicate on the UCCSN local net.
(14) Approved the Authorization to Install Electrical
Facilities and subsequent easement to Nevada Power
Company. This easement is necessary to provide
permanent electrical service to the new classroom/
office complex at UNLV.
(15) Approved the Authorization to Install Electrical
Facilities and subsequent easement to Nevada Power
Company. This easement is necessary to provide
permanent electrical service to the new Mc Carran
off-site employee parking lot located at Tropicana
Avenue between Paradise Road and Swenson Avenue on
the UNLV Campus.
(16) Approved to grant an easement to Nevada Power Company.
This easement is necessary to complete modifications
which have been approved for the Thomas and Mack
Center at UNLV.
(17) Approved the following interlocal agreements:
A. UCCSN Board of Regents/UNR and the Washoe County
School District (Nonexclusive Maintenance and
Drainage Easement)
Effective Date: Date approved by Board
Amount : None
Purpose : Easement to provide City of Reno
with major drainage ditch between
the Sage building fence and Mt.
Bismark Street.
B. UCCSN Board of Regents/UNR and the Nevada Depart-
ment of Human Resources/Division of Child and
Family Services (Interlocal Contract)
Effective Date: Date approved by Board through
September 30, 1994
Amount : $32,000 to UNR
Purpose : UNR to assess children eligible
for the Independent Living Pro-
gram for academic performance.
Those who are in need of remedial
academic assistance will receive
support for Independent Living
Program classes.
C. UCCSN Board of Regents/UNR and the Nevada Depart-
ment of Commerce/Real Estate Division (Interlocal
Contract)
Effective Date: Date approved by Board through
June 30, 1994
Amount : $16,791 to UNR
Purpose : UNR to provide real estate edu-
cation classes.
D. UCCSN Board of Regents/UNR and the Nevada Depart-
ment of Human Resources/Health Division (Inter-
local Contract)
Effective Date: Date approved by Board through
September 30, 1994
Amount : $5000 to UNR
Purpose : UNR to provide support services
for prevention, education and
intervention for sexual assault.
E. UCCSN Board of Regents/UNR and Department of Con-
servation and Natural Resources/Division of En-
vironmental Protection (Interlocal Contract)
Effective Date: Date approved by Board through
June 30, 1994
Amount : $40,000 to UNR
Purpose : UNR to provide data entry serv-
ices.
F. UCCSN Board of Regents/UNR and Nevada Division of
Wildlife (Interlocal Contract)
Effective Date: February 13 through March 30,
1994
Amount : $8000 to University Inn
Purpose : University Inn to provide rooms
and meals from February 14, 1994
through March 30, 1994 for con-
ference.
G. UCCSN Board of Regents/UNR and the Las Vegas
Valley Water District (Interlocal Contract)
Effective Date: Date approved by Board
Amount : $61,614 contributed by UNR and
$61,663 reimbursement to UNR by
the Las Vegas Valley Water Dis-
trict
Purpose : UNR and Las Vegas Valley Water
District to maintain in coopera-
tion a water conservation program
and to conduct research to deter-
mine the feasibility of a shallow
perched saline acquifer in Las
Vegas Valley as alternative ir-
rigation source for turfgrass and
landscape usage.
H. UCCSN Board of Regents/UNR and Department of
Conservation and Natural Resources/Division of
Environmental Protection (Interlocal Contract)
Effective Date: Date approved by Board through
August 31, 1995
Amount : $120,000 to UNR
Purpose : UNR to prepare and distribute
"Nevada Waste Reporter" news-
letters.
I. UCCSN Board of Regents/UNR and the Nevada Depart-
ment of Human Resources/Division of Child and
Family Services (Interlocal Contract)
Effective Date: Date approved by Board through
June 30, 1994, with renewal op-
tions until June 30, 1996
Amount : $25,759 to UNR
Purpose : UNR to adapt training and deliver
training during the first year at
three rural Nevada replication
sites including one site serving
children's birth through three
years and two sites serving chil-
dren ages three through five
years.
J. UCCSN Board of Regents/UNLN and the Department of
Commerce/Real Estate Division (Interlocal Con-
tract)
Effective Date: Date approved by Board through
June 30, 1994
Amount : $17,186 to UNLV
Purpose : UNLV to provide real estate
education classes.
K. UCCSN Board of Regents/UNLV and the Department of
Human Resources/Welfare Division (Interlocal
Contract)
Effective Date: Date approved by Board through
June 30, 1995
Amount : $440,000 to UNLV
Purpose : UNLV to collect and analyze
Medicaid hospital data for the
purpose of rate setting, managed
care analysis and comparative
analysis with existing data.
L. UCCSN Board of Regents/UNLV and the Department of
Human Resources/Welfare Division (Interlocal
Contract)
Effective Date: Date approved by Board through
June 30, 1994
Amount : $5000 to UNLV
Purpose : UNLV to operate an information
and referral service for preven-
tion of sexual exploitation and
provision of general health edu-
cation to UNLV students and the
local community.
Mrs. Whitley moved adoption of the Consent Agenda, with the
exception of item 5, and approval of the prepared agenda
with the authority to change the order of items as specified
throughout the meeting. Mrs. Berkley seconded. Motion
carried.
Mrs. Price requested a discussion be held regarding a policy
statement regarding the appointment of elected officials to
System advisory boards and foundation boards. A discussion
was held during the Chancellor's Report (item #4) and during
the DRI Research Foundation meeting. Minutes of the DRI Re-
search Foundation meeting are filed in the Regents' Office.
2. Introductions
Interim Chancellor Richardson introduced Mr. Danny Gonzales,
Research Analyst, who will undertake the State Postsecondary
Review Entity (SPRE) project and the Dwight D. Eisenhower
Math and Science Program. The System Administration Office
has received approval to operate SPRE and has received fund-
ing until June 30, 1994.
President Maxson introduced student government leader Mr.
Pat Smith.
President Maxson took the opportunity to announce that KUNV-
FM radio station on the UNLV Campus has received acknowl-
edgement of being the "Best Campus Radio Station in the
Country".
President Taranik introduced Mr. John Gardner, Special
Programs Coordinator, who also serves as the Space Grant
Coordinator at DRI.
President Remington announced that Vice President of Aca-
demic Affairs Bill Bonaudi has recently earned his Ed. D.
in Higher Education Administration.
President Gwaltney introduced Mr. L. D. Lovett, Director of
Multicultural Diversification at TMCC.
President Crowley introduced Mr. J. Christian Grymyr who
served on the Sagebrush editing staff that recently publish-
ed the 100th edition of the Sagebrush.
3. Chairman's Report
Acting Chairman Graves informed the Board that Dr. Eardley's
wife, Barbara, recently underwent open heart surgery, which
was successful. Dr. Eardley is tending to her at this time,
and will return within the next month to assume the Chair-
man's position.
Acting Chairman Graves appointed the following persons to
serve on the Tuition Committee.
Interim Chancellor John Richardson, Chairman
Regent Daniel Klaich
Regent Jill Derby
President Joseph Crowley, UNR
President Paul Meacham, CCSN
ASB President Melody Carlyle, NNCC
GSA President Sharlene Sayegh, UNLV
4. Chancellor's Report
Interim Chancellor Richardson informed the Board that he
recently accepted a gift, on behalf of UCCSN, from the IBM
Corporation. Executive Director Don Zitter attended the IBM
Conference in Washington, D. C. in which they presented
those institutions in attendance an IBM ThinkPad, a notebook
computer. The computer will be used by the Chancellor's
staff for various assignments, such as notetaking during
the Board of Regents' meetings.
Interim Chancellor Richardson stated that Secretary of the
Board Mary Lou Moser is working to schedule the Board of
Regents' Retreat for late January. She will be contacting
Regents and Presidents to determine the most convenient
date.
Interim Chancellor Richardson reported that originally the
Nevada WICHE Office was located in the System Administra-
tion Office and then was relocated to the UNR Campus during
the mid 1980s. The three commissioners, Paul Page, Cheryl
Rogers-Purdue and John Vergiels, have requested that the
office be relocated to the System Administration Office.
Interim Chancellor Richardson stated that he was supportive
of this request. This will establish closer ties to the
WICHE and Nevada higher education activities. He announced
that he will proceed to make these arrangements unless he
hears of any objections from the Board members. He intro-
duced Dr. Paul Page and Mr. Ron Sparks, II, Director and
Certifying Officer for WICHE.
Interim Chancellor Richardson reported that WICHE has under-
taken the task of examining ways to increase the number of
minority faculty because of the insufficient numbers nation-
ally and the competition to hire such individuals at the
institutions. The Regents' ad hoc Committee on Ethnic
Minority Affairs is also concerned about these issues.
WICHE recently held a meeting to discuss a proposal to
address this issue. A sizeable grant from the Pew Founda-
tion Trust has been given to fund three or more doctoral
fellows in the western states for the next three years for
this project. Senior Research Analyst Sunny Minedew is
attending a meeting in Salt Lake City, Utah to learn more
about this project.
Interim Chancellor Richardson announced that the University
Press has received honors for its publication, "The Tempta-
tions of St. Ed and Brother S", by Frank Bergon (a native
of Ely, Nevada). This publication has received coverage
in Publishers Weekly, Kirkus, Library Journal, New York
Times Book Review and Boston Globe.
UNLV has been invited to join the Oak Ridge Associated
Universities (ORAU). ORAU is a private not-for-profit
consortium of over 65 predominantly eastern Colleges and
Universities. Its mission is to provide and develop capa-
bilities critical to the nation's infrastructure in energy,
education, health and the environment.
It is anticipated that membership in ORAU will allow faculty
and students access to federal research equipment and facil-
ities, fellowships, scholarships and research alliances.
Interim Chancellor Richardson reported that currently there
is no definitive Regents' policy that exists which deals
specifically with the issue of service of elected officials
in the UCCSN. Concerns have surfaced regarding elected
officials serving as members of advisory committees, trust-
ees on foundation boards and as employees within the System.
Mrs. Price has also raised the issue for which a definitive
policy should exist regarding political candidates using
Campus facilities during campaigns.
The Council of Presidents has discussed these matters and
it was determined that the Board of Regents may wish to dis-
cuss these issues if they wish to set a policy.
Interim Chancellor Richardson suggested that this item be
brought forward under "New Business" in order for Mrs.
Price to be able to raise these issues and for the Board
to determine whether it will accept the proposed appoint-
ments on the Consent Agenda that have been held over for
discussion.
5. Approved the Bond Refunding, University Refunding Revenue
Bonds
Approved the following resolution authorizing the issuance
of the UCCSN Universities Refunding Revenue Bonds, Series
January 1, 1994:
RESOLUTION #93-8
A resolution designated by the short title "1-1-94
Student Fee Bond Resolution"; concerning the Univer-
sities of the University and Community College System
of Nevada; authorizing the issuance of the "University
and Community College System of Nevada, Universities
Refunding Revenue Bonds, Series January 1, 1994", for
the purpose of refunding certain outstanding bonds;
accepting on behalf of the University the best bid for
the purchase of the bonds; providing duties, privileges,
powers, liabilities, disabilities, immunities and rights
pertaining thereto; providing convenants, agreements and
other details, and making other provisions concerning
the Universities, the bonds and the pledged revenues;
ratifying action previously taken and pertaining to the
foregoing matters; providing other matters relating
thereto; and repealing all resolutions in conflict
herewith.
Mrs. Gallagher moved approval of the resolution authorizing
the issuance of the UCCSN Universities Refunding Revenue
Bonds, Series January 1, 1994. Mrs. Sparks seconded.
Vice Chancellor Sparks reported that UCCSN received three
bids, and recommended the Board to award the bid to the
company that submitted the lowest bid, Hutchinson, Shockey,
Erley & Co. of Chicago at an interest rate of 5.49%. The
bond sale total is $21,600,000 and will be allocated for
the UNR Church Fine Arts, UNR Canada Hall, and UNLV Dining
Facility. By awarding the bid to Hutchinson, Shockey, Erley
& Co., $1,590,411 will result in a total savings for the
System.
Motion carried.
6. Approved the Bond Refunding, Community College Student Fee
Refunding Revenue Bonds
Approved the following resolution authorizing the refunding,
paying and discharging of certain outstanding bonds of the
University payable from fees collected from students at the
Community Colleges:
RESOLUTION #93-9
A resolution designated by the short title "12-1-93
Community Colleges Student Fees Bond Resolution";
concerning the Community Colleges of the University
and Community College System of Nevada; authorizing
the refunding, paying and discharging of certain out-
standing bonds of the University payable from fees
collected from students at the Community Colleges;
authorizing the issuance of the "University and Com-
munity College System of Nevada, Community Colleges
Student Fees Refunding Revenue Bonds, Series December
1, 1993", for the purpose of defraying in part the
cost of such project; accepting on behalf of the Uni-
versity the best bid for the purchase of the bonds;
providing covenants, agreements, and other details,
and making other provisions concerning the Community
Colleges, the bonds, and the pledged revenues; ratify-
ing action previously taken and pertaining to the fore-
going matters; providing other matters relating thereto;
and repealing all resolutions in conflict herewith.
Vice Chancellor Sparks reported that UCCSN received 4 bids
and recommended the Board to award the bid to the company
that submitted the lowest bid, La Salle National Bank of
Chicago at an interest rate of 4.54%. The bond sale total
is $2,295,000 and will free funds for capital improvements
for TMCC worth $225,000 and CCSN worth $325,000. By award-
ing the bid to La Salle National Bank, $178,155 will result
in a total savings for the System.
Mrs. Gallagher moved approval of the resolution authorizing
the refunding, paying and discharging of certain outstand-
ing bonds of the University payable from fees collected from
students at the Community Colleges. Mr. Klaich seconded.
Motion carried.
7. Approved Emeritus, UNLV
Approved Emeritus Status for Dr. Wilbur Stevens, Emeritus
Professor of English at UNLV, effective January 1, 1994.
Dr. Derby moved approval of Emeritus Status for Dr. Wilbur
Stevens, Emeritus Professor of English at UNLV, effective
January 1, 1994. Mrs. Whitley seconded. Motion carried.
8. Information Only: Outstanding Faculty Recognition
At the request of the Board of Regents, each Faculty Senate
Chairman reported on the outstanding faculty achievement for
the institution. Ref. B is filed in the Regents' Office.
University of Nevada, Reno
Ms. Susan Carkeek
Desert Research Institute
Dr. William Pierson
Truckee Meadows Community College
Ms. Ohne Mulder
9. Information Only: Outstanding Student Recognition
At the request of the Board of Regents, each Student Govern-
ment Officer reported on the outstanding student achievement
from the institution. Ref. C is filed in the Regents'
Office.
University of Nevada, Reno
Tina Marie Crinite
Truckee Meadows Community College
Barbara Hartzell
10. Information Only: Public Comment
UNLV Faculty Senate Chairman Johhn Swetnam discussed aspects
of teaching in higher education. He felt that teaching
should be in the forefront when discussing organization of
the institutions and the development of the budget. As
Faculty Senate Chairman at UNLV, he will appoint a commit-
tee which will develop a report highlighting ideas for
teaching for presentation to the Board of Regents at its
February meeting.
Ms. Christine Kelly, returning student, discussed the new
grading policy. She felt that the policy should be uni-
form throughout the System. She stated that she is compet-
ing with other students for admittance into the Nursing pro-
gram at UNR and she felt that the grading policy makes it
easier for some students and harder for others. It was
noted that ASUN is conducting a student survey and that
other institutions may want to conduct a similar survey.
When the results have been compiled the Board of Regents
will determine whether or not this issue should be brought
forth for further discussion. Interim Chancellor Richardson
suggested that the policy remain in effect for at least one
full year. He felt that it was far too early to make a
determination on the policy. The current policy had been
discussed with Faculty Senates and Presidents, and a compro-
mise was made to implement the current policy.
11. Information Only: Report on Gaming-Related Classes and
Programs, UCCSN
In response to a request for information about gaming-relat-
ed classes and programs throughout the UCCSN, Interim Vice
Chancellor Karen Steinberg presented an overview. Ref. D
is filed in the Regents' Office.
Dr. William R. Eadington, Director of the Institute for the
Study of Gambling and Commercial Gaming at UNR, made a pres-
entation on the Institute and its activities. The insti-
tute was formed in 1989 by the UNR College of Business Ad-
ministration; however, involvement with the Study of Gam-
bling and Commercial Gaming goes back to 1973. The insti-
tute is very active in research, conferences, information
and knowledge. Academia has recognized the study of gam-
bling, but the program involves non-degree level programs,
degree granting programs, and executive level outreach
programs throughout the world. The mission is to be the
world center for gambling studies and research.
Dr. Eadington reported that several publications have been
produced through the Institute for the Study of Gambling
and Commercial Gaming (6 books through the institute, and
a journal on gambling studies that is co-sponsored by the
Institute). The journal originally addressed deviant
gambling behavior, but now it has become a major publica-
tion on many aspects of gambling. The University of Nevada
Press has agreed to publish a Gambling Studies Series.
Dr. Eadington reported that educational programs have been
developed, such as the Executive Development Program and
Casino Management Issues for senior level casino executives.
The Gaming Management Series sponsors national workshops
conducted in cooperation with UNR's Continuing Education.
The Hotel/Gaming Professional Development Program is a
short non-degree course created for the Northern Nevada
gaming industry. Gaming courses are taught throughout the
College of Business Administration at UNR.
The Institute for the Study of Gambling and Commercial
Gaming is active in national and international confer-
ences. Such conferences included the North American Con-
ference on the Status of Indian Gaming; the Eighth Inter-
national Conference on Gambling and Risk Taking; the
Second North American Conference on the Status of Indian
Gaming held in Reno; the Ninth International Conference
on Gambling and Risk Taking held in Las Vegas; and the
Institute co-sponsored the First Asian-Pacific Conference
on Casinos and Gaming in Hong Kong.
The Institute does have a 20-member advisory board, with
membership from Nevada (10), other U. S. states (5), and
the remainder from the United Kingdom, Holland, Canada and
Spain. The membership represents pioneers in gambling re-
search, leaders of regulatory bodies, recognized experts
in various fields, and leading gaming companies.
Dr. Eadington stated that the Institute works with other
institutions nationally and internationally and is very
active in media contacts, such as the New York Times,
Economists, Washington Post, CNN, PBS and others.
Upon questioning, Dr. Eadington responded that the Journal
on Gambling Studies is published four times a year for $45
per subscription.
Mrs. Sparks indicated that UNLV has similar courses and
questioned whether UNR's Institute for the Study of Gam-
bling and Commercial Gaming shares information and works
with the UNLV program, and Dr. Eadington replied in the
negative.
Mrs. Price stated that the two programs at the Universities
are outstanding; however, she had a problem with these
courses being supported by the System. She requested that
the issue of privatizing courses be placed on the agenda
for the Board of Regents' Retreat.
Acting Chairman Graves stated that this was a very impres-
sive presentation. He felt that the UCCSN should have this
expertise and become the leaders throughout the world on
this issue. He requested that UNLV and CCSN make similar
presentations to the Board in the future.
The opening meeting recessed at 3:30 P.M. for committee meetings
and reconvened at 9:50 A.M. Friday, December 3, 1993, with all
Regents present except Regent Eardley.
12. Information Only: Regents' Workshop on the UCCSN Budget
A workshop on the UCCSN Budget was presented by Interim
Chancellor Richardson and Vice Chancellor Sparks. An
overview of the budget process and calendar, and a review
of the Capital Budget Process were discussed.
The workshop included a review of the processes used to
establish the capital budget, the base budget and the
priority budget, as well as a review of a calendar of dead-
lines and important dates. A review of the UCCSN budget
structure including appropriation areas, functions, and
expenditure objects was also reviewed.
Interim Chancellor Richardson reviewed the budget calendar,
filed in the Regents' Office, which includes information on
the Budget Overview, UCCSN Capital Construction Process,
UCCSN Operating Budget Process, the Budget Process History,
and UCCSN Biennial Operating Budget Structure. He explained
that the calendar has been scheduled as a two-step process.
He requested that if anyone had any issues that they wished
discussed during the upcoming sessions, they be brought
forward at the meeting prior to the appropriate meeting, so
that staff can be prepared.
Acting Chairman Graves questioned whether revenue projec-
tions would be predicted by January 1994, and Interim
Chancellor Richardson stated that Vice Chancellor Sparks
follows the information provided on tax and gaming collec-
tions and revenue. He is able to give preliminary projec-
tions on the economy of the State and the General Fund
Revenue for the next biennium. Vice Chancellor Sparks
stated that the newly appointed State Budget Director,
Mr. Perry Comeux, has been invited to the January work-
shop. It is hoped that an update of the revenues can be
made in order to make a projection for the next biennium.
Mr. Foley stated that UCCSN has utilized the same formulas
which in recent times have been a disaster in the Legisla-
ture. He strongly felt UCCSN should abandon the formulas
and base the budget on needs and priorities. It is time
to take a good strong look at these formulas.
Mr. Klaich objected to Mr. Foley's comments regarding the
generalization of acceptance by the Legislature. When there
is no money available, it doesn't matter how the budget was
presented. During the 1993 Legislative Session, the UCCSN
took measures that were incredible and were doomed from the
start because of lack of funding. It did not have anything
to do with the way UCCSN's budget was prepared. The "gin-
gerbread" approach is not feasible at this time. The form-
ulas have taken growing institutions and funneled the money
to maintain the institutions. The formulas have failed be-
cause of the rapidly growing institutions. Mr. Klaich stat-
ed it is the State's fault, not the formulas' fault, that
UCCSN was not appropriately funded. Taxpayers must be made
aware that if they want quality education, then they must
pay.
Interim Vice Chancellor Karen Steinberg stated that the up-
coming workshop will address these issues.
Dr. Derby stated that she did not advocate "gingerbread"
budgeting and appreciated Mr. Klaich's remarks; however, she
reflected back on Mrs. Price's recent comments that there is
a difference between incremental vs. priority budgeting.
The values in 1971, when the formulas were devised, may be
different than the 1993 values. She felt that the formulas
should be reviewed and that the assumptions of why formulas
were developed should also be reviewed.
Mrs. Price supported Mr. Foley's concerns and questioned
whether the budget process included total expenditures or
only the State supported expenditures. Interim Chancellor
Richardson stated that UCCSN is concerned with securing
funds for the System, therefore the State budget which is
funded by the State's General Fund will be discussed. The
gifts, grants and contracts will not be discussed.
Mrs. Price announced that she would not be in attendance
during the next two meetings; therefore, she has requested
Professor Jim Roberts to attend the meeting on her behalf
and report back to her after the meetings.
Interim Vice Chancellor Steinberg stated that the overall
purpose for this workshop and the one scheduled in January
is to address the values and issues on this sensitive sub-
ject. The Chancellor's staff has held many discussions on
how to proceed with the budget process and it was determined
that everyone should have a basic overall understanding of
the budget process, with its flaws and good points, and how
it fits into the State's budget process.
Interim Vice Chancellor Steinberg explained that a budget is
a financial plan that includes proposed expenditures and es-
timated revenues for an estimated time. It is a plan. She
further explained that the "Capital Budget Request" contains
in priority order requests for new capital projects, i. e.,
buildings. The "UCCSN Biennial Operating Budget Request"
will contain UCCSN's operating request for the 1995-97 bien-
nium. It is composed of two parts: 1) the "Base Budget"
reflects the funds necessary to maintain existing programs
and extends those funds into the next biennium with adjust-
ments for student enrollment increases, inflation, operating
funds for new facilities, adjustments to reach previously
approved budget formulas, and other selected adjustments;
and 2) the "Priority Requests for New Funding" includes
those items that fall outside the Base Budget and include
requests for new programs or activities or for enhanced
funding to other activities. She emphasized that the Board
of Regents sets the parameters for constructing the Base
Budget and sets the priority for new funding.
She explained the UCCSN Capital Construction Process for
new construction and maintenance, repair and renovation.
This information is intended to give the Board members a
sense of the process, and if additional information is
needed, Interim Vice Chancellor Steinberg encouraged the
members to contact the Chancellor's staff and they would
give further explanation.
Vice Chancellor Sparks explained the UCCSN Operating Budget
Process which includes the Base Budget and the Priority Re-
quests for New Funding. The Base Budget is an extension of
the existing programs for the next biennium. This process
is started every odd-numbered year with the parameters being
reviewed. He explained the process for Priority Requests
for New Funding, which is started in the Fall of each odd-
numbered year.
Vice Chancellor Sparks reviewed the budget process history.
He reminded the members of the Board that prior to the 1983
Legislative Session the System's budget was $86.7 million
and in 1993 the budget has increased to $250.5 milion, an
increase of 189%. Enrollments have grown by 73.8% since
1982. No other state in the country has grown at this rate.
He proceeded to review the documentation provided at the
meeting, which is filed in the Regents' Office.
He reported that during the 1993 Legislative Session, the
General Fund operating support decreased 2.7% over the bi-
ennium; the instruction formulas were suspended for the
biennium; 50% of the fee increase was set aside to improve
student access; UCCSN received 18.3% of the total State
Appropriation; and $48.3 million was received for Capital
Improvements.
In order to restore the instruction budget, it will cost
the State each year of the biennium $20-25 million. In
addition, to fund the support services it will cost $20-
25 million. By allocating a 1% pay increase throughout
the System, it will cost approximately $2 million for each
percentage, and to increase the merit program, it will cost
$1-2 million per year.
Vice Chancellor Sparks indicated that the State of Nevada
adopted the 3-tier budget process in 1991 to include adjust-
ed base, program enhancement, and priority requests for pro-
gram enhancement. The UCCSN's operating budget is only 2-
tiered: Base Budget and Priority Requests for New Funding.
UCCSN should attempt to be as close to the State's procedure
so there wouldn't be wasted time in explaining why UCCSN is
different. UCCSN should be similar to the State's process
and UCCSN should make every attempt to come together with
the State's process.
Mrs. Berkley left the meeting.
UCCSN's budget structure is based on NACUBO's suggested
structure in order that comparison can be made easily.
The UCCSN budget is arranged to display System resource
needs by System activities. The activities are classified
in various ways: Appropriation Areas, Budget Function and
Expenditure Objects. Vice Chancellor Sparks reviewed these
structures. He noted that funds appropriated to each of
the appropriation areas cannot be interchanged or moved
from one area to another. The 8 budget functions are not
utilized in all budgets. The budget functions used by
UCCSN have been defined by NACUBO.
Mrs. Berkley returned to the meeting.
Vice Chancellor Sparks indicated that within the 8 budget
functions, funds can be moved between the functional areas,
but UCCSN tries to stay as close to the legislative intent
as possible. The transfers are reported to the Board of
Regents once a year.
In summary, Vice Chancellor Sparks stated that the UCCSN
biennial operating budget is made up of 23 appropriation
areas. Within each appropriation area, specific activi-
ties are described by budget function categories. There
are 8 approved functions, each appropriation area uses one
or more of these functions to describe its activities.
Finally, for each function area, there are objects of ex-
penditure. The UCCSN uses 9 standard expenditure objects.
Acting Chairman Graves commended staff for an excellent
presentation.
Mr. Foley stated that this process has been explained before
and the next budget will be generated as in the past. He
felt that NACUBO was bureaucratic. He strongly suggested
that UCCSN approach the legislative money committees and
have them face reality, let them cut programs and reduce
education at any of the 7 institutions. He felt that ap-
proaching the Legislature for full funding of the formulas
was an absolute myth. Higher education in Nevada costs
money and the Legislature should face up to this fact.
Mr. Klaich stated that when displacing an old value system,
a new value system must be incorporated or chaos will ensue.
The formfulas are the present value system. He questioned
if the "new" budget would be constructed by listing all
programs throughout the system. Mr. Klaich stated that
students have the right to be taught quality education and
have access to facilities and support services. He stated
that the formulas are a service delivery system to men and
women in the State of Nevada. He questioned what is so
wrong with the formulas, and if Mr. Foley had a base for
his proposal.
Mr. Foley stated that UCCSN should revisit the process and
see if the funding formulas are still desirable. He felt
that after each Legislative Session, the Legislators claim
they did the best they could with what they had to work
with, and that UCCSN doesn't really expect to get fully
funded. He is not asking the Board to junk anything, but
just that the Board not blindly adopt the same old routine.
He suggested that the institutions devise a budget that
would fit their own institution and find out what the
Legislators are going to do about funding higher education.
UCCSN must take a stand and abandon the Legislature's op-
portunity to deny full funding of the formulas. He stated
that he would be very disappointed if nothing different was
done about the budget process.
Mrs. Sparks indicated that she respected Mr. Foley's com-
ments and his right to disagree with the proces; however,
she stated that she served on the Funding of Higher Educa-
tion in Nevada Committee, and the formulas are the "new"
way of processing the budget. The "old" way allowed the
Legislature to delete programs on their own. The Committee
attempted to provide some parity between the institutions
and to limit and restrict the budget. The formulas were
devised by members who serve on several Statewide commit-
tees. The Committee felt that formulas were fair to all
institutions. If the formulas were to be discarded it
would impact funding for growth. She recommended that the
Board of Regents proceed with the current process. The
Board of Regents and UCCSN should utilize its strength in
relaying to the Legislators the importance of funding higher
education. It is not fair to the Chancellor's staff to
redevelop a budget process.
Mrs. Price addressed Mr. Klaich's remarks regarding values.
She did not believe that UCCSN is changing its values, but
the mechanism in reaching those values, such as teaching,
research, etc. She felt that to reach the values, the Board
should set its values based on priorities, not previous his-
tory. She mentioned that former State Budget Director Judy
Matteucci tried making changes to the budget process, and
suggested that Mr. Klaich speak with her. In order to set
priorities, the Board needs to review information regarding
programs to budgets, mission statements and strategic plans.
There is an opportunity at this time to make a change and
listen to others about the budget process, or UCCSN may be
bound for another 2-3 years to "business as usual".
Mrs. Gallagher reminded the Board that the budget process
does not only affect UCCSN, but other State agencies. Leg-
islators, higher education personnel, and the citizens of
the State of Nevada are the ones to develop a budget. This
is the time to make a difference about quality education.
She suggested to those who want to go back to the way the
budget was presented in the past to speak with President
Crowley, and he could tell them about the time UCCSN was
kicked out of a legislative meeting to go back and formu-
late a corrected version of the UCCSN budget. UCCSN must
work with the legislative process. The Legislators do have
control of the monies and can call UCCSN to the carpet if
necessary.
Dr. Derby stated that this discussion is an "either/or" di-
alog. She did not feel that the formulas should be dis-
carded, but that UCCSN's values be discussed to see if its
current needs are being addressed. She did not have a
specific alternative, but felt that the structure developed
in 1985 should be reviewed. The Board of Regents has an
enormous social impact on society, and she felt that what-
ever the process should be, that recently it was reported
that UCCSN leads the nation in being the last higher edu-
cation system to give to needy students. She questioned
if the current formulas were addressing this issue and if
the formulas adequately address student access.
Mrs. Whitley questioned why salaries and computer expansion
are listed under the priority requests for new funding and
not the base budget. Vice Chancellor Sparks replied that
these are new salaries and new equipment, not recurring
expenditures.
Mr. Klaich stated that he has been tagged the "Guardian of
the Past" because he is usually opposed to change. He
stated that he is not guarding the formulas, but only wants
to do what is best for the students. He is not opposed to
revision, but that it be done constructively and fine-tune
the process with detailed information.
Acting Chairman Graves noted the frustration between the
members of the Board. A very sophisticated budgeting system
has evolved over the years and with the strategic directions
being included in the construction of the budget, it will
become even more sophisticated. There is a great need to
educate people on the dramatic effects that take place at
UCCSN's institutions if the budgets are not fully funded,
such as quality education, decreased access, and limited
counselors and support staff. He felt that the current
budget process is appropriate and suggested no change take
place at this time, but that the budget process be enhanced
by including the strategic directions and the academic mas-
ter plans.
13. Disapproved an Emergency Item: Allocation of Regents'
Special Project Funds
Regent Lonnie Hammargren requested consideration of an al-
location from the Regents' Special Project Funds to Desert
Research Institute for the purpose of leasing an earth
globe and distributing educational materials to schools in
Nevada.
The emergency exists because the proposed project became
available after publication of the Board of Regents' agenda
and needs to be in the State prior to January 6, 1993.
Mrs. Gallagher moved acceptance of the emergency item for
consideration of an allocation from the Regents' Special
Project Funds to DRI. Dr. Derby seconded.
Interim Chancellor Richardson explained that this item was
brought to his attention by Regent Hammargren. After con-
sulting with General Counsel Klasic, it was determined
that in order for the Board of Regents to engage in dis-
cussion of this activity, the item would immediately need
to be brought before the Board for consideration. If the
item were to have been placed on the next agenda, the
opportunity would have passed.
General Counsel Klasic stated that the criteria for an
emergency item was whether the item was unforeseen at the
time the agenda was published. He requested additional
information regarding the nature of the timing of this
project.
Dr. Hammargren explained that this project is an atmospheric
science project and the DRI Space Grant could become active-
ly involved. He requested that the event happen in conjunc-
tion with the next Earth Winds launch in January. He in-
formed the Board that the project is now temporarily being
stored in Las Vegas and by implementing this project at
this time would save money on shipping costs.
President Taranik stated that he learned of this project on
Tuesday, November 30. Dr. Hammargren had spoken to Mr. John
Gardner, Space Grant Coordinator, about this project. Mr.
Gardner presented President Taranik with a video tape cas-
sette of this project which was initiated at the University
of Minnesota. President Taranik agreed that this project
is an outstanding program that will provide outreach serv-
ices to all levels of education (K-16).
President Taranik explained that the project is for students
of various ages to build a globe on a University Campus.
This proposal was hoped to be built in conjunction with the
Earth Winds launch. However, President Taranik noted that
students will be on Winter break during this window of op-
portunity. He stated that DRI is willing to facilitate this
activity through its Space Grant Program.
President Taranik relayed that the Marsville project took 6
to 9 months to plan with K-12. It was successful, and in
order for this proposed project to be successful, President
Taranik stated that K-12 would need to be involved.
Acting Chairman Graves stated that it was his understanding
that this project is only in the State for the next 3 months
and then it will be shipped to Israel.
Dr. Hammargren stated he has spoken with Mrs. Sandy Miller
and Ms. Anne Lynch, associates with the Education 2000 pro-
gram, who have stated that the program would be viable.
Dr. Hammargren stated that the emergency of this item is
the availability of the globe to Nevada.
A roll call was taken:
Affirmative: Regents Derby, Hammargren, Whitley
Negative : Regents Foley, Gallagher, Klaich, Sparks
Motion failed.
President Taranik encouraged that Board of Regents consider
this project for the future and take time to view the video
cassette that has been provided. Acting Chairman Graves
requested interested Regents to view the video cassette
tape on their own time.
Mrs. Sparks requested that this item be placed on the agenda
in the future and that it would be an excellent endeavor if
enough planning time were allowed.
Dr. Hammargren stated tht he did not actually believe that
this item would receive approval by the Board of Regents,
but hoped that the Board would keep an open mind and view
the video cassette tape for additional information. It is
the process in which this emergency item was placed on the
agenda that is being denied. He stated that he would be
willing to place this issue on a future agenda.
Mrs. Gallagher stated that she was not against the project,
but objected to the process in which it came to the Board
of Regents.
Mrs. Berkley stated that she was uncomfortable with this
project and did not feel that it is a part of the academic
plan that has been set by the Board of Regents and the
institutions. She felt that if K-12 and Nevada 2000 liked
the project, then maybe those entities should consider the
project.
The open meeting recessed at 11:50 A.M. for lunch and reconvened
at 12:50 P.M. Friday, December 3, 1993, with all Regents present
except Regents Eardley, Hammargren and Klaich.
14. Approved Fall 1993 Enrollment Report
Interim Vice Chancellor Karen Steinberg presented the of-
ficial Fall 1993 Enrollment report. She summarized Campus
and System data, and presented information concerning en-
rollment by gender, race-ethnic designation and full-time/
part-time status, as contained in Ref. D, filed in the
Regents' Office.
Some of the highlights discussed were as follows:
The UCCSN currently enrolls 35,619 full-time equivalent
(FTE) students. Although this represents a decrease of
379 FTE students, or 1.1% from Fall 1992, it is an in-
crease of 67% from the Fall of 1984.
The Community Colleges currently enroll 13,579 FTE
students, a decrease of 263 students, or 2% from the
Fall 1992 semester and an increase of 89.5% from the
Fall of 1984.
The Universities currently enroll 22,040 FTE students,
a decrease of 116 FTE students, or 0.5% from the Fall
1992 semester and an increase of 55.6% from the Fall
of 1984.
The UCCSN is currently serving 65,124 State supported
students. This is a decrease of 692 students of 1.1%
from the Fall of 1992 and an increase of 60.4% from the
Fall of 1984.
The UCCSN Community Colleges currently serve 35,305
State supported students, a decrease of 1314 students,
or 3.8% less than the number enrolled in Fall 1992 and
an increase of 64.9% from the Fall of 1984.
The total headcount for the UCCSN Community Colleges,
including both State supported and non-State supported
classes, is 46,281.
The Universities currently serve 31,819 State supported
students, an increase of 622 students or 2.0% over the
number enrolled in Fall 1992 and an increase of 55.9%
over the Fall of 1984.
69% of UCCSN students are part-time students.
49% of University students are part-time students, up
from 48% in 1992.
87% of Community College students are part-time stu-
dents, up from 86% in 1992.
56% of all students in Fall 1993 are female, a slightly
larger proportion than in 1992.
75% of all UCCSN students in Fall 1993 are white, 16.7%
are minority students, 3.0% are non-resident alien, and
5.4% are of unknown status.
Student age data are collected every other year. The
following UCCSN age data were reported for Fall 1993:
Systemwide, 27.0% of students are between 18 and 21
years of age; 33.5% of students are 22 to 29 years
of age; 20.4% of students are 30 to 39 years of age;
11.9% of students in 1993 are between 40 to 49 years
of age; 5.5% are over 50 years of age; and 1.1% are
under 18 years of age.
Because the issue of out-of-state students has received
much attention this year, specific information about
this topic is included below:
The total number of non-resident students enrolled
in the UCCSN in Fall 1993 is approximately 6000.
This number also includes students who attend UCCSN
institutions under special tuition policies such as
Good Neighbor, Children of Alumni and WICHE Western
Undergraduate Exchange (WUE) programs.
In Fall 1993, 1228 students enrolled in UCCSN in-
stitutions under the Good Neighbor Policy.
283 students enrolled in UCCSN institutions under
the WICHE/WUE program in Fall 1993.
At the Universities, UNR reports 1284 students in
Fall 1993 are California residents, an increase of
17.9% over Fall 1992 (1088). UNLV reports 802 stu-
dents are California residents, an increase of 90%
from Fall 1992 (422).
Interim Vice Chancellor Steinberg felt that the decline in
enrollment was due to lack of resources and not enough
faculty to teach courses. The defacto cap in enrollment
is a serious issue.
Acting Chairman Graves suggested that more information be
gathered and reported on the declining rate of student
access. This may help UCCSN when this is presented to the
Nevada State Legislature and other significant entities.
Dr. Derby moved to adopt the Fall 1993 Enrollment Report.
Mrs. Gallagher seconded.
Dr. Derby questioned the flattened enrollment rate, and
Interim Vice Chancellor Steinberg offered 3 factors for
this decline:
1) declining revenues
2) increase in cost of education
3) increase in admission standards to the Universities
Mr. Klaich entered the meeting.
Acting Chairman Graves requested that if anyone should re-
ceive written notice from a student(s) on her/his trouble
in being admitted to a course, to forward the letter to all
Legislators so they can be made aware of this important
issue.
Motion carried.
15. Approved the Loan Resolution, NNCC
Approved the following resolution to solicit proposals for
a proposed loan up to $600,000 for the purpose of construct-
ing a building in Ely, Nevada, for NNCC.
RESOLUTION #93-10
It is hereby resolved by the Board of Regents of the
University and Community College System of Nevada that:
The Officers of the University be and hereby are author-
ized to solicit proposals for making a loan to the Uni-
versity and Community College System of Nevada in the
amount of up to $600,000 for the purpose of constructing
a building in Ely, Nevada, for Northern Nevada Community
College.
The Board of Regents at its April 9-10, 1992 meeting approv-
ed the construction of a facility in Ely to be funded by an
$850,000 EDA Federal grant to be matched with NNCC Founda-
tion and Campus Capital Improvement Funds. The total proj-
ect is estimated to cost $1.7 million and has been approved
by the State Public Works Board and the Legislative Interim
Finance Committee. According to the Federal grant restric-
tions, construction must begin by Fall 1994.
Following is a breakdown of the funds available to begin
construction on 7/1/94:
NNCC Capital Improvement Funds $ 50,000
NNCC Foundation 356,913
EDA Grant 850,000
Total $1,256,913
The Board gave approval to NNCC to solicit proposals for
a short-term (5 years) bank loan up to $600,000 to provide
the balance of funds necessary to begin construction of
this facility. Funds for the debt service for this loan
will come from $100,000 in Student Capital Improvement Fee
funds with the balance to come from the NNCC Foundation.
The results of the loan proposals will be brought back to
the Board for final approval.
Mrs. Gallagher moved approval of the resolution to solicit
proposals for a proposed loan up to $600,000 for the purpose
of constructing a building in Ely, Nevada, for NNCC. Mrs.
Sparks seconded. Motion carried.
16. Approved the Loan Resolution, TMCC
Approved the following resolution to solicit proposals for
a $1,200,000 TMCC Bank Loan (Applied Technologies Center
building):
RESOLUTION #93-11
It is hereby resolved by the Board of Regents of the
University and Community College System of Nevada
that:
The Officers of the University be and hereby are author-
ized to solicit proposals for making a loan to the Uni-
versity and Community College System of Nevada in the
amount of up to $1,200,000 for the purpose of construct-
ing the Applied Technology Center building on the Campus
of Truckee Meadows Community College.
The Applied Technology Center is a joint project between
TMCC and the TMCC Foundation. The facility will house oc-
cupational programs for the Campus. Total cost of the
facility is estimated to be between $2 and $2.4 million
with the Foundation funding half of the cost and the Campus
the other half using student capital improvement fee funds.
Currently, cash on hand from the Foundation exceeds $700,000
with the balance of the Foundation share to come from pledg-
ed revenue. In order to begin this project in conjunction
with the construction of Phase VI authorized by the last
session of the Legislature, approval is to be given to TMCC
to solicit proposals for a short-term bank loan in an amount
up to $1.2 million. The project will begin in the Summer
of 1994 and TMCC will request approval at the 1995 Legisla-
ture to convert the short-term loan to a student fee revenue
bond.
Interim Chancellor Richardson and Vice Chancellor Sparks
recommended approval with the understanding that the loan
proposals will be brought back to the Board for final ap-
proval. Also, State Public Works Board and Legislative
Interim Finance approval will be required before the proj-
ect can be started.
Mrs. Gallagher moved approval of the resolution to solicit
proposals for a $1,200,000 TMCC Bank Loan for the Applied
Technologies Center building at TMCC. Mrs. Whitley second-
ed. Mrs. Price abstained. Motion carried.
17. Disapproved a Handbook Addition, Acquisition or Sale of Real
Property
The Board of Regents had requested that a policy be drafted
on acquisition or sale of real property. The proposed pol-
icy is as follows:
Acquisition or Sale of Real Property
1. Before the Chancellor or the President of a UCCSN insti-
tution can commence negotiations for the purchase or
sale of real property on behalf of the Board of Regents,
the Board's approval must first be obtained.
2. After the Board of Regents gives its approval for the
acquisition or sale of real property, the Chancellor or
the President of a UCCSN institution, as the case may
be, shall be authorized to negotiate the real property
acquisition or sale, including the purchase or sale
price, subject to the subsequent approval of the terms
of the purchase or sale by the Board.
3. All offers for the acquisition or sale of real property
under this subsection must be in writing and must con-
tain the following statement:
The (purchase) (sale) offer is contingent upon
the approvl of the terms of the (purchase) (sale)
by the Board of Regents. If the Board of Regents
does not approve the terms of the (purchase) (sale),
the (purchase) (sale) offer made herein is void and
is of no binding effect whatever.
If this policy were approved, it would become a part of the
Handbook, Title 4, Chapter 10, Business Management.
General Counsel Klasic explained that Mr. Graves had re-
quested the Chancellor's staff to develop a policy, and the
staff developed a 3-step process as stated above.
Mr. Foley suggested that another step be added to the proc-
ess between the above steps 2 and 3, in which prior to Board
approval of the sale a notice be placed in the local news-
papers. This will give the public an opportunity to raise
issues to the sale.
Mrs. Gallagher moved approval of the Handbook addition re-
garding the acquisition or sale of real property to include
Mr. Foley's above mentioned suggestion. Mr. Klaich second-
ed.
President Crowley stated that he had some concerns with the
proposed policy. Since 1976, which is the date of UNR's
previous physical master plan, UNR was placed in a position
to acquire land along the perimeter of the UNR Campus. This
property consists of mainly houses. There is some concern
about this delicate process to acquire land. UNR needs to
take advantage of the market and instantaneously seize
available land. If the proposed policy is approved, it may
take possibly 3 months to purchase property. This may allow
other potential buyers to claim the land first or in the
interim the seller may decide to take it off the market and
rent the property. By placing a public announcement in the
local newspapers, the price of the land may be increased;
therefore, the institution may have to withdraw its proposal
to purchase the land. President Crowley stated that the
current process has worked for UNR for the past 17 years
and he would not like to tamper with the policy.
Acting Chairman Graves stated that he understood President
Crowley's concerns. He sugested that the first step of the
proposed policy be changed to "... the Chancellor's approval
must first be obtained.", rather than the Board's approval.
This will expedite the process.
Acting Chairman Graves stated that the purpose of this pro-
posed policy is to address the selling process, not the
acquisition of land. It was brought to his attention when
UNLV approached the Board of Regents for approval of an
allocation of funds for the purchase of land during the
negotiation period. UNLV offered a lower price than ap-
proved by the Board of Regents for the land. It would have
been possible that the seller could have learned of the
maximum amount approved by the Board and set the price at
that approved amount. Acting Chairman Graves suggested
that the Chancellor give approval during the negotiation
period.
After several suggestions were brought forward, the Chan-
cellor's staff was directed to revise the policy to reflect
the concerns raised during this discussion. Interim Chan-
cellor Richardson added that all Board of Regents' action
is made public; therefore, it would be redundant to require
a notice in the newspapers.
Motion failed.
18. Disapproved the FY Merit Increase for Administrators
At its October 1993 meeting, the Board approved to grant
merit increases retroactive to July 1993 to Associate Deans
and above and to other personnel reporting to the Chancellor
or a President not considered for a merit increase earlier
this fiscal year. In accordance with Board of Regents'
policy, the following increases were requested:
2% 1993-94
Current Merit Total
Salary Increase Salary
Chancellor's Office
Sue Baker $ 35,706 $ 714 $ 36,402
Doug Burris 114,200 2,284 116,484
Pamela Galloway 51,519 1,030 52,549
Donald Klasic 86,650 1,733 88,383
Mary Lou Moser 65,629 1,312 66,941
Thomas Radko 62,845 1,257 64,102
Ron Sparks 102,787 2,056 104,843
Karen Steinberg 84,000 1,680 85,680
Donald Zitter 84,407 1,688 86,095
Interim Chancellor Richardson stated that the Board recently
approved a policy on salaries. The Presidents' decision has
been reported to the Regents as information, in accordance
with the new policy. In addition, the new policy requires
only salary increases for Chancellor's Office personnel be
brought before the Board of Regents for consideration.
Mrs. Gallagher moved approval of the FY merit increase for
Administrators. Dr. Derby seconded.
Dr. Derby requested that institutional information be in-
cluded with the agenda material.
Mrs. Price stated that the Chancellor's staff is outstand-
ing; however, she had a problem with the non-renewal con-
tract for Endowment Director Edna Brigham. She felt it
was a conflict to award merit increases and terminate other
employees. Mrs. Price confirmed that the Chancellor has
the right to hire and fire staff members, but felt this
was unfair.
Mrs. Gallagher stated that she received information regard-
ing the System Office's budget. Interim Chancellor Richard-
son stated that information was sent to each Regent in Octo-
ber in the form of a lengthy letter. The current policy
states that a one year's notice be given to terminated pro-
fessional staff. This policy has been adhered to in the
termination of 3 professional employees in the System Ad-
ministration Office. (These 3 people are not professional
employees but are consultants on Letters of Appointment.)
Mrs. Price stated that these terminations were based on lack
of funding for these positions. Interim Chancellor Richard-
son stated that the System Administration Office was con-
cerned with protecting the income derived by investment in-
come for the Management Development funds, which funds these
3 positions.
Vice Chancellor Sparks stated that there are not sufficient
monies to fund these 3 individuals with State operating
funds.
Mr. Klaich questioned where the funding for the proposed
merit increase would come from, and Vice Chancellor Sparks
responded that State operating funds would be expended for
this 2% merit increase.
Interim Chancellor Richardson informed the Board that a 2%
merit increase was awarded to professional employees below
the Associate Dean level. All salaries reported to the
Board were not provided for in the legislative approved
budget. He stated that this request is not any different
than what has been awarded to professional employees at
the institutions, which the Board authorized.
Acting Chairman Graves disagreed and stated that what is
being proposed is a straight across-the-board 2% merit
increase. He felt that merit should be awarded on a
meritorious basis and should not be awarded across-the-
board. He suggested that the System Administration Office
set an example of awarding merit accordingly. Interim
Chancellor Richardson clarified that the institutions did
award 2% merit increases across-the-board.
Mrs. Berkley stated that the private sector is also facing
strained economic times. She stated that the Chancellor's
staff perform well, but UCCSN is experiencing difficult
economic times. Due to the fact that academic programs
are being terminated, she will be voting against the merit
increases.
Mrs. Sparks pointed out that State employees have not re-
ceived cost-of-living increases for the past 3 years. She
felt that such increases should then be awarded on a meri-
torious basis using an established critera. She did not
agree with releasing Mrs. Brigham, who is responsible for
raising money which is being used to award these increases.
She agreed that merit should be established with a way to
set criteria. Discussions on this have always been held
during the time that the actual vote is to be taken. She
felt uncomfortable with voting this issue while the persons
are in the same room.
Acting Chairman Graves directed the Chancellor to develop a
procedure to award merit.
Mrs. Gallagher stated that this issue has been thoroughly
discussed and it has been determined that merit should be
awarded on a meritorious basis. However, the Board has
approved others to vote against the Board's immediate staff.
She agreed that a policy on merit criteria should be devel-
oped for the future.
Mrs. Berkley questioned what the Chancellor's criteria were
in recommending the 2% merit increase for the Chancellor's
staff. Interim Chancellor Richardson explained that all
individuals are meritorious, or he wouldn't have recommend-
ed that they all receive the 2% merit increase. He stated
that he has reviewed comparable positions at the institu-
tions and the salary levels reported in the Hay Group Study.
He also considered that State employees have not received a
cost-of-living increase for the past 3 years. He stated
that if cost-of-living increases would have been given, then
he might have been more selective. He noted that the 2%
merit increase is less than the Consumer Price Index in-
crease. The final determination to award the 2% merit in-
crease was that some State employees (classified) automati-
cally received merit increases. He recommended a 2% merit
increase for the Chancellor's staff as listed above.
Interim Chancellor Richardson felt that if the Board of
Regents does not have confidence in its Chancellor to ex-
pend $13,754, then it certainly indicates a powerful nega-
tive message to the Chancellor. There are a total of 9
employees that are being discussed. He stated that recent-
ly the Board of Regents approved increases for institutional
Vice Presidents, Deans, etc. without any discussion. He
pointed out that at this time the Board of Regents is
questioning its own staff for merit increases.
Dr. Derby stated that she did not have a problem with con-
fidence bestowed with the Chancellor or the total amount
of the proposed merit increases. She stated that her ob-
jection was that no formual evaluations have been performed
on these employees.
Acting Chairman Graves agreed that it was not an issue of
confidence nor the amount of money expended, but a matter
of principle. He found it hard to believe that every
employee was meritorious. He felt that the System Admin-
istration Office should set an example for the institutions
and send a message that this is a critical matter.
Mrs. Sparks, too, felt that it was odd that all employees
should receive the full 2% merit increase. She requested
a list of the criteria used to determine each employee's
merit.
Motion failed for lack of 6 affirmative votes.
Affirmative: Regents Gallagher, Graves, Price, Sparks,
Whitley
Negative : Regents Berkley, Derby, Klaich
Mr. Klaich commented that 3 Regents were not present for
the afternoon session. He acknowledged that Chairman
Eardley was absent due to family illness. He indicated
that the Interim Chancellor could initiate this item at
another time.
19. Approved an Amendment, Regents' Bylaws, Committees
Approved the additional language to the description of the
Status of Women Committee to read as follows. The first
reading was held at the October 21-22, 1993 Board of Re-
gents' meeting.
The Status of Women Committee shall study issues
and recommend policies to the Board relevant to
the equity, the education and the employment of
women in the University and Community College System
of Nevada. The Committee shall consist of 8 persons
appointed by the Chairman of the Board, and all mem-
bers of the Committee shall have a vote. 4 members
of the Board shall be appointed to the Committee,
and the remaining members of the Committee shall
represent the University and Community College System
of Nevada community.
Mrs. Sparks moved approval of the amendment to the Regents'
Bylaws regarding the Status of Women Committee. Mrs.
Whitley seconded. Motion carried.
20. Report and Recommendations of the Academic, Research and
Student Affairs Committee
A report and recommendations of the Academic, Research and
Student Affairs Committee meetings held November 12 and
December 2, 1993 were made by Regent Dorothy Gallagher,
Chairman.
November 12, 1993
(1) Review of Existing Academic Programs - Board policy
calls for a review of existing academic programs by
each institution to assure academic quality and to
determine if need, student demand and available
resources support program continuation. Mrs. Karen
Steinberg, Interim Vice Chancellor for Academic
Affairs, related that a 10 year cycle is used for
the review of programs by the Community Colleges and
Universities, and a 5-year cycle is used for the
Desert Research Institute. The format for the annual
report includes two parts: 1) A list of all exist-
ing programs which were reviewed by the institution
over the past year, new programs approved during this
time period, and programs which were deleted or put
on inactive status; and 2) A summary of the major
findings and future plans for each program which was
reviewed.
There was extensive discussion at the Summer 1992
Regents' workshop concerning program review, and one
of the major points brought out was that the reviews
should be used for program improvement. This year
33 programs were reviewed by the institutions, build-
ing upon 43 reviews which were conducted and reported
to the Board one year ago. A total of 76 programs
have been reviewed and reported to the Board in the
last two years.
The quality of the reviews conducted by the institu-
tions is high. Evaluations focused on the need for
the programs, program quality issues, the relation-
ship to the institutional mission, student outcomes,
and the cost and adequacy of facilities and equip-
ment. One Campus reviewed only a few programs and
used this year to focus on the development of a com-
prehensive evaluation process and self-study. Other
Campuses have developed schedules for future reviews.
Integration of the program reviews into the master
planning process appears to be occurring as a result
of this activity. The reports are filed in the Re-
gents' Office.
Interim Vice Chancellor Steinberg related that the
trend is that far fewer new programs have been ap-
proved in the last year, and that the deleted or in-
active programs listed are almost equal to those new
programs approved. She stated there appears to be
much more intensive review of the programs by the
Campuses. The lack of sufficient resources for pro-
grams was a concern of almost all the Campuses.
Following are summaries of the reports:
Community College of Southern Nevada - Dr. Herb Peebles
The program reviews which are conducted are comprehen-
sive and include both strengths and weaknesses of re-
viewed programs. CCSN has updated the general educa-
tional requirements for all of its degree programs
over the past year. Reviews indicate that the lack
of funding has had some impact on classroom space,
equipment and personnel for some programs. Two pro-
grams were deleted due to limited resources. Future
plans include restructuring curriculum, administrative
reorganization and addressing the shortage of resources
as funding becomes available.
Northern Nevada Community College - Dr. Cliff Ferry
NNCC has established a program review process and
schedule for the next 10 years. Although two programs
were reviewed this year due to unique circumstances,
individual Campus reviews are not conducted in the
years immediately prior to and immediately following
regional accreditation vists. The Northwest Associ-
ation site evaluation will take place in 1994. A
review of all technical programs is planned for 1995.
Truckee Meadows Community College - Dr. Elsie Doser
Thorough reviews were conducted of 8 programs within
the Professional Business Studies Division. In addi-
tion, internal evaluations were made of 11 other pro-
grams. The findings identify both strengths and weak-
nesses of the programs. Instructors appear to be well
qualified and programs are kept up to date. Budget
shortages have limited the expansion of some programs
to their full potential. Future plans include the
addition of courses and equipment to enhance offerings
and accommodate students, as funding permits. The re-
view also pointed up the need to include outside per-
sons during the internal review process.
Western Nevada Community Colelge - Dr. Lorrie Peterson
Western Nevada Community College conducted a review of
all of its applied science and technology programs, as
well as two liberal arts/transfer programs during the
1991-92 academic year. These were reported to the
Board of Regents in 1992. All program reviews were
undertaken as a part of the analysis and development
process incorporated in the creation of the 1993-95
academic master plan. Next year it is anticipated
that all transfer programs will be reviewed.
University of Nevada, Las Vegas - Dr. John Unrue
The comprehensive program reviews included site visits
for those programs subject to special accreditation,
and the use of both internal and external evaluators
for graduate programs. Each of the UNLV programs was
commended for its strengths. Future plans include re-
vising curriculum, creating a language lab, and review
of program policies. A need for increased State fund-
ing was identified in several reviews. Implementation
of recommendations for addition personnel and facili-
ties are contingent upon additional resources. The
Faculty Senate will begin a review of the program re-
view process and will look at program consolidation,
i. e., small programs, combining graduate and under-
graduate reviews.
University of Nevada, Reno - Dr. Bill Cathey
Three programs were reviewed by UNR over the past year.
The University focused most of its efforts on the de-
velopment of a comprehensive format and extensive
criteria to be used for a 5-year self-study of all
programs, to be initiated during the 1993-94 academic
year. This appears to be a strong plan and the System
Office recommends its adoption. It is hoped that the
plan can be implemented by next year. Nursing and
Social Work programs were reviewed for accreditation
this year, and the Japan program will be phased out
this coming year.
Desert Research Institute - Ms. Carol Thompson
The Desert Research Institute conducted a review of
all 5 Centers this year, in response to a meeting of
its National Science Advisory Committee in 1992. This
full-breadth review is performed every 3 years, and
reflects the strengths of each Center. The report
encouraged the continuation of strong support for ed-
ucational programs at the Universities, the emphasis
on collaborative efforts and continued efforts to
enhance the quality and strength of its programs.
Interim Vice Chancellor Steinberg reported that the
System Office has reviewed the Campus plans and is
very pleased with the efforts of the Campuses. She
stated there is now a link with program review and
the academic master plans which is enhancing the
quality of the programs. Chairman Gallagher commend-
ed Dr. Derby an the Academic Affairs staff for being
instrumental in establishing this process.
In answer to a question, Interim Vice Chancellor
Steinberg related that the 10 year cycle for program
review of all programs allows the Campuses time to do
the reviews since they are very time-consuming and ex-
pensive, and also coordinates with the Northwest Ac-
creditation process.
Dr. Unrue related that because UNLV was losing a number
of professors to the early retirement program at an ap-
proximate cost of $1.4 million, and the lack of addi-
tional resources, they would not be able to fill all
the vacancies and therefore would be monitoring the
programs for quality. He added that the Business Of-
ficers have met to discuss the percentage of time for
the phase-in retirement which might cut down on the
actual number of early retirements.
In answer to a question concerning lack of State re-
sources, the Campuses responded that they would be
working with advisory boards, applying for grants,
etc. for program enhancements. They cautioned that
the programs could be stagnant without proper funding,
and that once equipment becomes outdated it takes a
long time to once again get caught up, as well as not
being able to offer students proper training.
Dr. Derby questioned whether CCSN's Animal Health
Technology program had been deleted only for lack of
funds. Dr. Peebles replied that was mainly the reason,
but additionally the business community has not made
any changes in the salary for these people; therefore,
there is little incentive to upgrade. In the case of
the Ophthalmic Technology program, the salaries are
appropriate, but the community has not determined what
skills the program should contain. CCSN is working
with them and the program may be brought back in the
future.
In answer to a question, Interim Vice Chancellor
Steinberg explained that outside accreditation and
Campus Program review are very related. Program re-
view is an internal Campus review to focus on quality,
while accreditation is done by an outside agency. In
the past most program review was done during the ac-
creditation process; however, with the new program re-
view we are moving away from this model. Dr. Cathey
further explained that accreditation has "acceptable"
or minimum standards, whereas a program review focuses
on strengths and provides insight into how to further
enhance excellence. Program review also provides dis-
cussion on the future of the programs; the discussion
can be very frank and open with the external reviewers.
It provides a more intensive look at data in a more
relaxed process.
Dr. Doser related that TMCC feels a broader influence
is needed for a more objective review of the programs.
They eventually hope to be able to identify cost per
student for each program, and to have a better way of
identifying the success of transfer students. The
Universities are helping to develop a process to track
these students. Dr. Peterson pointed out that outcome
assessments have been done at WNCC, but they are ex-
pensive and may have to be cut back without additional
funding.
Staff development was discussed. Interim Vice Chan-
cellor Steinberg related that the System Articulation
Board has pulled together task forces in subject matter
areas to review and improve transfer. This same model
could be used for staff development.
In answer to a question on funding vs. quality, it was
agreed that a comprehensive push for additional fund-
ing will be needed for the 1995 Legislative Session.
Also, it was agreed that quality has not slipped at
this time, but that programs are not improving as they
should and that over time they will slip. Dr. Unrue
pointed out that quality programs rest with quality of
faculty and staff, and that faculty are much more mar-
ketable now, and will have gone without a raise for
4 years. Dr. Cathey added that everyone on the Campus-
es understands the budget cuts, but cautioned that
there is a limit as to how much they can do. Another
consideration is trying to keep abreast of the tech-
nological growth in order to have quality programs.
Mrs. Berkley stated the Board is sensitive to the fi-
nancial constraints and does appreciate the "120%" ef-
fort by the faculty. She agreed that greater strides
must be made by the System in the 1995 Legislature in
order to maintain quality education for the students.
Dr. Derby asked the Campuses to comment on the use of
part-time faculty. Because of budget cuts, the Campus-
es have had to use more part-time faculty, which will
be of concern when accreditation is considered. It
was pointed out that there are fewer full-time faculty
to monitor the part-time, and to accept all the respon-
sibilities beyond teaching that are required in running
the Campus. Interim Chancellor Richardson stated that
Council of Presidents will be addressing this issue in
the very near future. Interim Vice Chancellor Stein-
berg reminded the Committee that undergraduate educa-
tion, of which part-time instruction is a part, is one
of the Strategic Directions the System will be study-
ing this next year; however, that will require a wide
audience in order to complete the study.
Interim Vice Chancellor Steinberg stated that at the
December 4-5 meeting, an overview of these program re-
views will be given to the full Board of Regents.
December 2, 1993
(1) Approved Student Fees, Interactive Video Network - In
September the Board of Regents' Academic, Research and
Student Affairs Committee requested that Campuses pro-
vide reports on the Interactive Video courses being
offered during Fall 1993; provide information on the
costs of those courses, and submit requests for approv-
al of course fees to be charged for Spring 1994 and
the 1994-95 academic year. Interim Vice Chancellor
Steinberg provided an overview of requested materials
contained in Ref. ARS-1, filed in the Regents' Office.
Interim Vice Chancellor Steinberg discussed the esti-
mated costs for delivering courses through interactive
video and the proposed student fees developed by the
individual institutions. The reference material also
contains a list of currently scheduled courses for
Spring 1994.
Interim Vice Chancellor Steinberg stated that one of
the objectives under the Board's strategic directions
for 1993-94 calls for the System to "... continue to
explore the establishment of nontraditional delivery
systems such as distance learning to reach populations
not easily served by current Campuses. The Board en-
courages the incorporation of new instructional tech-
nology where appropriate and encourages the support
and training which this technology requires."
The funding sources for having all sites on line has
been derived from the institutions without State sup-
ported dollars. Interim Chancellor Richardson is
working with the institutions and the UCCSN Computing
Services to receive continued funding for the inter-
active video system, and is hopeful in securing State
funding; however, this would not come about prior to
the next Legislative Session.
Interim Vice Chancellor Steinberg stated that there are
real costs in providing this service. Institutions are
currently providing funding, but hope to seek a new
funding base for the program. In the interim, a modest
user fee is being applied to help deliver the courses.
The Chancellor's staff has researched other states with
distance learning programs, and they all vary in fund-
ing their programs. At some State-supported institu-
tions there are no additional fees. Funds from grants
and other resources are utilized; however, it is com-
mon to charge fees. The staff learned that there are
no consistencies among those surveyed on the amount of
fees to be charged. It has been difficult to gauge the
exact cost because of two reasons: 1) UCCSN has a
short history in providing interactive video courses,
and 2) the separation of direct and indirect costs for
these courses is difficult.
The institutions have proposed an additional fee to be
charged, which will not cover all the costs associated
with this program, but will help offset some costs
and assist in providing services for these courses.
Mrs. Gallagher questioned Presidents Remington and
Calabro on the difference in costs between NNCC and
WNCC. President Remington explained that NNCC pro-
posed $24,000 as an estimated annual cost per site to
include a technician. President Calabro explained that
WNCC proposed $1090 as an estimated per course cost to
include technicians, instructors, facilitators and
travel expenses.
Mr. Graves requested that a standardized method be used
to calculate the estimated costs. Interim Vice Chan-
cellor Steinberg stated that she is working to stand-
ardize the report with actual costs. She reminded the
Committee that they had only requested the provided
information in September of this year. Costs for the
program have been handled by the institutions, with
much estimation and guess work.
Mrs. Sparks questioned whether each institution would
ultimately charge the same fee or would the same re-
porting methods be used but different fees be charged.
Interim Vice Chancellor Steinberg responded that the
ultimate goal is to not charge the students, but in
the interim the fees to be charged will aid in recover-
ing some of the costs involved, including technology
and instruction costs.
President Maxson suggested that the motion be amended
to authorize the institutions to charge up to the
amount proposed in the reference material, with the
flexibility of not charging the student any additional
fee for these courses.
An amendment to the motion was made by including that
the institutions may have the flexibility of not
charging the students or charging up to the amount
reported in the referenced material.
(2) Information Only: Report on Institutional Program Re-
view - Board of Regents' policy calls for an annual
report to the Board of Regents on the review of exist-
ing academic programs. A meeting of the Board of Re-
gents' Academic, Research and Student Affairs Commit-
tee was held on November 12, 1993, to discuss Campus
reports. An overview of the reports contained in Ref.
ARS-2, filed in the Regents' Office, was given by
Interim Vice Chancellor Steinberg.
Interim Vice Chancellor Steinberg stated that the
policy has been revised to include an existing annual
program report. She reported that this year 33 pro-
grams were reviewed by the institutions, building upon
43 reviews which were conducted and reported to the
Board one year ago. A total of 76 programs have been
reviewed and reported in the last two years. The
quality of the reviews conducted by the institutions
is high. The evaluations focused on need for the pro-
grams, program quality issues, the relationship to the
institutional mission, student outcomes, and the cost
and adequacy of facilities and equipment. Some insti-
tutions have refined the review process and have re-
ported to the Committee on these changes.
Interim Vice Chancellor Steinberg stated that she was
impressed with the institutions' efforts to improve
this review process. She felt the process has been
very successful. The review process integrates with
academic planning. The institutions are using this
program review for planning activities and maintaining
quality programs, even with the declining resources
the System has recently experienced.
UNLV Faculty Senate Chairman John Swetnam reported that
UNLV included the graduate and undergraduate program
reviews and it was enormously time-consuming. He sug-
gested that it become a single process. In addition,
Dr. Swetnam mentioned that the review process is very
expensive, and he requested the Board to consider budg-
eting $3000 for each review.
Interim Chancellor Richardson responded that any budget
proposal would have to come through the Council of
Presidents and the budgeting process as a new priority
for the System. The new priority must then be balanced
against the other competing needs within the System.
President Crowley stated that this suggestion has
never been discussed by the Council of Presidents, but
felt it was worth reviewing. He felt it might make a
statement to the Legislature that UCCSN is serious
about program review. President Maxson agreed and
confirmed that program review is a very expensive
endeavor, because of the outside consultants that
are brought in to review the programs.
Chairman Gallagher requested that Interim Chancellor
Richardson bring this issue before the Council of
Presidents.
(3) Information Only: Report on Cost of Textbooks - Mem-
bers of the Board recently expressed interest in re-
ceiving information related to the UCCSN Campus book-
stores and information on the costs of textbooks to
students. Each of the Campuses provided information
that is summarized in Ref. ARS-3, filed in the Regents'
Office. In addition, a video produced by The College
Stores Research & Educational Foundation concerning
the factors influencing textbook pricing was secured
and previewed at the meeting. Interim Vice Chancellor
Steinberg reviewed the UCCSN information.
Interim Vice Chancellor Steinberg stated that she has
been working with the Student Affairs Council on this
subject. She stated that she does not endorse the
video, but the video does explain the cost factors.
She explained that the textbook publishing industry
is producing a smaller amount of printed editions and
there are fewer used books available for students to
purchase at a discount.
Interim Vice Chancellor Steinberg stated that UCCSN
makes very little profit from textbook sales. The
average profit is $.039 on each dollar. The Chan-
cellor's staff is working closely with the institu-
tions in addressing this issue; however, it was noted
that in many instances textbook costs go beyond the
scope of the institutions.
Mr. Graves stated that it was his understanding that
the institutions have conducted comparisons and won-
dered if these studies are considered prior to nego-
tiating the contract on book sales. He requested a
report be made to the full Board and requested a
report on the profit and management of the "contract"
vs. "student-operated" book stores throughout the
System.
President Maxson stated that it was his belief that
the cost of the textbooks is too high. The bookstore
makes its profits from the miscellaneous items sold.
Upon questioning, it was learned that for the first
time CSUN will prepare a bid to operate the UNLV book-
store. CSUN President Joel Kostman stated that they
are looking at 0% profit on textbooks. President
Maxson stated that he is encouraging the students to
submit a bid, but UNLV will award the contract on the
best submitted bid.
Mrs. Sparks informed the Committee that the Regents'
Audit Committee performs audits of the various book-
stores throughout the System on a regular basis.
Chairman Gallagher requested the Chancellor's staff to
provide a full report and recommendation on what is
the best bookstore operation for profit. The Committee
will then determine whether the recommendations should
be Systemwide.
NNCC Faculty Senate Chairman Scott Hawkins informed the
Committee that textbooks at NNCC are much higher than
in Utah. Even the paperback reading books are delayed
and cost more at NNCC than in downtown Elko.
(4) Approved Handbook Change, Fees and Expenses - Regent
James Eardley had requested that the Committee and
the Board consider a change to the Board of Regents'
Handbook, Title 4, Chapter 17, Fees and Expenses, for-
warded by a Student Government President. The suggest-
ed revision to the policy, contained in Ref. ARS-4,
filed in the Regents' Office, would set a date by which
a final decision on tuition and fees will be determined
and requiring two meetings, one in the North and one
in the South, prior to final decisions by the Board.
Interim Chancellor Richardson recommended the request
be changed to read as follows:
Whenever practicable: (A) two meetings (one
in the Northern part of the State and one in
the Southern part of the State) will take place
prior to any final or binding decisions made by
the Board; and (B) the final decision on tuition
rates and fees for the biennium will be determined
by May 1 of every even numbered year.
Interim Chancellor Richardson further recommended
approval of the request in its changed form.
Chairman Gallagher questioned the process by which
this item came to the Board. Interim Chancellor
Richardson stated that the CSUN Student Body President
wrote a letter to Chairman of the Board James Eardley
with a proposed amendment on existing language. The
letter was sent to President Maxson for his informa-
tion. Chairman Eardley requested Interim Vice Chan-
cellor Steinberg to address the request. The Chan-
cellor's staff's initial recommendation was that the
request for change be reviewed by the Tuition Committee
that is being established at this time. CSUN President
Joel Kostman disagreed with the process and requested
that it be placed on the agenda. Interim Vice Chancel-
lor Steinberg had discussed this issue with Chairman
Eardley and it was decided to place the item on the
agenda rather than postponing or referring it to the
Tuition Committee. The process that was followed is
not within our policy regarding agenda items.
Chairman Gallagher agreed that this issue should be
addressed by the Tuition Committee.
Mrs. Berkley stated that the proposals are acceptable;
however, the Committee is trying to be process-orient-
ed. She stated that she had no problem with the pro-
posal being implemented this year and felt it would
be appropriate to have a full report from the Tuition
Committee on this issue.
Chairman Gallagher did not wish to set a precedent in
having agenda items coming directly to members of the
Board, and bypassing the President and the Chancellor.
She felt that the Tuition Committee should review this
proposal.
Interim Chancellor Richardson stated that it was his
intent to complete the work of the Tuition Committee
and make a presentation to the Board before the end
of Spring semester while students were still present.
He did agree to have public hearings both north and
south to give all students an opportunity to be heard.
CSUN President Joel Kostman stated that this was not
an attempt to bypass President Maxson. He stated that
Chairman Eardley suggested this process. President
Maxson stated that he felt it was appropriate for the
Chairman of the Board to place items on an agenda and
felt this item did go through the correct process.
Chairman Gallagher requested that the Tuition Committee
address this issue.
(5) Information Only: Report on Impact of Research on
Education and Economic Development - Members of the
Research Affairs Council (Drs. Hunter, Bishop and Mc
Nelis) discussed the impact of research on 1) under-
graduate and graduate education, and 2) economic de-
velopment and diversification in Nevada.
Dr. Kenneth Hunter discussed the impact of the re-
search and education relationship. He mentioned that
Mr. Glen Krutz, UCCSN Research Analyst, recently com-
pleted a report that indicated that UCCSN research
grew the fastest in the country. Dr. Hunter stated
that some people believe research makes education
better, while there still remains an argument that
higher education students should become scholars in
their field. However, now there is too much informa-
tion to teach facts and there should be more emphasis
on critical thinking to develop researchers and
scholars.
Dr. Hunter stated that later in the day, research
students would join Board members for lunch and would
highlight their projects. Students are very good at
getting the message across to the community by telling
their own stories.
The research enterprise is a critical component to
education. A handout was distributed that represents
the Graduate Assistantships supported by grants and
contracts in UCCSN totals $2.5 million. Grants and
contracts represent 33% of the total Graduate Assist-
antship support of $7.8 million, while the State of
Nevada supports 67%. Dr. Hunter stated that this
indicates that there are more students than the State
will support and there is a great need for financial
support.
The growth of research has impacted Nevada's economy.
UCCSN has participated actively with the economic
development agenda in Nevada.
Dr. Bill Bishop presented data that demonstrated an
argument to obtain direct income for the State by
investing in research to stimulate research. He
stated the UCCSN receives positive impacts on the edu-
cational system and on the economic development of
the State through research; however, there are some
immediate financial returns to the State on the invest-
ment as well. For every $1 invested from tax revenues
by Nevada in stimulating research in the UCCSN through
Federal programs such as EPSCoR, $1.75 is returned in
taxes. In addition, for every $1, over $50 is stimu-
lated in Nevada's economy. Dr. Bishop described the
computation used to arrive at this information. His
report is filed in the permanent minutes.
Dr. David Mc Nelis reported that UCCSN is directly
contributing to Nevada's economic health, and he
reported on 3 industry-related programs with student
involvement. He stated that industry-led projects
grew from $10 million to $68 million last year. UCCSN
and NISET invited Dr. Mark Stanley to Nevada to meet
with advanced technology firms. There were 44 attend-
ees from UNLV and 48 attendees from UNR. It is antici-
pated that several proposals will be submitted in con-
junction with NISET.
While getting a handle on advanced technology in Nevada
is underway, it is also helping small companies develop
a competitive market in different markets. For example
the UNLV Supercomputer Center is working with a small
company to expand its technology. UCCSN personnel have
collaborated with this small company and they are just
now receiving orders for hardware and UNLV is receiving
orders for software.
Mr. Klaich announced that Dr. Mc Nelis had invited him
to tour UNLV's programs and he had an opportunity to
interact with the students and professors on the proj-
ects which had practical and educational applications.
Mrs. Sparks moved approval of the report and recommendations
of the Academic, Research and Student Affairs Committee,
with the exception of item 1 from the December 2, 1993 meet-
ing. Mr. Klaich seconded. Motion carried.
Mrs. Price stated that she opposes item 1, Student Fees,
Interactive Video Network, because there was no student
input, and that this is another out-of-pocket expense placed
on the student.
Mr. Klaich moved approval of item 1, Student Fees, Inter-
active Video Network, from the December 2, 1993 meeting.
Mrs. Sparks seconded. Mrs. Price opposed. Motion carried.
21. Report and Recommendations of the Audit Committee
A report and recommendations of the Audit Committee meeting
held December 2, 1993 were made by Regent Nancy Price,
Chairman.
(1) Approved the audit of the TMCC Scholarship Office,
July 1, 1992 through June 30, 1993. The report is
filed in the Regents' Office.
Chairman Price requested clarification on the issue
raised during the audit regarding scholarships given
to relatives and Acting Director Love replied that
it was an agency account rather than a TMCC Scholar-
ship and the process is currently under review.
Upon questioning, Acting Director Love informed the
Committee that the Scholarship Office has been re-
quested to develop a procedures manual.
(2) Approved the audit of the CCSN Library, July 1, 1992
through June 30, 1993. The report is filed in the
Regents' Office.
(3) Approved the audit of the UNR Nevada Small Business
Development Center, January 1 through December 31,
1992. The report is filed in the Regents' Office.
Chairman Price noted that community persons approach
this Department for information and it is essential
that this Department be closely monitored. Acting
Director Love informed the Committee that this De-
partment is also audited by other State agencies.
(4) Approved the Reporting Responsibility of Internal
Audit. Chairman Nancy Price lead a discussion on
the Internal Audit reporting responsibilities per
the October 21-22, 1993 Board of Regents' meeting.
See Ref. A-4, filed in the Regents' Office.
Chairman Price stated that when discussions were
being held regarding the Chancellor's position, one
recommendation was the role of the Chancellor in its
involvement with the audits. The issue was deferred
to be reviewed by the Chancellor's staff. Chairman
Price stated that this topic was also discussed at the
Audit Committee's orientation meeting by outside repre-
sentatives. She reported that she attended the Re-
gents' ad hoc Chancellor's Search Committee meeting
and mentioned her concern over this issue. She re-
quested the Committee to review this particular issue.
Chairman Price indicated that she has discussed this
issue with Interim Chancellor Richardson and it was
determined that they both agree that the current policy
and organizational chart is not reflecting the proper
management oversight. The documentation should reflect
either a reporting structure to the Board of Regents or
to the Chancellor.
Chairman Price stated that, in her opinion, the audi-
tors and the Board of Regents' Secretary should report
directly to the Board of Regents because oversight is
the Board's responsibility. She felt that from the
public's perception and the standard auditing process,
proper oversight is critical. Currently, the UCCSN
Code refers to the Board of Regents as an access posi-
tion. She felt that for the sake of the public's
perception and accountability, the Board of Regents
should be committed to upholding the auditors' in-
dependence. Chairman Price requested a change to the
UCCSN Code and the organizational chart.
Mrs. Sparks felt that the discussion regarding the
position of auditors should also include external
auditors. The external auditors audit the internal
auditors. She suggested that the external auditors
report directly to the Board of Regents and indirect-
ly to the internal auditors. Chairman Price felt that
the external auditors serve as an outside function re-
quired by the Board of Regents; they are not UCCSN
employees. However, she did agree that the external
auditors should be recognized in the documentation.
Interim Chancellor Richardson stated that higher
education systems throughout the country operate both
ways -- internal auditors reporting directly to the
governing board or reporting directly to the chief
executive officer. He stated that in his experience,
auditors have reported directly to the Chancellor/
chief executive officer who then reports to the govern-
ing board. The Board's responsibility is to govern
and make policy statements.
Chairman Price stated that she was most concerned with
the System's accountability. Currently, there is no
avenue to oversee the Chancellor. The Board of Regents
can make policy, but oversight is another responsibil-
ity of the Board. She suggested that the internal
auditors report indirectly to the Chancellor because
of the need to insure the auditors' independence.
Acting Director of Internal Audit John Love stated
that there has never been a problem with the auditors'
independence within UCCSN. Chairman Price clarified
her statements and stated that she is concerned about
the perception.
Interim Chancellor Richardson disagreed with Chairman
Price and stated that there is a very direct accounta-
bility for the internal auditors in reporting to the
Chancellor. The Chancellor serves at the pleasure of
the Board of Regents.
Mrs. Sparks agreed that the Board of Regents is the
oversight. She suggested that external auditors be
included in the documentation. Chairman Price felt
that the external auditors do not only audit the
internal auditors, but also the financial sheets.
There needs to be a check and balance, along with
independence.
Mrs. Sparks then stated that if the Board of Regents
does not have confidence in its Chancellor to provide
oversight, then a new Chancellor should be selected
to perform this task.
Mr. Doug Burris, Director of Community College Affairs,
stated that the intent to provide independent review
is what is being discussed. However, the Board of
Regents holds the Chancellor responsible and there
should be a check by external auditors who go beyond
fiscal matters. If the internal auditors' direct
reporting to the Chancellor is removed, then the
Chancellor's responsibility of overseeing that System
is being managed corrctly is also removed. Technical-
ly the Board could not hold the Chancellor responsible
if the internal auditors do not report to that posi-
tion. In his past experience Mr. Burris stated that
the external auditors have always reported directly
to the governing board, while the internal auditors
reported directly to the chief executive officer.
It was moved to adopt the recommendation provided by
Interim Chancellor Richardson, which states that the
internal auditors will report directly to the Chan-
cellor and indirectly to the Board of Regents, with
the addition of the external auditors reporting direct-
ly to the Board of Regents.
Interim Chancellor Richardson clarified that his recom-
mendation also includes the Secretary of the Board di-
rectly reporting to the Chancellor and indirectly to
the Board of Regents, and that the stated motion is
only dealing with the reporting structure of the audi-
tors.
The motion was amended to exlude the recommendation of
the reporting structure of the Secretary of the Board
and to continue with the current structure.
Chairman Price questioned whether these motions would
then be reflected in the UCCSN Code. Interim Chancel-
lor Richardson stated that the policy language should
reflect that the Director of Internal Audit should re-
port to the Chancellor with access to the Board of
Regents' Audit Committee. He clarified that the above
motions are not only with respect to administrative
responsibility, but also to making reports directly
to the Chancellor.
Chairman Price stated that in the future the Audit Com-
mittee will also be dictated by outside sources, such
as the Internal Revenue Service. The UCCSN Code lan-
guage should reflect that the Board of Regents are
responsible and the internal auditors will have access
to the Board of Regents.
Mr. Klaich clarified that the Chancellor will be held
responsible for the internal auditors. Chairman Price
stated that the Board of Regents has the ultimate re-
sponsibility, and Mrs. Sparks added that the external
auditors are the control over this oversight. Chair-
man Price indicated that the Chancellor is responsible
for the oversight and the response to the audits.
Interim Chancellor Richardson stated that the Chancel-
lor is already responsible for the auditors, through
the Vice Chancellor for Finance who reports directly
to the Chancellor.
Mrs. Price explained that several outside persons have
addressed the Audit Committee to explain their point
of view on the reporting structure of the auditors.
Mrs. Price reported that Acting Internal Audit Director
John Love held a meeting to discuss the unrelated busi-
ness tax. She stated she was the only Regent present.
She concluded from this meeting that the Internal
Revenue Service will be looking closer at University
systems with regard to fees and the implementation
of procedures regarding unrelated business tax. This
meeting was held to give additional information to
System personnel on this very important oversight role.
Mr. Klaich moved approval of the report and recommendation
of the Audit Committee, excluding item 4. Dr. Derby second-
ed. Motion carried.
A discussion was held regarding item 4, Reporting Responsi-
bility of Internal Audit. Mrs. Price indicated that the
reporting structure of the auditors has been disucssed at
several meetings, including the Board of Regents' meeting.
There has been ample opportunity to understand the proposals
which have failed at the Audit Committee level. Presenta-
tions were made to clarify that the Board of Regents are
responsible for the audits performed by the System Admin-
istration Office. These discussions were held because it
was noticed that the current organizational chart was in
error. She noted that Interim Chancellor Richardson's pro-
posal was to have the Internal Audit Department report di-
rectly to the Chancellor, while her proposal was to have
the Internal Audit Department report directly to the Board
of Regents.
Mr. Klaich clarified that the organizational chart that was
about to be voted on would contain a solid line between the
Internal Audit Department and the Chancellor, and that lan-
guage would be amended in the UCCSN Code to reflect this
reporting structure.
Mr. Klaich moved approval of the reporting structure of the
Internal Audit Department in which it will report directly
to the Chancellor. Mrs. Whitley seconded. Mrs. Price
opposed. Motion carried.
Mrs. Price stated for the record that her opposition con-
cerns proper oversight of the System.
Mrs. Berkley clarified that she agreed with the motion, and
felt the motion did reflect that there is ample oversight
in the System.
22. Report and Recommendations of the Investment Committee
A report and recommendations of the Investment Committee
meeting held December 2, 1993 were made by Regent Daniel
Klaich, Chairman.
(1) Approved the Board of Regent becoming a limited partner
for the sole purpose of obtaining a new loan on real
property which is the subject matter of a lawsuit and
foreclosure. The property was used to secure a 2nd
mortgage loan investment placed by American Investors
for the UNR Pinching Endowment Funds.
The Board of Regents has a $10,622.21 or 4.44% interest
in the 2nd mortgage loan along with 13 other investors.
The existing first mortgage at 14% interest needs to be
refinanced and enough additional funds borrowed to re-
pair the property before it can be sold. In order to
proceed with this refinancing plan there has to be at
least one of the 14 investors in the 2nd mortgage
agreeing to be a general partner. The Board of Re-
gents' 4.44% interest in the investment does not jus-
tify assuming the liability of a general partner.
The property must be refinanced and improved in order
for the Board of Regents, or any other investor, to
realize any of their investment from foreclosure. Mr.
Howard L. Cunningham is the attorney for the owners of
the 2nd mortgage in the foreclosure proceedings and
has located a lender to refinance the property.
Dr. Derby moved approval of the report and recommendations
of the Investment Committee. Mrs. Sparks seconded. Motion
carried.
23. Report and Recommendations of the Ad Hoc Committee on Ethnic
Minority Affairs.
A report and recommendations of the ad hoc Committee on
Ethnic Minority Affairs meeting held December 2, 1993 were
made by Regent June Whitley, Chairman.
(1) Information Only: Final Reports and Recommendations
from the Campus Committees - Each of the UCCSN Presi-
dents discussed their Campus's final report and recom-
mendations. The reports are filed in the Regents'
Office.
Campus committees were formed on each of the UCCSN
Campuses to assist the Regents' ad hoc Committee on
Ethnic Minority Affairs in gathering information.
Campus committees gathered information relating to
ethnic minority affairs on each of the Campuses, con-
ducted surveys and hearing of students and faculty,
compiled and assessed data, and assisted with recom-
mendations for action. Campus committee Chairs pro-
vided the ad hoc Committee with interim reports in
June. These reports have now been updated to include
survey findings, analysis, and recommendations.
President Crowley presented an overview of the survey
conducted at UNR. He acknowledged Dr. Michael Coray,
UNR committee Chairman, for his analysis of the sur-
veys. The goal at UNR was to understand the issues
and challenges that confront the institution with
empirical information. President Crowley felt that
UNR was forthright in helping to forecast the future
for students, faculty and staff at UNR. The emphasis
of the report is in which direction UNR needs to pro-
ceed and to improve for positive interactions and
quality experiences for minority employees and stu-
dents. An executive summary is contained in the
referenced material.
President Crowley reported that the student survey
received a 20% response, which he felt was a good
response, and noted that most respondents were general-
ly satisfied with the educational experience on the
UNR Campus. Many of the incidences could be isolated
into individual cases. He noted that the faculty
responded differently than the students, which was
very helpful information. It will help UNR target
issues in order to make the changes that are needed.
President Crowley expressed his appreciation to Dr.
Coray, who performed a tremendous amount of work on
the survey and the general report.
Dr. Derby acknowledged UNR for its scope and depth
contained in the report. It is always a difficult
task to identify problems.
Chairman Whitley stated that UNR's report was an ex-
cellent report and commended those involved.
President Maxson reported that he felt conducting this
survey was the appropriate thing to do in order to be-
come culturally diverse on the Campus. President Max-
son introduced the co-Chairs of the Campus committee,
Velicia Haron and John Lujan. President Maxson noted
that the Campus has not yet had the opportunity to
respond to questions and issues raised in the report.
President Maxson reported that UNLV sponsored a nation-
al minority workshop, developed a minority engineering
program, and signed a contract with a small minority
College in Georgia to conduct a 3 + 2 program with the
Department of Energy sponsoring the expenses of this
program. In addition, a joint agreement with the Latin
Chamber of Commerce has been given to raise money sepa-
rately for scholarships and an agreement with the Black
Chamber of Commerce is underway. UNLV has a very ac-
tive minority pre-law program which ultilized the Pres-
ident's Discretionary account. He reported that the
most successful minority program at UNLV is the Upward
Bound Program. UNLV sponsors a National Youth Program
during the Summer, and he reported UNLV also grants
Native American scholarships.
President Maxson stated that the report contains some
case studies that are being addressed. This will be
an ongoing process, and he assured the Committee that
UNLV will address every single issue raised in the
report.
Dr. Derby questioned why the student response rate was
so low. Dr. Lujan responded that the student surveys
were distributed from the UNR Campus and were requested
to be returned to the UNR Campus. Chairman Whitley
indicated that she had heard that the survey was too
long. Dr. Coray agreed with it being too long, but
did not know the reason for the low response rate.
Mrs. Berkley questioned if steps were being taken to
check the validity of the remarks made in the report,
and Dr. Lujan stated that due to the confidentiality
factor where no names were asked for on the survey,
authenticity was not being checked; however, UNLV will
be sponsoring a forum for discussion. Mrs. Berkley
requested that Departments mentioned in the report be
notified that said action is unacceptable. President
Maxson agreed to carry out her request.
Ms. Velicia Haron addressed the Committee. She felt
that the number of responses at UNLV was good; however,
she too was disappointed with the number. She noted
that it was indicative of the climate on the UNLV
Campus. She did not think that a "committee on ethnic
minority affairs" would make a definite change, but
that Department Heads and Senior Administrators should
serve on such a committee to give strength to the goals
and mission of the committee. There is a great need to
educate people on how to deal with diversity and the
report contains recommendations to address this issue.
Chairman Whitley agreed and added that people should be
held accountable by conducting evaluations on every
employed person at the institution.
Mrs. Berkley questioned whether there was a possibility
of creating a position in the Chancellor's Office for
a Vice Chancellor of Diversity. It was strongly sug-
gested that this person be given the appropiate re-
sources and be held accountable for her/his actions.
Mrs. Berkley suggested that the ethnic minority group
at UNLV raise a community commitment for resources
such as the UNLV's Women's Center. Mrs. Haron indicat-
ed that the community resources are being tapped for
all different fund raising events. She suggested that
institution Administrators give their support to this
program.
Dr. Derby expressed her appreciation for the comments
contained in the report. She agreed that resources
are a very critical issue in order for the program to
be successful. She felt that UNLV has made a good and
honest effort, and demonstrated much courage by plac-
ing the negative comments in the report. It is never
easy to publicly admit mistakes.
Ms. Haron suggested that Campus personnel receive
sensitivity training to reduce the "chilly climate"
at the institutions. She felt that a comprehensive
effort throughout the institution would help the di-
versity issue, not just increasing the numbers of
minority faculty. Chairman Whitley noted that this
scenario exists throughout the country.
Mrs. Graves suggested that the community and various
organizations work together and raise resources to
fund a minorities office with appropriate staff and
equipment to efficiently perform the job at UNLV.
Mr. Lugan stated that he appreciated Mr. Graves' sug-
gestions, but it has been his experience that minori-
ties should take care of minorities. It should be the
Board of Regents' responsibility to fund this project.
Mr. Graves emphasized that the whole community should
be approached to support this project, not just the
minorities within the community.
Mrs. Berkley stated that she understood Dr. Lugan's
concerns; however, she advised UNLV not to wait for
funding from the Legislature on this project.
Chairman Whitley stated that the Board of Regents
should set a systemwide policy that all faculty and
students can follow.
Mrs. Price stated that the Board should set priorities
which would indicate an allocation of its values. This
project should depend on the System to provide funding,
not community individuals.
Dr. Hammargren pointed out that the Board of Regents
has made the Status of Women Committee a standing com-
mittee, whereas the Ethnic Minority Affairs Committee
is an ad hoc committee. Women have been elevated to
a different status, even on the Board of Regents' own
agenda. Chairman Whitley reminded the Committee that
the Status of Women Committee began as an ad hoc com-
mittee, and through assessment efforts it has been
realized that women's issues are an ongoing problem.
The ad hoc Committee on Ethnic Minority Affairs is
still in its early stages and is working towards a
permanent status.
Ms. Haron informed the Committee that CSUN President
Joel Kostman will become an integral part of this
process in the future.
President Gwaltney reported that 1200 surveys were sent
with 145 returned. The responses were generally posi-
tive. The faculty responses indicated a more negative
attitude with regard to tenure status, with the part-
time faculty not being able to obtain tenure. TMCC
needs more role models and leadership training to
develop these role models. President Gwaltney stated
that TMCC is very successful in attracting minority
students, but needs some work on getting these students
to graduate. President Gwaltney introduced L. D.
Lovett, who responded to several questions posed by
Chairman Whitley regarding the statistical numbers re-
ported. Mr. Lovett stated that TMCC intends to dis-
tribute more information to the part-time faculty on
diversity.
Chairman Whitley noted that the institutions do not
need to have specific role models for the students, but
should have "adult" role models who are sensitive to
minority affairs.
President Taranik introduced Ms. Anne Mueller who was
an excellent resource to the Committee. He reported
that DRI has experienced an increase from 4.3% to
7.1% since 1987. He highlighted the reference material
and described the efforts made to hire minorities at
DRI.
President Remington reported that NNCC received a 25%
response rate from the students. The perceptions were
generally favorable; however, personal attention from
faculty needs to be improved. He is aware that there
are no offices for interaction between students and
faculty. President Remington highlighted issues
brought forth concerning curriculum, academic support,
student life, Campus life, and satisfaction with the
Campus. He discussed the steps that have already been
taken to address various issues.
President Remington stated that he was most proud of
Ms. Val Easterly, Ms. Debbie Heaton-Lamp and Gerald
Martin, who served as Chairman of the NNCC Ethnic Mi-
nority Affairs Committee. These people were very
energetic and enthusiastic. They have developed some
action plans from the issues and concerns raised in
the survey. There is much to accomplish, but President
Remington felt that NNCC has established a very hard
working committee which could meet these accomplish-
ments.
Chairman Whitley questioned what types of problems
were coming forth from the financial aid offices.
President Meacham responded that the financial aid
offices are a very important entity for many needy
students, and it is the most stressful. If the stress-
es cannot be relieved, then problems arise. President
Remington suggested that senstivity training should
be provided for financial aid personnel. Mr. Stan
Aiazzi, NNCC Vice President for Student Services, in-
dicated that financial aid offices must adhere to
Federal regulations, which may not be in the best in-
terest of the needy student. When financial aid per-
sonnel must deny funding, issues arise such as those
mentioned in the reports. President Calabro stated
that with the forthcoming changes in Federal regula-
tions, the problems will become even more difficult.
He agreed that personnel should be given sensitivity
training with an emphasis on handling students.
President Calabro reported that his institution deals
with several different communities, such as off-Campus
centers, prison program and part-time students. Over-
all, the students gave positive responses to the sur-
vey. Several of the issues brought forth are being
addressed. He mentioned that WNCC will be sponsoring
an Open House and it too has a multi-cultural Dean of
Arts and Science who has much experience in ethnic
minority affairs. The employee will conduct workshops
for faculty, staff and students at WNCC.
Mrs. Price informed the Committee that WNCC has a
higher percentage of enrolled Hispanic students than
the population it serves. She commended WNCC for
its ability to attract these students.
President Meacham discussed CCSN's diversity efforts
and assessment activities as reported in the referenced
material. The data indicates that minority enrollment
has fluctuated at CCSN. The non-completers are due
to the limited financial aid nationwide. He agrees
that faculty must become more sensitive to the minority
student. CCSN has the largest proportion within the
System of minority executive/administrative/managerial
employees (22%); minority secretarial/clerical employ-
ees (22%); minority technical/paraprofessional employ-
ees (22%); and minority skilled craft employees, with
DRI (33%).
It was learned that minority students want the same
access of every service as any other student on the
Campus. President Meacham stated that the solutions
to these problems do not always cost money. Just by
attending some of the multi-cultural activities
sponsored by the institutions means a great deal. He
did caution the Committee that if not careful, the
Board may have to provide more funding for law suits
when it proclaims that it is going to increase serv-
ices for minorities -- this may cause a rise in
reverse discrimination suits.
Mrs. Whitley extended her personal thanks to each
President and the Campus committees for their efforts
in developing reports, hearings on Campus, conducting
surveys, and being truthful on statements made by
participants.
Mrs. Whitley stated that future activities that were sug-
gested by Acting Chairman Graves will be considered by this
Committee and the Council of Presidents. All materials
will be sent to the members of the Blue Ribbon Task Force
Committee and the ad hoc Committee on Ethnic Minority Af-
fairs will conduct a meeting with that entity. Final
recommendations will be presented at the next Board of
Regents' meeting.
Mrs. Sparks moved approval of the report and recommendations
of the ad hoc Committee on Ethnic Minority Affairs. Mrs.
Gallagher seconded. Motion carried.
24. Report and Recommendations of the Ad Hoc Chancellor Search
Committee
A report and recommendations of the ad hoc Chancellor Search
Committee meeting held December 1, 1993 were made by Regent
Madison Graves, Chairman.
(1) Search Update - The Committee reviewed a proposed in-
itial rating form to be used in reviewing applications.
It was agreed that a numerical rating should be used,
with 1 as low, 5 as average, and 10 as high.
Chancellor's staff had prepared a list of questions to
be used during the interview process with candiates.
It was pointed out that the interview questions should
not be discussed in an open meeting. It was agreed
that the Committee members would review the proposed
questions, make additions or deletions and return them
to Chairman Graves, who would work with the staff to
finalize the list.
Chairman Graves related he had been contacted by a
Regent not on the Committee who would like to review
applications. It was agreed that Committee members
would receive copies of the applications for their
review, and that one copy would be available in both
the Reno and Las Vegas System Administration offices
should other Regents wish to review them.
In answer to a question about the time line for the
Search, it was pointed out by staff that this is the
best possible time for recruiting.
(2) Chancellor's Salary - The Committee received a report
from Mrs. Karen Steinberg, Interim Vice Chancellor,
on the ad hoc Compensation Study Committee, with
regard to the Chancellor's salary. The Board of Re-
gents has adopted a policy of establishing ranges for
all executive positions in the System. Salary models
are being developed for all these positions, and it
is anticipated that the ranges will be ready for Board
discussion at its January meeting. Once established,
salaries for new hires will be placed within one of
the ranges based on experience and qualifications.
The salary model will be updated every two years and
salaries could be changed at that time. The Univer-
sity and Chancellor's Office peer groups are being
established and will go to the Board of Regents for
approval. The Community College and DRI salary models
are awaiting determination of the peer groups.
It is anticipated that the salary model for the Chan-
cellor salary will be complete prior to the end of the
search.
Mr. Graves clarified that copies of the applications will
be kept in the Regents' Office, both north and south, for
only the review by members of the Board of Regents. He
stressed the importance that these applications must be
kept in the respective office.
Mr. Graves reported that DRI Vice President for Research,
Dr. William Bishop, has sent a letter to those involved
with EPSCoR, to inform them of this position opening.
Mr. Graves stressed that the proposed interview questions
are of a sensitive nature, and should not be made public.
He will address all concerns made to him, as Chairman of
the Committee, regarding the proposed interview questions.
Mrs. Whitley moved approval of the report and recommenda-
tions of the ad hoc Chancellor Search Committee. Mrs.
Sparks seconded. Motion carried.
25. Approved Waiver of Policy, UNR
Approved to waiver the policy contained in Title 4, Chapter
10, Section 18.1.c of the Board of Regents' Handbook. This
waiver will enable UNR Athletic Director Chris Ault to also
serve as Head Coach of the UNR football team.
The policy reads as follows:
c. To assist in assuring institutional control over
intercollegiate athletics programs, member insti-
tutions shall not make new joint appointments to
the positions of Director of Intercollegiate
Athletics and Coach of an intercollegiate sports
program.
Mrs. Sparks moved to accept the waiver of the policy to
enable UNR Athletic Director Chris Ault to also serve as
Head Coach of the UNR football team. Mr. Klaich seconded.
Mrs. Berkley questioned the reason for this agenda item to
appear before the Board of Regents. President Crowley
responded that this matter should be resolved by the Ad-
ministrator of the institution; however, there have been
various ways of interpreting this policy. The view of the
Board of Regents was to dissolve the practice of having
one person serve two positions. He noted that the Board
had some concern that maybe the Athletic Director would
funnel monies to the up and coming football program, in
which the incumbent had recently served as the Head Football
Coach. However, President Crowley assured the Board that
this did not happen, in fact, Mr. Ault over compensated with
the other athletic programs. When Mr. Ault stepped down as
Head Football Coach, President Crowley stated that it was
Mr. Ault's intention to make that a permanent decision.
However, recent events have occurred, with Head Football
Coach Jeff Horton taking the Head Football Coach position
at UNLV. This has caused UNR to react immediately in hiring
a Head Football Coach, because this is a critical time for
recruiting purposes. President Crowley stated that approval
of this waiver is critical to the UNR football program.
Acting Chairman Graves indicated, for the record, that when
this situation occurred, President Crowley contacted him
and expressed his concerns that the football program would
be devastated and UNR needed to act quickly to this situa-
tion. Acting Chairman Graves encouraged President Crowley
to offer Mr. Ault the Head Football Coach position, and to
approach the Board of Regents for approval of the waiver
to this policy.
Mr. Klaich stated that he would vote for the motion. The
current policy is a sound policy and by accepting the waiver
does not in any way indicate he was backing away from the
current policy.
Dr. Derby stated that she was concerned with one person
serving two positions; however, President Crowley has for-
warded justification for this waiver.
Mrs. Sparks stated that this was an exceptional item due to
the emergency nature. By approving this waiver, it does
not indicate that there will be a permanent change to the
current policy.
Acting Chairman Graves stated for the record that he agreed
with Mrs. Sparks and that this waiver was being made for
compliance reasons. He noted that to his knowledge, the
University of Oregon and UNR are the only two institutions
that have this unique situation.
Interim Chancellor Richardson recommended approval of this
waiver to the policy. He personally did not think that the
current policy was needed. These types of decisions should
be made by the President of the institution, not the govern-
ing board. He recommended that the policy be eliminated and
these decisions be made by the President of the respective
institution.
Motion carried.
1. Approved Consent Agenda (continued)
Mr. Klaich moved approval of item 5, Appointments, Advisory
Board, TMCC, as contained in the Consent Agenda. Mrs.
Whitley seconded. Motion carried.
26. New Business
Mrs. Berkley requested a one-hour workshop session to be
scheduled in the future to discuss the responsibilities and
the service provided to the Board of Regents by the General
Counsel staff. Mr. Klaich suggested a written report be
submitted to each member of the Board, but Mrs. Berkley
specifically requested a verbal presentation.
Mrs. Berkley requested information be presented by each
President to the Legislative Affair Committee on what their
respective institution plans to be doing over the next six
to nine months with respect to legislative matters.
The meeting adjourned at 2:30 P.M.
Mary Lou Moser
Secretary of the Board
12-02-1993