12/02/1993

UCCSN Board of Regents' Meeting Minutes
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