12/20/1990

UCCSN Board of Regents' Meeting Minutes
December 20-21, 1990








12-20-1990

Pages 110-113



                         BOARD OF REGENTS

                    UNIVERSITY OF NEVADA SYSTEM

                         December 20, 1990



The Board of Regents met on the above date in the Student Union,

ASUN Auditorium, University of Nevada, Reno.



Members present:  Mrs. Dorothy S. Gallagher, Chairman

                  Mrs. Shelley Berkley

                  Dr. Jill Derby

                  Dr. James Eardley

                  Mr. Daniel J. Klaich



Members absent:   Mr. Joseph M. Foley

                  Dr. Lonnie Hammargren

                  Mrs. Carolyn M. Sparks

                  Mrs. June Whitley



Others present:   Mr. Mark H Dawson, Chancellor

                  Vice Chancellor Ronald Sparks

                  General Counsel Donald Klasic

                  President Joseph Crowley, UNR

                  President Robert Maxson, UNLV

                  President James Taranik, DRI

                  President Anthony Calabro, WNCC

                  President Paul Meacham, CCSN

                  President Ronald Remington, NNCC

                  President John Gwaltney, TMCC

                  Ms. Mary Lou Moser, Secretary



Also present were Faculty Senate Chairmen Paula Funkhouser, TMCC;

Richard Brown, UNR; Alan Balboni, CCSN;  and Isabelle Emerson,

UNLV; and ASUN President, Jason Geddes, UNR.



Chairman Gallagher called the meeting to order at 1:35 P.M.,

stating the purpose of the meeting was to discuss the UNS 1991-

93 Biennial Budget Request and the Governor's tentative budget

recommendations.  She related that the Governor's Budget Office

has reviewed all State agency budgets and has asked each of the

agencies to present budgets with a 5% and a 10% cut.  Mrs.

Gallagher stated these cuts would be extremely difficult for

UNS because of the growth the system is experiencing.  However,

she added that if UNS does not make that decision, the Gover-

nor's Office will use a negative figure in the revenue section

of the budget and UNS will have to make the cuts anyway.



Vice Chancellor Sparks distributed the Governor's Tentative

Recommendations, filed as Ref. A, with the permanent minutes.

Each of the recommendations was thoroughly discussed.  Of note,

the Governor is not recommending a cost-of-living increase for

professionals as was requested, and at the present time there

are no pay raises recommended for any State employees.  UNS

has requested 100% funding of the support services formula in

the Base Budget amounting to $20 million; the recommendation

is at 21% or $4 million.



Mrs. Berkley questioned the reason for recommendation No. 11 -

not funding the operating equity adjustment in instruction func-

tion for UNLV, CCCC, TMCC and WNCC.  It was explained that the

Budget Office felt that an equity adjustment in this area would

be a continual problem.  In the past, Institutions have used

savings in other areas to strengthen this area which has caused

the inequity, and this practice is likely to continue.  Mrs.

Berkley was assured that there have been long discussions with

the Budget Office over this issue.



Mr. Sparks explained that items 12 and 13 remove flexibility

for the Institutions in that the Budget Office has recommended

1% to 2% of professional and 3% of classified salaries as salary

savings.  In the past, the Presidents have been able to use these

salary savings to fund needed growth areas.  Salary savings are

those monies not used due to turnover; hiring at a lower salary;

resignations, etc.  In 1989, it was about 1% of the budgeted

instructional salaries and this amount was used in support serv-

ices.  For 1991, 1% of professional salaries will amount to about

$1 million and 1% of classified salaries will amount to $500,000

per year.  President Maxson stated that UNLV was allotted about

$300,000 for part-time instructors last year, but spent $2 mil-

lion to teach the students enrolled.  The salary savings made

up a great deal of this amount.  These savings are used as con-

tingency funds.  Taking the salary savings away gives the Campus

no flexibility and also takes away the incentive to save.  Mrs.

Berkley added that this is only a good business practice, and

with the flexibility gone, it will actually cost the State more

in the long run.



It was pointed out that the smaller Colleges are really stressed

under this reduction.  President Calabro stated it meant WNCC

must save $71,000 from his Campus budget.



UNS has recommended scholarships be based on the percentage

growth in faculty plus a percentage increase in fees (No. 14),

and while some funds have been allocated, it is considerably

lower than the request.  Mrs. Berkley pointed out the current

inequities between UNLV and UNR and voiced strongly that it

should be adjusted as requested by UNS.  Mr. Klaich stated that

it was most disturbing with the very meager recommendations

forthcoming from the State, to see Regents take a north/south

attitude and it was his hope that they would not "rip apart"

the system from within during this Legislative Session.  He

recognized that there were very serious complaints, which UNS

has addressed, but unless full funding is recommended, these

complaints should be made to the Governor and the Budget Office.



It was agreed that the only way to work out the inequities was

to have fully funded formulas and moving forward in the lock-

step situation UNS finds itself does perpetuate them.  Dr.

Derby stated she was discouraged about ever getting formulas

fully funded, and questioned whether UNS should begin to think

about other measures to address inequities.  The history of the

present formulas was reviewed, wherein all Institutions partici-

pated with the Legislative Interim Committee when the formulas

were developed.  All Institutions made compromises during the

process and agreed that the end result was the best possible

solution for funding at that time.



Dr. Derby questioned what would happen if the Regents did not

agree with the recommendations.  It was explained that the Gov-

ernor makes his recommendations to the Legislature and histor-

ically the Legislature has made some changes, but not a great

deal.  Mr. Sparks related that the Governor's tentative recom-

mendation is for approximately a 6.2% increase over the present

1990 budget.  A 5% cut would bring UNS to just above current

allotments, but does not take into account any future growth.

A 10% cut would amount to $7.5 million less than current for

the first year of the biennium.



Mrs. Gallagher stated that the Regents need to take a very, very

active role in selling the UNS needs to the public and to Legis-

lators.  Many of the Legislators ran their campaigns on "no new

taxes", and while individually they support education, collec-

tively they do not want to increase taxes.



It was pointed out that none of the UNS priority items have been

budgeted.  The Budget Office has related that over 50% of the

State funds are going into growth; that a 1% salary increase for

State employees costs $11 million.



Mrs. Berkley stated her perception of the Regents' role was to

say "no" to cuts, that any cuts would impair the ability to

properly prepare students; that UNS is being penalized for its

success; and that the Regents must defend the original budget.

Mrs. Gallagher stated that it was not a matter of the Regents

"giving in"; that the electorate must be made aware of the needs

and the electorage must pressure Legislators to take action.



Mr. Klaich agreed with Mrs. Berkley, stated UNS has significant-

ly forged successful partnerships in education; that UNS has

made a significant change in the "brain drain" from the State;

that UNS has increased tuition and made significant inroads in

"helping itself", and with all this, these recommendations do

not meet UNS even half-way.  He reminded the Board that what-

ever UNS does, does not impact the Governor.  He stated that

if this State wants to lock 5% or 10% out of the UNS budget,

then the people responsible should have to cap enrollments for

UNS and tell the people the State cannot educate them.  He

stated he would not vote for any cuts.



Mrs. Berkley suggested a letter be sent to the Governor saying

the Regents could not cut their budget and to explain that en-

rollment caps would be necessary.  President Crowley stated he

felt the Governor does want to promote higher education, and

suggested several alternatives the Board might consider:



    1)  Saying "thanks" for the opportunity to reduce the budget,

        but the Board does not wish to do so.  The Budget Office

        will make the cuts and the success in overriding the

        recommendation would amount to about 1 or 1 1/2%.



    2)  Enrollment caps, which would affect the Institutions

        differently.  UNLV would be more affected than UNR be-

        cause of the faster growth rate.  The budget was pre-

        pared on quality education and UNS owes it to those

        currently enrolled to continue that quality.



    3)  Cut the budget in some other way, which is very danger-

        ous to do because there is not enough to make those cuts

        in a systematic, sensible way.



The above suggestions were thoroughly discussed.  Enrollment caps

would have to be worked out so that all Institutions sacrificed

equally, which can be done, but which is very painful.  The Re-

gents asked for Presidents to comment.  President Remington

stated that, in his opinion caps could be ironed out and urged

Regents not to reduce the amount spent per student which would

cause a reduction in quality education.  President Gwaltney

agreed with enrollment caps, but stressed equality in that cap-

ping.  President Calabro agreed that taking on more and more

students and programs must end.  President Maxson and Crowley

agreed with caps, but cautioned that whatever solution is made,

UNS must be ready to live with the consequences.  Dr. Richard

Brown, Faculty Senate Chairman, UNR, speaking on behalf of the

other Chairmen, stated they were distressed over the possibili-

ties, but felt that capping enrollments was the only solution

at this time.  Mr. Jason Geddes, ASUN President, stated he felt

the Governor was saying educational quality will have to take a

cut, that the Governor and public should be reminded that stu-

dents were given a 15% increase in tuition last year and they

are doing their part in supporting education.



Mr. Klaich moved to send a letter to the Governor declining to

make cuts to the budgets and stating that tentative recommenda-

tions are inadequate to meet quality education; that there is

a real possibility that if 5% and 10% cuts are made it would

require enrollment caps for all Institutions.  Dr. Eardley

seconded.  Motion carried.



Note:  The letter sent to the Governor is filed as Ref. B with

       the permanent minutes.  Filed as Ref. C with the perman-

       ent minutes is a statement received from Regent Carolyn

       Sparks giving her views on the budget recommendations.



The meeting adjourned at 3:45 P.M.



                             Mary Lou Moser

                             Secretary

                                                       12-20-1990