December 20-21, 1990
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