 |
MINUTES |
 |
|
MINUTES |
|
Programs Committee Consent
Resources Committee Consent
- *Approval of Notice of Appointment for President Coor (ASU)
- *Approval of Notice of Appointment for President Likins (UA)
- *Approval of Appointment of Vice President for Institutional Advancement (ASU)
- *Authorization to Renew a Commercial Lease for 10 Years at Tumamoc Hill with the Arizona State Land Department (UA)
- *Learning Services Building: Project Approval (UA)
- *Authorization to Sell a Portion of the Cowden Property to Chamberlain Development, L.L.C. Board
- *Approval of Revised Ground Lease Agreement for Development of South Campus Residence Hall Project (NAU)
- FY 2002 State Expenditure Authority
- FY 2002 Initial All Funds Operating Budget
- Development of Supplemental State Operating Budget Requests for FY 2003
- Residence Life North: Revised Project Approval and Budget Increase (ASU)
- Herring Hall Renovation: Conceptual Approval (UA)
- Sixth Street Parking and Office Facility: Project Approval (UA)
- Highland District Housing: Revised Conceptual Approval with Budget Increase (UA)
- Signal Peak: Revised Conceptual Approval and Project Approval (NAU)
- Approval of Notice of Appointment and Multiple-Year Employment Contract for President Cargol (NAU)
- Internal Audit Reports
A meeting of the Arizona Board of Regents was held June 28 and 29, 2001, in the University Union at Northern Arizona University in Flagstaff, Arizona. President Donald Ulrich called the Study Session to order at 2:00 p.m. on Thursday, June 28, in the Grand Canyon Room.
| PRESENT: | Regent George H. Amos, III |
| ABSENT: | Governor Jane Dee Hull |
Also present were: President Clara Lovett, Dr. Jeanette Baker, Ms. Anne Barton, and Mr. Josh Allen, Northern Arizona University; President Peter Likins, Dr. Patti Ota, and Mr. Joel Valdez, University of Arizona; President Lattie Coor, Dr. Milton Glick, Dr. Mernoy Harrison, Dr. Elaine Maimon, and Dr. Christine Wilkinson, Arizona State University; Executive Director Linda Blessing, Board Counsel Joel Sideman, Secretary to the Board Judy Garza, Mr. Dave Harris, Ms. Louise Houseworth, Ms. Norma Salas, and Mr. Matt Ortega, Central Office Staff; Dr. Judith Sellers, Arizona Faculties Council; and Student Regent Designees Myrina Robinson and Matthew Meaker.
Regent Jewett chaired this portion of the meeting. Mr. Valdez, Mr. Harris, and Dr. Harrison joined the meeting for this Study Session.
Mr. Harris explained the current capital development process. He then presented the proposed capital process. The proposed process is intended to streamline the capital process while promoting and improving its integrity. In essence, the proposed changes will replace the current Project Initiation step with a Capital Development Plan submission. The Capital Development Plan (CDP) will be a comprehensive recommendation of capital improvement projects proposed for the coming fiscal year. It will clarify each university's proposed program of capital improvements for the coming fiscal year.
In the CDP Approval step, the universities will give a full presentation of their upcoming fiscal year's capital development plans to the Board in the Spring of each year. The CDP submissions will contain all the information now required for Project Initiation. Approval of a project in the Capital Development Plan will authorize the universities to proceed with the project to the Project Implementation Phase. One mid-year adjustment to the CDP will be allowed. Under this approach, a project could go forward only if it is included in the university's approved CDP.
In the Project Implementation Approval step, the universities will present individual projects to the Board after conceptual design is completed and will cite any changes in project scope or cost since CDP approval. In the Project Approval step, the universities will request Project Approval after final design is completed and the project is ready to go to bid. If there are no significant changes in project scope or budget following Project Implementation Approval, the Executive Director may grant Project Approval.
Regent Amos said he had asked the Central Office to contact former Regent Herman Chanen and ask his opinion on the proposed policy changes as Mr. Chanen had been the main architect of the current policy framework. Mr. Chanen reviewed the proposed policy and agreed with the changes. Regent Amos said he also believes this policy will be an improvement. Regent Gignac said she believes spending time on the CDP will be more valuable. She asked if it will be necessary to spend money to provide necessary numbers for the CDP and was told that the universities were authorized to spend up to $100,000 on each project prior to CDP approval.
Regent Palacios suggested the need for a realistic five-year plan as there seems to be a one or two-year plan and a long-term plan but no mid-term plan. Mr. Harris explained the statutory requirement to develop a Capital Improvement Plan (CIP) that includes both a 2-year plan and a 2-year forecast does form the basis for a mid-term plan.
Mr. David Duffy joined the meeting for this discussion. Regent Jewett said Northern Arizona University would not be asked to present its plan until August to allow time for President Cargol's review. Mr. Duffy presented four new projects the University of Arizona was proposing to be placed in the university's CDP. Approval of the UA CDP would allow the university to initiate advance planning, facilities programming, and preliminary design for each of these projects.
The Biomedical Sciences and Biotechnology Building is a high-technology, interdisciplinary laboratory facility that is envisioned to provide 130,200 gross square feet (gsf) and 71,600 net assignable square feet (nasf). Total project cost is approximately $60M. Given the complexities associated with the planning and design of the research building, the university also requested Board authorization to exceed the $500,000 limit for planning and preliminary design as provided for in proposed policy changes to Chapter VII. This project is currently listed on the university' Four-Year Capital Plan.
The AHSC Academic Facility is an approximately 117,000 gsf new interdisciplinary academic building. It collocates in one facility, the College of Public Health, office and instructional space for the College of Pharmacy, instructional space for the College of Nursing, and office space for the Vice President for Health Sciences. The building would provide approximately 70,000 nasf. This proposal would replace the Pharmacy and Public Health projects currently listed on the university's Four-Year 2002-2005 Capital Improvement Plan.
The Alumni Plaza is a $2.5M gift-funded project which proposes to construct a new central campus plaza to honor the university's heritage and alumni. Featuring seating, shade, arid region landscaping, and artistic elements, this multi-purpose space will accommodate a wide variety of functions within a design framework reflective of themes celebrating the "Arizona Experience." This project will link improvements associated with the new Integrated Learning Center and Student Union/Bookstore, and is therefore seen as an essential component of the Main Mall Enhancement Program.
The Parking Structure-Northeast was originally conceived to address the proposed relocation of Facilities Services units to the AHSC (Four-Year Capital Plan Project: Parking Garage, AHSC). The project is now required to replace spaces which may be lost as a result of the Biomedical Sciences and Biotechnology Building and AHSC Academic Facility projects. The approximately $25M project was therefore renamed to more accurately reflect its broader objective to provide replacement and new additional parking for the entire campus.
Mr. Valdez informed the Board there will be a need for a Northeast Campus Infrastructure Project to provide utility and surface infrastructure support for the AHSC Academic Facility and the Biomedical Sciences and Biotechnology Building projects. The university expects to bring this project to the Board in January 2002. There will also be a need to change the university's use of its remaining bonding authority from that identified in its 1999 Multi-Year Bonding Plan and an update will be provided to the Board in the Fall.
There was a discussion of using bid alternates to try to keep costs lower and keeping a safety margin for debt service. Possible new bonding authorization was also discussed.
Upon motion of Regent Jewett, seconded by Regent McKay, the Board granted approval to the University of Arizona for its proposed Capital Development Plan and authorized the UA to exceed
the $500,000 advance planning and preliminary design limit for the Biomedical Sciences and Biotechnology Building.
Dr. Harrison and Mr. Scott Cole presented four proposed new projects for Arizona State University Main Campus. The University Services Building (USB) is a new 120,000 gsf, $11.2M two-story administrative services and facilities shops facility to be constructed on the former Penn Mor property adjacent to ASU Main. The project includes an additional $3.2M for renovations to the various facilities being vacated by the several administrative and facilities units. The total project cost is $14.4M. The proposed building will have an 85,000 gsf high bay space on the first floor to house the facilities management shops and administrative services offices and the second floor will have 35,000 gsf administrative services. This facility will consolidate most of the administrative services units into a more efficient operational environmental and focus service deliveries in a one-stop location.
The Remote Library Storage Facility is a new 15,000 gsf, $2.8M, high bay, high-density shelving facility to be constructed on the campus of Arizona State University East. The main objective is to preserve lesser-used library materials currently housed in Hayden Library and store them off-site. The construction of this facility will allow the university to recapture 22,500 gsf existing library space at the Hayden Library and utilize it in a more efficient manner.
The Physical Science C-Wing Renovations are a comprehensive deferred maintenance project which renovates 12,600 gsf of scientific wet laboratory space formerly occupied by the Cancer Research Institute. The project costs are estimated to be $3.483M. The vacated space is in poor condition, is currently inadequate to meet modern research and teaching requirements, and is not code compliant. The laboratories and the building systems infrastructure will be upgraded maximizing adaptable and flexible technologies to provide state of the art research facilities conducive to supporting the research needs of the Departments of Chemistry and Biochemistry and promoting the development of interdisciplinary research in biochemistry and chemistry.
The Interdisciplinary Bio-Med Facility is a new 172,000 gsf, $60M, biomedical research facility to be constructed on the campus of Arizona State University Main campus. The new facility will house the Arizona Biomedical Institute which will articulate a collaborative research agenda conducted by ASU Main researchers along with allied faculty from member clinical institutions in the greater Phoenix area. The Institute's research program is devoted to three targeted, high-priority, biomedical specialties-- bioengineering, biotechnology, and integrative biomedicine. The Institute will create a national model for the linkage of clinical research centers with the basic science and knowledge creation capacities of a research university.
There was a discussion concerning providing parking and the use of technology so students would not have to always go to a building. There was a request for more information on efficiency ratios.
Mr. Terry Isaacson explained the request by Arizona State University East for construction of a lighted driving range consisting of 140 stations--70 for the Professional Golf Management (PGM) Program and 70 for public use. The project will also include two full-golf holes, one par 3 and one par 4, and a Golf Learning Center. The Center will include short game practice areas, putting greens, fairway bunkers, a chipping practice area, and other skill areas. The Center will work as an outside classroom used to teach all elements of the game of golf without requiring players to go to an actual golf course. The project cost for the 17-acre site is $1.2M, to be funded entirely by grants. Revenue generated from use by members of the community will be directed to operating and maintenance expenses.
There was a discussion concerning who would own the facility and Regents were told the project has been patterned after the Karsten Golf Course project.
Upon motion of Regent Jewett, seconded by Regent Gignac, the Board granted approval for the Capital Development Plans for ASU Main, ASU East, and ASU West, and authorized ASU Main to exceed the $500,000 professional and consultant services expenditure limit for the University Services Building to include demolition and infrastructure site work totaling $1,080,000. The Board also authorized ASU Main to spend $858,108 on the Interdisciplinary Bio-Med Facility to achieve project implementation and satisfy all federal requirements.
The meeting recessed at 3:55 p.m. and reconvened at 8:05 a.m. on Friday, June 29.
Regent Amos was not present for this Study Session. Present in addition to the Regents were: President Lattie Coor, Dr. Elaine Maimon, Dr. Milton Glick, and Dr. Christine Wilkinson, Arizona State University; President Peter Likins, Dr. George Davis, Dr. Elizabeth Ervin, and Dr. Patti Ota, University of Arizona; President Clara Lovett, Dr. John Haeger, and Ms. Anne Barton, Northern Arizona University; Executive Director Linda Blessing, Board Counsel Joel Sideman, Secretary to the Board Judy Garza, Dr. Art Ashton, Mr. Matthew Ortega, and Ms. Norma Salas, Central Office; Student Regent Designees Myrina Robinson and Matthew Meaker; and Dr. Judy Sellers, Arizona Faculties Council.
Regent Herstam chaired this portion of the meeting.
Dr. Art Ashton, Mr. Fred Hurst, and Dr. Sally Jackson joined the meeting for this discussion. The Board viewed a portion of a DVD produced by ASU showing some discussion that took place during a workshop of the Project Management Team. Dr. Jackson presented an overview of the Arizona Regents University (ARU).
Dr. Mason Somerville, NAU Dean of Engineering and Technology, Dr. Tom Peterson, UA Dean of Engineering and Mines, Dr. Don Scunk, ASU Associate Professor of Engineering and Applied Sciences, and Ms. Kathleen Gonzalez-Landis, joined the meeting for this discussion.
Ms. Gonzalez-Landis told the Regents about the Tri-University Masters of Engineering Degree Program. She explained the administrative structure and the role of the Advisory Board. She told how important the corporate advisors were to the program and the extent to which the proposed curriculum is responsive to the expressed needs of the students and the corporate community. She described the flexible programs of study.
There was a discussion of what made the tri-university engineering program work–the ARU financial support, the critical mass of courses already developed, and the strong corporate interest. There is a need to understand the customer's needs. It was stated the engineering program was underway before ARU was developed and it might take longer to implement education and health care programs.
The possibility of using ARU funds to ramp up some individual university programs as well as tri-university programs was raised. The problem of overcoming the different cultures and agendas at the three universities in the nursing program was mentioned. The importance of involving the professional communities in the health care and education programs was acknowledged.
There was a conversation about state standards for education and the need to emphasize academic needs as well as standards. There is a great need for math and science teachers in rural areas. There is the possibility of developing partnerships with schools who may pay for courses needed by their teachers. It is important to collaborate with the Department of Education as courses are being developed and with the technology already available in the schools.
It was reported the nursing deans are working on a plan to address state requests and hope to present a grant request this Fall. It was suggested the Arizona Hospital Association would be helpful during the development stage of health programs and recommended that AzHEC and the Telemedicine Program also be included.
Upon motion of Regent Herstam, seconded by Regent McKay, the Board approved the allocation of $250,000 per year for a period of three years to develop and implement ten new e-learning courses per year in the Tri-University Masters of Engineering Degree Program.
Mr. Fred Hurst presented ARU's current priorities. The Project Management Team will report to the Board by late summer on implementation recommendations and requests. Dr. Ashton said three areas of need in the state have been identified and it has been suggested grants be made in the amount of $250,000 per year. However, these grants will not be built into the base budget, so the Board can allocate the funds for new programs after the grant period. President Ulrich thanked all the participants in the Study Session for their work.
The meeting recessed at 9:25 a.m. and reconvened at 9:47 a.m. in the Havasupai Room. Regent Amos joined the meeting.
President Ulrich criticized what he termed the destructive few faculty members who have expressed vocal opposition to the selection of Dr. Owen Cargol as President of Northern Arizona University and the process used for the selection. He believes the process was democratic and the search committee represented almost every constituency involved with the university. As with every decision, he said some people are happy and some are not.
President Ulrich said the search committee used the NAU mission statement and strategic plan in developing a profile for a new president. He said NAU would continue to be a collegiate teaching campus that will continue to strive for quality in undergraduate education. It will continue its excellent graduate programs and to provide access through 2+2, electronic, and other forms of educational delivery.
President Ulrich thanked the majority of faculty who, even though they may have some doubts, are willing to go forward on the faith that many good people made this choice. He said the Board will not waiver from its agenda and will welcome Dr. Owen Cargol with open arms. The Board looks forward to working with him in the pursuit of excellence.
Cherie McGlynn, Chairman of the Pinal County University Foundation, spoke on behalf of the NAU/Signal Peak Construction Project.
Samantha Andrus, representing the Organization of English Graduate Students, reminded the Regents the graduate teaching and research assistants were still waiting for news concerning tuition waivers.
Ana Nunez, representing graduate students in the ASU Spanish Department, spoke on behalf of additional financial support for graduate teaching and research assistants.
Maceo Brown, new Executive Director for Arizona Students' Association, introduced himself to the Regents and said he was looking forward to working with the Regents on student matters.
John Miles, representing the UA English Graduate Union, spoke on behalf of financial aid for graduate teachers and research assistants.
Bob Yowell, Chairman of the NAU Faculty Senate, said the faculty did not believe there was enough faculty participation in the selection of the new president for NAU. He said there should have been more faculty representatives on the search committee and the presidential candidates should have been brought to campus earlier as many faculty had left for the summer before the candidates had their forums. He asked that the goals for the new president be made public so the faculty could work with him for the betterment of the university.
Robert Poirier, a member of the NAU faculty, challenged the Board's judgment as he believed the Board had ignored the relevant component of the university in making its decision on the new NAU president. He blamed the legislature and the Board for placing the universities in the lower quartile of per capita expenditure for education among peers; therefore, the faculty are alarmed when the Board says it has a vision for education in this state as he believes the Regents are only political appointees who know nothing about education. He believes faculty is more knowledgeable about education issues and the Board should work more closely with faculty.
Anne Scott, a member of the NAU faculty, said the Regents' selection of the new president for NAU demonstrated the contempt in which the Regents hold the NAU faculty. She said there had been a lack of shared faculty governance on the NAU campus that caused morale problems and the selection of the new president had only compounded the morale problems. She believes the Regents should have more knowledge of the campus and the faculty and invited each Regent to spend a week on campus with the faculty.
Linn Montgomery, said he did not believe the Regents respect the faculty's contribution to the university. He does not believe the Regents engaged in a search that was powerful enough to attract a strong, all-around candidate from an institution comparable to NAU.
David Maurer, Flagstaff Chamber of Commerce, thanked President Lovett for her years of service to NAU and the Flagstaff community. He also thanked the Regents for their selection of Dr. Cargol as the new NAU president. The Chamber Executive Board has met with him and is looking forward to working with him in the future.
Gaetano Senese, a member of the NAU faculty and a parent of a NAU student, said he believes there is a disconnect between the way faculty sees their responsibility to the public and the way the appointed Regents see theirs. Faculty sees the importance of experienced leadership that cares about the value of a university as a place for the youth of the state. There is a need for selective and sensitive distance education, not the wholesaling of school credentials. He believes the new president is more experienced at wholesaling distance education.
Marcus Ford, a member of the NAU faculty, said the faculty at NAU is not a constituency; it is the heart and soul of the university. They spend their entire lives at the university; they are not just passing through. The faculty believes this is a unique time in history and would like to play a role in how the university responds to this unique time. Faculty members believe the Board has excluded them from this dialogue.
Stan Lindstedt, a member of the NAU faculty and a member of the Presidential Search Committee, said the faculty are the university as the faculty is the group who achieve the goals of the university. He believes the faculty has earned the right to be a part of all decisions that impact the university. He believes the Regents have sent a message to the new president that the faculty voice is not to be taken very seriously. He asked what could be done to change that message.
Ray Quintera, UA Student Body President, said he was looking forward to working with the Regents, President Likins, and the Arizona Students' Association. He introduced the ASUA Directors. He said academic advising would be one of the main priorities this coming year.
President Ulrich said there had been a written request from Ms. Linda Small to read her letter into the record as she could not be present. It is the Board's practice not to read letters from those who are not present, but he noted that each Board member and President Likins had received a copy of Ms. Small's letter.
President Ulrich introduced Student Regent Designees Myrina Robinson and Matthew Meaker. Their terms of service will begin July 1.
Items on the Consent Agenda, which are marked in these minutes with an *, were considered as consent matters and were adopted upon motion of Regent Gignac, seconded by Regent McKay. There was no individual discussion of these items. President Ulrich announced that Item 22, Internal Audit Reports, had been removed from the Consent Agenda to be discussed under the Resources Committee Agenda. He also announced that Item 17, Creation of a Conference Center Complex (NAU), had been withdrawn from the Agenda.
The Board approved the May 24, 2001, minutes.
The Board approved the request from ASU West to establish four departments (Elementary Education; Secondary Education; Special Education; and Graduate Studies and Professional Department) within the College of Education and three departments (Accounting and Information Systems Management; Economics, Finance Marketing, and Quantitative Business Analysis; and Management) within the School of Management.
The Board also approved the establishment of the Institute for Biomedical Science and Biotechnology at UA; the Arizona Biomedical Institute at ASU Main, and the Center for Research, Development and the Assessment of Learning in Electronic Environments at NAU.
*Approval of Notice of Appointment for President Coor (ASU)
The Board authorized the renewal of Lattie F. Coor's appointment as President of Arizona State University for the period from July 1, 2001, through June 30, 2002, under the current terms and conditions of his compensation package.
*Approval of Notice of Appointment for President Likins (UA)
The Board authorized the renewal of Peter W. Likins' appointment as President of the University of Arizona for the period from July 12, 2001, through June 30, 2002, under the current terms and conditions of his compensation package.
*Approval of Appointment of Vice President for Institutional Advancement (ASU)
The Board ratified the appointment of Alfred J. Pfister as Vice President for Institutional Advancement effective June 1, 2001, through June 30, 2002, or until a successor is duly appointed.
The Board authorized the University of Arizona to renew its commercial lease with the State Land Department for 199.72 acres at Tumamoc Hill, subject to approval of legal documents by University and Board Counsel. There are no rental fees for the parcel as the university is a Trust Lands beneficiary. The term of the renewal is from March 31, 2001, through March 30, 2011.
*Learning Services Building: Project Approval (UA)
The university proposes to construct a new 25,750 gsf multi-story office facility in the University Village District. This project received Project Initiation approval in January of 2000 and Conceptual Approval in January of 2001. Estimated total project cost remains at $5M. The university is using the Construction Manager at Risk (CM@R) project delivery process and is "fast-tracking" it utilizing multiple bid packages. To date, all design submissions by the Design Professional and all confirming cost estimates by the CM@R are in support of the approved project budget. There have not been significant or material changes to this project since the Board granted Conceptual Approval. The Board granted Project Approval to the University of Arizona for the Learning Services Building.
*Authorization to Sell a Portion of the Cowden Property to Chamberlain Development, L.L.C.
The Board approved the sale of approximately 6.79 acres of the former Cowden Estate Property located in Tolleson, Arizona, to Chamberlain Development, L.L.C. The basic terms include the following: 1) A cash transaction with a purchase price of $74,052/acre, or $1.70/square foot for the 6.79 acre parcel; 2) The Seller will be responsible for a Broker's fee of approximately $7,538; 3) The Seller will pay for the improvements to 107th Avenue as required by the City of Tolleson in an amount not to exceed $240,000; 4) The Buyer will pay for all utility hook-ups and/or extensions needed for water and sewer service; 5) The net proceeds of the sale will be approximately $502,560 (excluding closing costs). The Board's share will be approximately $195,998 minus its share of closing costs.
The Board is required by A.R.S. §15-1643 to appoint a governing board for each of the five AzAHEC centers. The Board was asked to appoint one additional member to the Southeastern Arizona AHEC (SEAHEC), Nogales. The Board approved the appointment of Eddie Simental to the SEAHEC governing board for FY 2001 through FY 2003.
The Board authorized the President or Vice President for Administration for Northern Arizona university or their designee to negotiate, sign, and enter into a ground lease agreement for the development of an approximately 320 bed residence hall on substantially the terms described below, together with such additional terms and conditions that are not inconsistent with the approval granted, and to take all appropriate actions to complete negotiations and to enter into such related documents as needed; provided that Counsel to the Board has reviewed the ground lease.
This project received Project Initiation in November of 2000. NAU has selected Ambling West to develop, finance, and construct the project. The term of the lease is approximately 37 years, consistent with the financing amortization term. The ground lease may be terminated at an earlier date if the debt is retired in advance. Upon termination, ownership of the property and site improvements reverts to the Arizona Board of Regents for NAU. The property is an approximately 3-acre site located between the Skydome and parking lot P41 on the south campus of NAU. Rent will be equal to 100% of the Net Cash Flow from the project. Such cash flow is projected to exceed $3M at the end of the first 10 years. The ground lease will contain terms and conditions that are standard and necessary for tax-exempt financing and approved by both Ambling and NAU legal counsel.
Regent Herstam chaired this portion of the meeting.
Regent Herstam said the Regents have heard from graduate students about the need for increased compensation, and in particular, the need for resident tuition waivers. President Likins provided the Board with an update regarding plans at the UA.
President Likins said one of the reason for the cost effectiveness of America's research universities is the reliance on graduate students (GA's and RA's). Throughout the years, GA's and RA's have come to see themselves as exploited and many in other states have expressed their concerns in radical action such as unionization. The universities have recognized the problem; that is why the UA added health insurance a few years ago.
Dr. Likins said GA's and RA's at the UA have listed their three main priorities. The first is there were too few GA's and RA's and they could not produce what they were asked to do in a 20-hour week. They found themselves working 25 or 30 hours and were having problems keeping up with their own academic requirements. The University of Arizona was able to obtain general fund support in the most recent budget cycle to add GA's and RA's.
President Likins said the second concern was the GA's and RA's receiving a stipend and then returning a good share of the money to the university for tuition. The third concern is the market pressure to provide stipends that cover living expenses for the GA's and RA's and that would enable Arizona universities to compete for GA's and RA's with other schools in the country.
President Likins said both waivers and stipends represent money. However, the students would prefer the receipt of tuition waivers as it gives them a better sense of being part of the teaching team and receiving similar benefits to other employees. However, if tuition waivers are granted, the students making higher stipends will benefit to a greater degree than students making lower stipends.
Dr. Likins said granting full resident tuition waivers to all GA's and RA's would cost the UA in excess of $5M per year, and the GA's and RA's understand the UA cannot afford the full cost of this initiative. He said the university, with GA's and RA's participating, is trying to find a plan that would enable the phase-in of resident tuition waivers over a period of four or five years. This would require revenue from a variety of resources. Graduate students have indicated they would be more accepting of tuition increases if some of the money was used to strengthen compensation for graduate students. Some of this year's tuition raise will go to improve the compensation for graduate students and faculty. President Likins said the UA would like to use some of the money allocated for salary increases next year for tuition credits.
President Likins said there are many impediments to accomplishing the desired outcome for graduate students in four or five years. One is the Board's limit on waivers as the universities are not permitted to develop integrated budgets in which waivers and dollars can accomplish the objective. That is why the graduate students are bringing the request for tuition waivers to the Regents as they realize the Regents control the number of waivers. He said he hoped the Regents, over time, would come to the conclusion the presidents should be charged with proposing annual budgets in which waivers and dollars are simultaneously allocated. He does not know how he can accomplish the objective of fixing the problems of graduate students without this delegation of authority. He could move dollars around to give tuition credits and accomplish the objective within the budgetary process without the Board members approval; but he would feel more comfortable having the Board's blessing. If the Board was to give that authority to the presidents, the Regents could expect a different response from the different campuses as the universities each deal in their own market place.
President Likins said the universities need to determine if the rules of the state allow the 5% salary money to be used for waivers. The universities plan to come to the Board in the Fall with a proposal. Dr. Likins said it is his intention to use budget dollars if the Regents do not delegate the freedom to allocate tuition waivers. He will use $700,000 of the tuition increase in the second semester to begin the process. He said there may be a difference of opinion on this process among the three presidents.
President Ulrich said he had no problem with delegating waiver authority to the presidents, but he would like to know the legal issues involved. He would like to become educated on the complete issue. He would like guidelines so the Regents could see how the waivers fit in the mix of the budget money. President Likins said the Regents might wish to put constraints on the allocation, such as how many waivers need to go to need-based students. President Coor said he would like the Regents to understand some of the current tuition increase money would go to graduate student support and he supports President Likins' plan to bring more information in the Fall. Regent Echeverria thanked the presidents for their leadership in this area.
Provosts Davis, Glick and Haeger joined the meeting for this discussion and reviewed the changes requested by their universities. Regent Gignac asked for more detail under learning outcomes and plans for assessment of the B.A. in Multidisciplinary Media and Digital Culture at ASU. Dr. Glick said this is an Executive Summary of the detail submitted to the Central Office and there will be more detailed outcomes at the implementation request stage. Upon motion of Regent Herstam, seconded by Regent Gignac, the Board approved the request made by ASU for authorization to plan the B.A. in Multidisciplinary Media and Digital Culture.
Regent Gignac complimented the University of Arizona for its proposed B.S. in Science Education. Upon motion of Regent Herstam, seconded by Regent Gignac, the Board approved the request by the UA to authorize planning for the Doctor of Audiology and to implement the B.S. in Science Education.
Upon motion of Regent Herstam, seconded by Regent McKay, the Board approved the request by NAU to change the M.A. in Physical Education to the M.S. in Exercise and Health Sciences.
Authorization to Adopt the Name Arizona Children's Health Sciences Center (UA)
Regents Herstam, Jewett, Ulrich, and Stuart declared a conflict of interest on this issue and did not vote or participate in the discussion or vote. Regent Gignac chaired this item. Regent Gignac said she could not vote on this issue due to her representation of the Board of Regents on the University Medical Center Board (UMC); however, she is allowed to participate in discussion of the issue. She said there had been a lot of discussion in the Tucson community on the issue of a children's hospital. Everyone agrees there should be one; but there is not agreement on how to accomplish this goal. The two biggest players are the Tucson Medical Center (TMC) and UMC. The Shriners are considering Tucson as a possible site for their new children's hospital, but they have not yet made a decision.
The UMC Board believes it is important for the hospital, the College of Medicine, and the Arizona Health Sciences Center to have a stronger emphasis in pediatrics. This naming will bring together a number of different areas within the Arizona Health Sciences Center under one name. President Likins spoke in support of the name change. He said this was a request from the head of the pediatrics department to adopt this name as the umbrella nomenclature for all the pediatric programs within the Arizona Health Sciences Center. He would like to pull all the units physically together in closer proximity. Regent McKay asked if there is any chance UMC and TMC might come together in agreement on this issue and Dr. Likins said he did not see that in the near future.
President Likins said this process had a taint because the initial communication to the Executive Director didn't acknowledge the likelihood that TMC would be upset by this initiative. A memo from Dr. Likins, sent to the Executive Director requesting permission for the name change, included a memo from Dr. Ghishan, Director, Steele Memorial Children's Research Center, and Dr. Dalen, Vice President Health Sciences Center, which did not accurately disclose the current climate in Tucson and precipitated the memo from the CEO of TMC to the Regents. President Likins asked the Executive Director to send a copy of the entire communication to the Regents.
Regent Gignac said she did not like to see discontent in the community, but both her fiduciary responsibility to UMC and her academic duty to UA led her to believe this request should be approved. Regent Molera asked if this could be delayed until the next meeting to allow more time for negotiation between UMC and TMC. He was told one month would not bring any change in the relative positions as the differences are long standing. Regent Echeverria asked if this name change would prevent any cooperation in the future and was told no. Regent Palacios said she had not heard about the conflict in the community; however, she had toured UMC and she believes this change should be made. Regent McKay said she would be willing to vote for the name change as long as it did not preclude future cooperation between UMC and TMC.
Upon motion of Regent Palacios, seconded by Regent Echeverria, the Board authorized the University of Arizona to adopt the name "Arizona Children's Health Sciences Center" as an umbrella nomenclature for the consolidation of all the existing pediatric programs within the Arizona Health Sciences Center. The motion passed with Regents Molera, Echeverria, McKay, Palacios, and Amos voting yes.
Regent McKay chaired this portion of the meeting.
Arizona Regents University (ARU): Delegation of Budget Allocation Authority
Regent McKay said the Board approved the ARU budget for $2M last January. During the course of the year, specific allocations from that budget need to be made for projects and activities that support ARU. Earlier in the day during the ARU Study Session, the Regents voted on the first such allocation to provide a grant for the Tri-University Master of Engineering program. This item proposes delegation of authority to the Board's ARU Subcommittee, made up of Regents Herstam, Jewett, and McKay, to allocate ARU funding for specific programs and activities. This delegation will allow more timely allocations than is possible if the full Board must act on allocations.
President Ulrich asked how the limit of $35,000 had been chosen. Executive Director Blessing said procurement rules were used as a guideline. Upon motion of Regent Gignac, seconded by Regent McKay, the Board delegated authority to the ARU Subcommittee to allocate ARU funds for projects and activities that exceeded $35,000. Allocations of $35,000 or less can be approved by the Board's Executive Director.
Regent Jewett chaired this portion of the meeting.
FY 2002 State Expenditure Authority
Ms. Louise Houseworth, Mr. Josh Allen, and Mr. Alan Carroll joined the meeting for this discussion. Ms. Houseworth said the state expenditure authority included the state general funds appropriated by the legislature, tuition, and other miscellaneous revenues that support the state operating budget. She noted the preliminary state expenditure authority before the Board does not include the salary adjustments or the employee health insurance rate increases. Those figures will be included in the Fall Update presented to the Board in November.
Upon motion of Regent Jewett, seconded by Regent McKay, the Board approved the FY 2002 state expenditure authority for the universities and the Central Office.
FY 2002 Initial All Funds Operating Budget
Mr. Carroll, Mr. Allen, and Ms. Houseworth joined the meeting for this discussion. Ms. Houseworth said the All Funds Operating Budget combines the state operating budget and local funds budget into a comprehensive report that includes projected revenues, expenditures, and fund balances. In accordance with Board policy, the Board approves the initial All Funds Operating Budget for the coming fiscal year in June and receives two updates during the year.
This initial budget reflects changes since the Spring Update and designates any accounts with projected year-end deficits of greater than $100,000. This is the first time the 301 Funds have been included.
Regent Gignac questioned whether the Intercollegiate Athletic Department (ICA) deficit at ASU had been known at the time of the Spring Update and was told the extent of the deficit was not known at the Spring Update. President Coor said the plan is to reduce the deficit to zero in three years. He said the deficit was caused by a decline in football revenues and a decline in television revenues. This year's budget is a conservative budget that takes into account the past revenue history. There has been a reduction in staff and expenditures to correct the budget.
Upon motion of Regent Jewett, seconded by Regent Gignac, the Board approved the Initial All Funds Operating Budget for the universities and the Central Office for FY 2002.
Development of Supplemental State Operating Budget Requests for FY 2003
Mr. Carroll, Mr. Allen, and Ms. Houseworth joined the meeting for this discussion. Ms. Houseworth said the legislature appropriated funds for the university system in April for the 2002-2003 biennium and it is anticipated state agencies will have an opportunity to request supplemental general fund appropriations for the second year of the biennium. It is expected the Governor will issue supplemental guidelines. Based on previous supplemental guidelines, the parameters should include enrollment growth and new unfunded mandates. In fact the appropriations bill did not include any funding for enrollment growth for the second year, but there was legislative intent language indicating it might be considered. Building renewal funding was approved at 65% of the universities' request for both years; but the Governor vetoed building renewal funding for both the university system and the Department of Administration. She expressed her hope that partial funding could be restored if future revenue projections warranted. The universities desire to include building renewal as a supplemental request.
Residence Life North: Revised Project Approval and Budget Increase (ASU)
Dr. Harrison joined the meeting for this discussion. Regent Jewett said ASU was requesting Revised Project Approval with a Budget Increase for the 252 bed Residence Life Building on the north campus. The budget increase is necessary in order to relocate a major Salt River Project irrigation line that was recently identified on the site. This $750,000 budget increase will result in a new project budget of $9.75M.
Upon motion of Regent Jewett, seconded by Regent Palacios, the Board adopted a budget increase to $9.75M for the new Residential Life Building located at north campus.
Herring Hall Renovation: Conceptual Approval (UA)
Mr. Valdez and Mr. Bob Smith joined the meeting for this discussion. Regent Jewett said the UA was requesting Conceptual Approval for the $2.2M renovation of Herring Hall. The former
residence hall has seen many uses over the years, and the university is now proposing to convert it into a herbarium for the College of Agriculture. Regent Palacios asked about the funding since building renewal was not forthcoming and was told there is still a chance for building renewal. However, if building renewal is not funded, the project will have to come back to the Board with an explanation of how it will be funded. Dean Sander said Herring Hall is not usable for any purpose without renovation, and it is an historical building. The College of Agriculture needs laboratory space and this is ideal for a herbarium. There was a discussion of the Agriculture Endowment Fund and why it would not be advisable to use it to fund this renovation.
Upon motion of Regent Jewett, seconded by Regent Gignac, the Board granted Conceptual Approval to the University of Arizona for the Herring Hall Renovation with Regent Herstam voting no.
Sixth Street Parking and Office Facility: Project Approval (UA)
Mr. Valdez and Mr. Smith joined the meeting for this discussion. Regent Jewett said the University of Arizona was requesting Project Approval for the Sixth Street Parking and Office Building. The proposed project budget remains at $17M as approved at Conceptual Approval. However, due to anticipated budget constraints, the sixth floor of the structure containing 285 parking spaces is proposed to be bid as a bid alternate rather than being included in the base bid.
Upon motion of Regent Jewett, seconded by Regent Gignac, the Board granted Project Approval to the University of Arizona for the Sixth Street Parking and Office Building.
Highland District Housing: Revised Conceptual Approval with Budget Increase (UA)
Mr. Valdez and Mr. Smith joined the meeting for this discussion. Regent Jewett said the University of Arizona was requesting Revised Conceptual Approval with a $6M Budget Increase for the Highland District Housing Project. The Budget Increase is being requested in order to add 40 beds to the project and to add 10,000 square feet of Residence Life administrative offices.
Regent Amos asked why there was a $6M increase since January and was told it was to add office space to consolidate the Residence Life office space into one area. Upon motion of Regent Jewett, seconded by Regent McKay, the Board granted Revised Conceptual Approval to the University of Arizona for the Highland District Housing project.
Signal Peak: Revised Conceptual Approval and Project Approval (NAU)
Mr. Josh Allen joined the meeting for this discussion. Regent Jewett said Northern Arizona University was requesting Revised Conceptual Approval and Project Approval for the Signal Peak Academic Facility to be located at Central Arizona College. The project received Conceptual Approval at the August 1998 Board meeting at an estimated cost of $4M. The project anticipated $2M in private contributions and $2M in state General Fund appropriations. Private donations have reached $1.5M and General Fund appropriations have been approved in the amount of $800,000. NAU is now requesting Revised Conceptual Approval and Project Approval for a $3M project with the balance of $700,000 being provided with university funds. The project has been reduced in scope by converting the built-out space on the second floor to shell space.
Regent Palacios declared a conflict of interest and did not vote or discuss the matter as her employer donated money to this project. President Lovett explained the importance of moving ahead with this project even though it would be at a reduced level of funding. She said President Cargol had been briefed on the issue and agreed with the necessity of moving forward. Regent Gignac spoke on behalf of the project. She asked what fund the reserves for this project would come from and was told from the plant fund reserves. President Ulrich asked how much money was currently in the plant reserve fund and was told $2.3M.
The Regents congratulated the community for its fund raising and its commitment to education. President Ulrich said he would like the decision on how NAU's $700,000 is put into the project to be reserved until President Cargol comes to campus and has a chance to consider which fund he would like to use. President Lovett said this had been discussed with President Cargol and he understood the issue. However, the money can be spread over two or three years during the construction process. President Ulrich asked for information to be provided to the Board on this schedule and asked NAU to spread the funding as far as possible.
Upon motion of Regent Gignac, seconded by Regent McKay, the Board granted Revised Conceptual Approval and Project Approval to Northern Arizona University to construct an academic building at Central Arizona College, Signal Peak campus.
Approval of Notice of Appointment and Multiple-Year Employment Contract for President Cargol (NAU)
Regent Jewett said the Board was being asked to authorize a Notice of Appointment and multiple-year employment contract for Dr. Owen F. Cargol as President of Northern Arizona University from July 1, 2001, through June 30, 2004.
Upon motion of Regent Jewett, seconded by Regent McKay, the Board authorized the issuance of a Notice of Appointment to Dr. Owen F. Cargol as President of Northern Arizona University in accordance with the terms and conditions as summarized below and that the Board President be
authorized to execute a multiple-year employment contract with Dr. Cargol that incorporates said terms and conditions, subject to approval as to form by Board Counsel.
Dr. Cargol's annual salary will be $180,000 with an annual housing allowance of $46,993. He will have the opportunity to participate in a cash balance defined pension plan equivalent to $32,400 (18% of salary) and the same fringe benefits as all other NAU administrators. He will receive an annual automobile allowance of $8,394 and will be reimbursed for all business-related travel expenses at the rate applicable for all NAU employees. He will receive reimbursement for moving and travel expenses and the contract will include provisions relating to termination of employment, including payment of liquidated damages.
Regent Amos said he believed the search process had been fair, faculty had been included on the committee, and the Board had picked one of the three names the committee forwarded. He said he was surprised to hear the reaction of the faculty during Call to the Audience. He thanked Regent McKay for her work with the search committee.
Mr. Mark Petterson, Provost John Haeger, and Mr. Kurt Davis joined the meeting for this discussion. Regent Jewett said this was a request for the Board to review and accept six audit reports completed by the Central Office's internal audit staff–Special Class Fees (ASU, NAU, and UA), and Admission Processes for Home Schooled and Charter Schooled Students (ASU, NAU, and UA).
Regent Gignac said it was indicated in NAU's response to the Special Class Fees audit that fees not found to be in compliance with Board policy or relevant to today's environment would be terminated. She asked if the response could include repayment to students if they had paid more than they should have for some fees. Mr. Petterson said the audit staff had not quantified the amount of special class fees that could be subject to refund. In the opinion of the audit staff, internal auditors at NAU could determine the amount.
Provost Haeger said NAU has not been handling fees as well as they should have. He said it would be hard to refund fees as only part of the fees were questionable, anywhere from 16% to 80%. He said he was asking for every fee in the institution to be reexamined to be justified and to make sure their uses are legitimate. He will report back to the Board.
In conjunction with the Admission processes for home schooled and charter schooled students, Regent Gignac asked how many home-schooled and charter-school students applied to the universities and how that compared to the number of students coming from public and private high schools. She was told there will be a survey report given next fall. She asked if the numbers could be bench marked against the regular high schools and was told yes. Regent Molera said the Department of Education is putting together, as part of an information system, what happens to students after they leave the Department of Education system. He said it is hard to get information from home-schooled students and from private high schools, but information from charter schools can be tracked against traditional public schools. Regent Gignac said it would be helpful to know how charter school students do or do not succeed as they pass through the university system.
President Ulrich said he would like to see a white paper on how classes are certified for home and charter schools. President Coor said it was a joint endeavor among the three universities.
Upon motion of Regent Jewett, seconded by Regent Gignac, the Board accepted the six audit reports completed by the Central Office's internal audit staff.
Regent Jewett said he would like to answer some comments made at the Call to the Audience in the morning. He had been taught by his father and by the University of Arizona it is important to give back to the community and he had participated in community service all his adult life. The Regents sitting around the table were volunteers like himself and who also valued community service.
Adoption of Proposed Board Meeting Schedule for 2002-2003
Upon motion of Regent McKay, seconded by Regent Palacios, the Board adopted the 2002-2003 Meeting Schedule as follows: August 15 and 16, 2002 - NAU; September 26 and 27, 2002 - ASU; November 21 and 22, 2002 - UofA South; January 23 and 24, 2003 - UA; March 6 and 7, 2003 - ASU; April 24 and 25, 2003 - UA; and June 19 and 20, 2003 - NAU.
Regent Gignac reported the State Board of Directors for Community Colleges (SBDCC) had received information on each of the community college district work force development plans as required by Proposition 301. The presidents and the governing boards of the districts were requested to get together with the state board staff and develop some performance measures and a reporting template for the December report. She said tuition was also set for all the college districts and the SBDCC received a status report on the Arizona Learning System (ALS). She said the areas of infrastructure and funding were proving difficult to resolve for ALS. There has also been a problem with articulation among the campuses.
Regent Gignac reported the Joint Conference Committee met in May and heard an update on transfer articulation between the community colleges and the universities. She said the marketing
plan for the Arizona Transfer Articulation Support System was discussed. She said the community college presidents have agreed to funding ATASS at a higher level.
Dr. Judith Sellers said the Arizona Faculties Council maintained its principles to shared governance and would like to affirm certain shared governance principles with regard to search processes for leadership positions in the universities. They believe the faculty should be recognized as significant stakeholders in the presidential search process and strongly believe the presidential search committee should have significant faculty representation, that a representative group of faculty members on the presidential selection committee should be chosen from the ranks of elected faculty representatives, that these faculty members should have a strong voice in determining the qualifications of the office of president, and that all interviews for presidential candidates be held during the academic year so faculty, students, and staff can fully participate.
Dr. Sellers introduced Dr. Andrew Jackson, who will become the Chair of the Arizona Faculties Council in September. Dr. Jackson said he was looking forward to working with the Regents.
Regent Echeverria thanked everyone for their support during the year. The Regents and members of the Council of Presidents thanked Regent Echeverria for her work this past year and stated they believed she had been a phenomenal student regent. The presidents and the Board presented Regent Echeverria with gifts to remember her year of service as Student Regents. The Regents and members of the Council of Presidents also thanked President Lovett for her work as President of NAU and thanked President Ulrich for his work the past year. Dr. Sellers sent best wishes on behalf of the Arizona Faculties Council to Dr. Lovett.
Regent Stuart commented he had spent two days with faculty at NAU when he first became a Regent and was surprised to hear the comments made during the Call to the Audience.
President Elect McKay presented President Ulrich with leather desk accessories as a gift from the Regents. President Ulrich thanked everyone for their assistance this past year.
Maceo Brown presented gifts on behalf of ASA to Regent Echeverria and President Ulrich for their year of service . He also presented a gavel to President Elect McKay.
The meeting adjourned at 1:05 p.m.
SUBMITTED BY:
____________________________
Judy E. Garza
Secretary to the BoardAPPROVED BY:
______________________________
Donald J. Ulrich, Jr.
President
ATTEST:
__________________________
Chris Herstam
Secretary