BOR Minutes: September 21-23, 2005

System Issues

Academic / Student Affairs Items

Administrative/Budget Items

Staff and Compensation Committee Items

Workforce Development Committee Items

Consent Agenda

COMMITTEE MINUTES

Academic/Student Affairs Committee

Budget and Audit Oversight Committee

Staff and Compensation Committee

ROLL CALL

Roll Call indicated a quorum present

Regents Present: Stephen Barrett, Mike Foster Vice Chair, Lynn Hamilton, Kala French, John Mercer Chair, Mark Semmens, Lila Taylor, and Linda McCulloch ex officio.  Also present was Commissioner Sheila M. Stearns.

Regent Absent: Governor Brian Schweitzer ex officio excused

Representing Governor Brian Schweitzer:  Ms. Jan Lombardi, Education Advisor

APPROVAL OF MINUTES

   Regent Foster moved APPROVAL of the Minutes of the May 10, 2005 Special Meeting in Missoula, MT, the May 18-20, 2005 Regular Meeting in Billings, MT, and the July 14, 2005 Regular Meeting in Great Falls, MT 

  The Minutes were APPROVED unanimously on 7-0 vote.

SYSTEM ISSUES

a.

Roundtable with local members of state legislature and representatives of Governor Schweitzer, Senator Baucus, Senator Burns, Congressman Rehberg

*     Discuss/identify the most important issues, projects, or new ideas for Montana

Sharon Pearson with Senator Burns�s office reported briefly on the appropriations bills.  Chair Mercer asked Ms. Pearson to tell Senator Burns that the Board appreciates all he does, but they are really interested in an opportunity to meet with him as a Board.  He also asked her to let him know that the Board and the Montana University System are ready to help him with any problems he may have.  Randy Vogel with Representative Rehberg�s office said the offer to help is greatly appreciated because the learning curve is steep with turnovers.  Dustin Frost is a new member of their staff, and a recent graduate of UM-Missoula.  Mr. Vogel indicated that Mr. Frost will work a lot with the campuses.  They don�t know what will happen in the near future following the hurricane problems.  The House had passed all of the bills prior to their damage.  Chair Mercer asked Mr. Vogel to invite Representative Rehberg to meet with the Board when he might be in the state.  Rep. Gary Branae, a member of the standing committee for Education said he was encouraged by the emphasis being placed on two-year education.  He indicated that when he was a school counselor one of the problems he had faced was convincing students of the importance of two-year education, and not just four year.  Rep. Branae noted they need to change the mindset in the student community on the value of two-year education.  There needs to be continued and improved collaboration with the PEPB to communicate it to the state.  Sharon Pearson commented that Montana is in a unique position with three congressional people in perfect positions to help the state.  Two are on Appropriations and the third is on Finance.  She indicated this unique position may never happen again.  State Senator Bob Story said that the Montana University System could be helpful in training legislators since the imposition of term limits brings about rapid turnover.  He also said they could help with conflict resolution, and the current school funding issues.  He noted that not having good data is a big problem, and that using a consultant to revise the allocation model without data would be a waste of time.  Senator Story also suggested the Board monitor the interim committees and show up at the meetings to report on what has already been done by the university system.  Alan Peura, Fiscal Analyst gave an update on quality schools and Shared Leadership in action.  See his attached report.

*  MUS coordination and assistance for these efforts

*  Existing process for providing continuity and increased visibility for important initiatives

*  Tracking short- and long-term progress (accountability) toward achieving shared goals

Following a 10-minute break, the Board reconvened at 10:15 a.m.

b.

Montana University System Technology Transfer (Dwyer/McCoy)

 Presentation on how technology transfer is accomplished in Montana

       Example of how university research and innovation supports state businesses and job creation

See attached report    See attached presentation

c.

Presentation of results from the Montana business workforce survey and update on Montana economy (Polzin)

*      Data and conclusions about types of jobs that are available in the State

*      Discuss implications for our postsecondary education system in educating and training the State�s workforce in the short- and long-term.

Mr. Paul Polzin made a presentation to the Board on types of jobs available in the state.  (See attached presentation).  Montana businesses had been reporting difficulties in recruiting, and dissatisfaction with worker skills.  The presentation was based on a questionnaire prepared by the Bureau of Business and Economic Development who then performed interviews across the state.  Mr. Polzin followed this report with another showing the impact of Hurricane Katrina on the Montana economy (see attached presentation).

The Board recessed for lunch at noon, and reconvened at 1:10 p.m.

d.

Set top priorities for the MUS 2010 strategic plan and expectations for when/how action plans will be developed (Foxley)

Dr. Cecelia Foxley gave a brief overview of what had transpired so far in working on the Strategic Plan.  The top priorities had been narrowed down, and it was expected that action plans would be developed by the November Board meeting.

  Regent Hamilton moved ADOPTION of the top three priorities as listed.

Regent Foster suggested challenging the system by identifying seven priorities and asking the campuses to come up with a plan for all seven.  He believes the talent and ability are there and they should  not restrict the priorities to three.  Regent Semmens agreed with Regent Hamilton to work with the top three, but to continue to convey the importance of all items on the list.  Mr. Bill Muse indicated there was a page break and on the following page were two more items that should be considered.  There was considerable debate on what should actually be done at this time, without giving the impression that any item on the list was less important than the three that might be chosen.  Commissioner Stearns indicated the item needed more staff work.  They could structure it in time for the strategic planning meetings with campuses.

  Regent Hamilton WITHDREW her motion.

 END SYSTEM ISSUES

The Board took the following ADMINISTRATIVE BUDGET ITEM out of order

r.

ITEM 128-2804-R0905 - Authorization to Acquire the former BLM Lewistown Field Office at Public Benefit Allowance Discount for Educational Purpose through the U.S. Department of Education; Montana State University-Northern

Ms. Diane Oldenberg and Mr. Kevin Byerly of Lewistown testified on behalf of this item.  There was discussion of the building fee that was expected to cover O&M on the building, but which had been pulled at the start of the meeting.  There was also some concern that the fee was so high.

   Regent Semmens MOVED APPROVAL of Item r. with the condition that the Board subsequently will need to approve the O&M related fee at the November 16-18, 2005 meeting.

  The motion was APPROVED UNANIMOUSLY on 7-0 vote with the noted condition.

a.

Discussion of textbook costs.  A Bookstore for All Seasons    A New Model for Textbook Pricing    Bookstore Blues    Bundled    Textbooks    Passing the Bucks    Ripoff 101    Ripoff    Stay Independent

There had been considerable discussion of this issue in the committee meeting.  The campuses are working to move to electronic books, and course packs.  They want to see a more systematic approach in Montana.  Faculty representative Shannon Taylor said he will make the effort to raise awareness of the market on campus, as well as an awareness of the used book market, and to urge the bookstore managers to encourage the use of Amazon.Com and Half.Com.  They will also encourage faculty to include the ISBN for each book on the syllabus.

b. 

Follow-up on the mental health discussion from the March 2005 meeting.

It was reported that these problems nationwide are greater in number than in the past, and part of the reason is better screening.  The committee wants to continue the discussion.

c.  

Possible discussion on the so-called Matrix 5.

Since the current format is designed for K-12, it does not readily lend itself to the university system.  Deputy Commissioner Roger Barber reported that a new format will be designed and they will return to the Board at a future meeting with a complete report.

d. 

College Preparatory Program Report.    Memo

e. 

Distance Learning Report.   Memo

f.  

Credit by Exam Report.    Memo

g. 

Diversity Report.    Memo

h. 

Quality Report.   MSU-Bozeman    MSU-Billings    MSU Great Falls CoT   UM-Missoula    UM-Western    Montana Tech of UM    UM-Helena CoT

  Items d. through h. were deferred to the November 16-18, 2005 meeting.

i.  

Discussion of the Writing Proficiency Project.    Memo    Attachment

The Committee recommended this item be brought to the Board for action at the November 16-18, 2005 meeting.  Superintendent McCulloch indicated she had come prepared to speak to this item since it was on the Agenda, and she did not know if she was going to be able to attend the November meeting.  She felt the Board should be aware of all sides of this issue.  Chair Mercer indicated that until a new procedure is established, it would be best for her to bring her information to the Committee who would then give the best advice to the Regents at the full meeting.  Regent Semmens indicated he would like to hear Superintendent McCulloch�s testimony today in case she can�t be at the November meeting.  She noted that her letter had been handed around to the Regents, and it covered questions and concerns that needed to be addressed.  She said there is more common ground than not.  Her main issue is student achievement and the issue of barriers.  If a test is used for placement, she has no problem, but if the test prevents entry into the university system, she does have a problem.  Ms. McCulloch said the math proficiency test had been put into effect but she had no idea if it was making any difference or not.  She believes that the writing proficiency test puts the cart before the horse.  She said K-12 is guilty of losing writing skills, and permitting it to happen.  There is less formal writing since students use Blackberry, e-mail and other electronic formats.  She indicated she would appreciate a concerted collaborative effort like the P-20 Committee to work on this skill.  Further, she reported that fewer than 20% of American Indian students are passing the test.  Ms. McCulloch indicated they didn�t need more barriers in Montana, and there will always be students who are not prepared.  However, she said it doesn�t mean they won�t be successful and productive in society.  She urged the Board as they work on their strategic goals and objectives to include increased attainment.  Regent Hamilton indicated they will continue to work with the P-20 committee on this issue.

j. 

Discussion of the admissions program at The University of Montana-Missoula.

k.

Memorandum on grade point average values.

l.

Memorandum on minimum grade policy and its implementation.

m. 

Report on the Montana State University Rural Nursing Partnership in North Central Montana.

n. 

Discussion of the transfer information on the Montana University System web site.  Index   Minimum Grades     Policies

o.

Discussion of  �next steps� in the transfer arena.

p. 

Discussion of possible activities for the Academic & Student Affairs Committee.

  Items k. through p. were deferred until the November 16-18, 2005 meeting

q. 

ITEM 128-101-R0905:  An Assessment Plan for the Transfer Audit Policies.  Attachment 1    Attachment 2    Attachment 3    Attachment 4    Attachment 5    Attachment 6

r.

ITEM128-102-R0905:  Revision of Board of Regents� Policy 209.2, Coordinator of Community Colleges.    Attachment

   Regent Hamilton MOVED approval of items q. and r.

  The motion was APPROVED unanimously on 7-0 vote.

s.

ITEM128-104-R0905:  Faculty Appeal

   Regent Hamilton MOVED that the Board not hear this appeal, and to uphold the decision of the Commissioner.

  The motion was APPROVED unanimously on 7-0 vote.

t.

ITEM128-105-R0905:  Student Appeal � CONFIDENTIAL

  Regent Hamilton MOVED that the Board not hear this appeal, and to uphold the decision of the Commissioner.

 The motion was APPROVED on 5-2 vote with Regents Foster and Mercer dissenting.

u.

 Level I memorandum.

Deputy Commissioner Barber noted a correction to one item in the Level I memorandum.  Please see the MSU-Great Falls Lazarus item online.

 Level II Action Items.

v.

ITEM 128-2003-R0705: Pre-Medical Certificate, Montana State University-Bozeman.    Request    Summary     Proposal    Budget

w.

ITEM 128-2004-R0705:  Master of Science degree in Ecological and Environmental Statistics, Montana State University-Bozeman.  Request    Summary    Proposal    Budget

x.

ITEM 128-2005-R0705:  Humanities Institute, Montana State University-Bozeman.   Request    Proposal    Budget

y.

ITEM 128-2801-R0705:  Associate of Applied Science degree in Electrical Technology, Montana State University-Northern.    Request     Summary     Proposal     Budget    Appendix 1    Appendix 2

z.

ITEM 128-1001-R0705:  Minor in Central and Southwest Asian Studies, The University of Montana-Missoula.    Request   Summary    Proposal

aa. 

ITEM 128-1002-R0705:  Paleontology Center on campus and field station in Glasgow area, The University of Montana-Missoula.    Request    Summary    Proposal    Budget

bb. 

ITEM 128-1501-R0705:  Master of Science degree in Interdisciplinary Studies, Montana Tech of The University of Montana-Missoula.    Request    Summary    Proposal    Budget

cc.

ITEM 128-1505-R0705:  Revised mission statement, Montana Tech of The University of Montana.    Request    Vision

dd.

ITEM 128-1506-R0705:  Conversion of option in Medical Assistant to an Associate of Applied Science degree in Medical Assistant, Montana Tech of The University of Montana.    Summary    Proposal    Budget

  Regent Hamilton moved APPROVAL of items v. through dd.

Regent Foster indicated he saw duplication in some of the proposed programs, and that there should be an explanation to the Board.  He asked how many graduates it takes for a program to pay for itself, what the economic development impact was of each proposal, and if they were duplicative, he requested an explanation.  Regent Barrett agreed completely, and believes the burden should be on those requesting the programs.  Regent Hamilton noted there is a section in the form that speaks to other programs in the system.  Deputy Commissioner Barber indicated the campuses are creative in defining the word duplication.  Regent Hamilton said the campuses are good about working together.  One problem is that the agendas are very heavy, and she fears they might be shortsighted in their discussions.  Chair Mercer again issued a challenge to find a solution for wading through all these documents.  He suggested possibly having graduate students review for duplication, but added they need to have the justification in writing.  Deputy Commissioner Barber referred to page 258 in the materials which displayed a clear description of the question.  He said it could be expanded to include the issues of collaboration.  Regent Barrett noted that without the necessary information, there is mission creep all around.  He indicated that if the campuses don�t complete all the information, they are not to bring the items to the Board.  Regent Hamilton said the Board needs to take the responsibility to question duplications, and then their responsibility is not to approve the problem proposal.  She said the campuses make good arguments, but the call is the Board�s.

  Motion APPROVED unanimously on 7-0 vote.

ff.

Letter from Montana State University-Billings concerning possible new nursing program in that city.

Regent Barrett indicated that the bottleneck in health care is the number of clinical slots available, not the number of programs available.

gg.

Level II items on submission at this meeting.

There were no questions on this item.

END ACADEMIC / STUDENT AFFAIRS ITEMS

The issue of speech pathology was assigned to the Workforce Development Committee for research, and Tuition Policy was assigned to the Budget and Audit Oversight Committee for review.

Return to Top

WORKFORCE DEVELOPMENT ITEMS

  Item b. was deferred to the November 16-18, 2005 meeting to permit more work by staff.

  Items c. through f. were discussed in Committee.

END WORKFORCE DEVELOPMENT ITEMS

    Regent Mike Foster indicated he will place the issues raised by the presentation from Paul Polzin on the November committee agenda and they will work to address them.  He noted that Regent Hamilton had mentioned they now have the information from the business sector.  They now need to focus on the government sector and asked that Paul Polzin follow through on it.

    Commissioner Stearns introduced Mick Robinson, the new Associate Commissioner for Fiscal Affairs, and Harry Freebourn financial manager for OCHE.  She thanked Pam Joehler for filling the Associate Commissioner position for the past five months.  She also acknowledged the assistance provided by Mark Bruno from the Governor�s office over the last several months

Return to Top

ADMINISTRATIVE/BUDGET ITEMS

   Regent Semmens MOVED APPROVAL of Item a.

  The motion was APPROVED unanimously on 7-0 vote.

   Regent Semmens MOVED APPROVAL of Item b.

  The motion was APPROVED unanimously on 7-0 vote.

There was discussion of the desired scope of the revised allocation model, with reservations being voiced about including the structural issue.  Regent Semmens said it was important to consider tuition and fees in the model, and the impact they will have on families.  The impact must be understood, so they need to consider tuition and fee policy, the market rate for distance education, mandatory fees, and what goes into tuition.  Regent Hamilton asked if it was typical not to include all sources of revenue in a business.  Regent Semmens indicated they are trying to consider all sources.  Chair Mercer noted that when the scope is broadened the issue becomes very complicated.  The real issue is how the state dollars are divided.  He believes the institutions receiving the money now are the best people to provide ideas on how it should be divided.  He recommended that rather than having the Commissioner do this, he would like to see the eight units produce their ideas.  Chair Mercer said he would like to see a simple model tied to base budgets.  Regent Semmens asked if the scope should include state funds, tuition and fees, and Chair Mercer indicated yes.

   Regent Semmens MOVED APPROVAL to authorize the Office of the Commissioner to put out an RFP for a consultant with the campuses to provide the funding in an amount up to $30,000.

 The motion was APPROVED on 5-2 vote with Regents Foster and Mercer dissenting

Following a 10-minute break the Board reconvened at 4:30 p.m.

Regent Semmens said the Board needed to give guidance to staff and the consultant on what they want to achieve.  They will need to know if differential tuition, need based aid at the system level, base funding, incentives and rewards for behaviors aligned with strategic planning, and being enrollment driven are important.  Commissioner Stearns indicated there should be a preliminary list ready for the Campus Advisory Group meeting on October 20.

   Regent Semmens MOVED APPROVAL of Item e.

  The motion was APPROVED UNANIMOUSLY on 7-0 vote

  Regent Semmens MOVED APPROVAL of Item f.

Regent Foster asked what this item was all about.  President Gamble indicated that by statute the Board appoints members to the Council every two years.  Regent Foster asked if the Board was supposed to appoint members, why they did not see the applications.  He asked how they could approve something they had not seen.  Chair Mercer said Regent Foster could vote no today, and then examine if the members should be appointed by the Board, or if they could go to the next legislative session and change the statute.

  The motion was APPROVED on 5-2 vote with Regents Foster and Taylor dissenting.

   Regent Semmens MOVED APPROVAL of Item g.

  The motion was APPROVED UNANIMOUSLY on 7-0 vote.

   Regent Semmens MOVED APPROVAL of Items h. and i.

  The motion was APPROVED UNANIMOUSLY on 7-0 vote.

   Regent Semmens MOVED APPROVAL of Item j. removing the words �unrestricted funds.� 

  The motion was APPROVED UNANIMOUSLY as amended on 7-0 vote.

   Regent Semmens MOVED APPROVAL of Item k. removing the words �unrestricted funds.� 

  The motion was APPROVED UNANIMOUSLY as amended on 7-0 vote.

  Item l. was deferred to the November 16-18, 2005 meeting.

   Regent Semmens MOVED APPROVAL of Item m.

  The motion was APPROVED UNANIMOUSLY on 7-0 vote.

   Regent Semmens MOVED APPROVAL of Item n.

  The motion was APPROVED UNANIMOUSLY on 7-0 vote.

   Regent Semmens MOVED APPROVAL of Item o.

  The motion was APPROVED UNANIMOUSLY on 7-0 vote.

   Regent Semmens MOVED APPROVAL of Item p.

  The motion was APPROVED UNANIMOUSLY on 7-0 vote.

  Due to the high cost of this 6.1 acre property at $250,000 per acre, it was decided to present item q. as information only at this meeting.  It will be brought back to the Board at the November 16-18, 2005 meeting.

Chair Mercer asked Chancellor Sexton to report at the November meeting what he would be able to buy somewhere else for the same price, and why it was so critical to build next door at this price.  He also wanted to know why they should spend this amount when they could purchase something bigger for less.  Chancellor Sexton indicated he would also bring an aerial photo to the meeting to show what is happening at the west end of Billings.

   Regent Semmens MOVED APPROVAL of Item s.

  The motion was APPROVED on 6-1 vote with Regent Hamilton dissenting.

The meeting recessed at 5:15 p.m.

FRIDAY, September 23, 2005

The full Board reconvened at 8:45 a.m.

Mr. Dan Carter announced that today was Native American Heritage Day in Montana.

  Chair Mercer asked that the Resolution on American Indian Heritage Day be approved and entered into the record.

 The motion was APPROVED unanimously on 7-0 vote.

STUDENT REPORTS

See attached reports

END STUDENT REPORTS

ADMINISTRATIVE / BUDGET ITEMS continued

Regent Semmens indicated these were the same budgets which the Board had seen in May, with a weather normalization factor added to the utility surcharge at Bozeman.  Additionally, the Office of the Commissioner of Higher Education will add an annual percentage change column to any budget tables in future Executive Summaries.

   Regent Semmens MOVED APPROVAL of Item t. with the noted amendment.

  The motion was APPROVED unanimously on 7-0 vote as amended.

President Dennison made a PowerPoint presentation on MPACT, and asked for approval of the Board to pursue a pilot program to help cut the costs for students.  The other campus CEOs expressed interest in the project.  Regent French said this program makes the difference to a student working 40 to 60 hours a week and having little time for academics, to be able to work 20 hours a week and concentrate on academics.

   Regent French MOVED APPROVAL for The University of Montana-Missoula to run MPACT as a pilot.

  The motion was APPROVED unanimously on 7-0 vote.

Following a 10-minute break, the meeting reconvened at 10:45 a.m.

Although there was discussion of changing the dates of the March meeting by one day, it was decided to leave it as scheduled for March 1-3, 2006.

Associate Commissioner Dave Gibson presented an updated format for strategic planning, and noted the campuses should come to the November 16-18, 2005 meeting with their suggestions for action items.  It was agreed by the CEOs that the November timetable was fine, and the priorities also were fine although they would not necessarily apply to every campus.

   Regent Barrett MOVED approval of the format and timeline.

  The motion was APPROVED unanimously on 7-0 vote.

Staff and Compensation Items

Salary Issues

b.

ITEM 128-114-R0905 - Proposed Policy Setting Salaries for the Commissioner of Higher Education, Presidents and Chancellors    Attachment

   Chair Mercer MOVED approval of item b.

There was a thorough discussion of the purpose, pros and cons of this item.  Although there was disagreement on the approach to solving the problems, it was agreed that something needed to be done.  Chair Mercer reminded the Board that they would be able to make changes to the policy in the future if it appears to be needed.

  The motion was APPROVED on a 4-3 role call vote with Regents Hamilton, Semmens and Taylor dissenting.

c.

d.

ITEM 126-108-R0305 - Amend Policy 711.2 - Criteria for Board of Regents Contract; Non-faculty Personnel   Attachment

  Items c., d., and e. were deferred to the November 16-18, 2005 meeting to allow time for additional work

f.

Staff item reporting format

  It was agreed that the campuses will continue to use the current format for staff items until decisions have been made on the previous three items.

Staff Items:

a.

a.

a.

   Regent Barrett moved APPROVAL of  the Consent Agenda.

  Motion APPROVED unanimously on 7-0 vote

PUBLIC COMMENT

Ms. Ellen Swaney presented the Regents with a list of Resolutions on behalf of Ms. Carol Juneau.

END PUBLIC COMMENT

Return to Top

With no further business to come before the Board, the meeting adjourned at 11:55 a.m.

MINUTES OF THE COMMITTEE MEETINGS

WEDNESDAY, September 21, 2005

Budget and Audit Oversight Committee

Committee Members Present: Regent Mark Semmens Chair, Regent John Mercer, and Regent Lila Taylor

Others Present:      Agricultural Dean, Alan Peura, Bill Muse, Bob Duringer, Cathy Swift, Chancellor Alex Capdeville, Chancellor Frank Gilmore, Chancellor Ron Sexton, Chuck Jensen, Commissioner Sheila Stearns, Craig Roloff, Dan Bingham, Dan Carter, Darrel Hammon, Dave Gibson, Dean Mary Moe, Dick Storey, Harry Freebourn, Kevin McRae, Lynn Hamilton, Maggie Peterson, Mark Bruno, Mark Sheehan, Mary Ellen Baukol, Mick Robinson, Mike Foster, Pam Joehler, President Geoff Gamble, President George Dennison, President Jane Karas, Ralph Lenhart, Rolf Groseth, Susan Briggs, Terri Iverson, Theresa Branch, and Tom McCoy.

Regent Semmens introduced Mick Robinson the new Associate Commissioner for Fiscal Affairs

Bruce White and George Schutzer of Pacific Life joined the meeting via conference call to answer questions of the Board.  Peter Roberts, of College Savings Bank, FESP's contracted manager attended in person.  Karen Wing of the MGSLP has taken over from Rod Sundsted as OCHE's director of the FESP.  In her absence, Pam Joehler introduced Peters, White and Schutzer, who explained the revisions to the board policy.  The changes in policy are necessary to bring the program into compliance with changes in state law and federal SEC rules. The Board of Regents is now the trustee and administrator of the participating trusts, each of which corresponds to a "program," or savings account.  The changes in the law increase the Board's potential liability and create the need for slightly different rules.  The name of the trust must also be changed.  New offering documents will be sent to the investors, who will be automatically changed over to the new trust.  Pacific Life will clearly explain to account holders that the state has become the trustee.  The changes unfortunately add a regulatory burden with no extra protection to the consumers.

  Regent Mercer moved the committee recommend adoption of item a. 

Ms. Pam Joehler noted that her memo addressed three things - Study scope, Timeframe/Procedures, and Policy issues.  The model allocates state funds only, which account for only 39% of the operating budgets.  The Board had informally recognized that tuition should be a part of the allocation model.  Ms. Joehler recommended obtaining an outside consultant to help staff through the process of rebuilding the model.  This needs approval of the Board to proceed with the study, and to obtain a consultant�s services, as well as identifying where the funding will be found.  It will take at least two months to get the consultant which means they won�t be able to start until January 2006, or possibly summer.  Ms. Joehler indicated there is a lot of concern about the breadth of the study.  Regent Mercer said the concern is that this has been looming, and everyone hopes it continues to loom, but it must be done.  He noted they needed something in the model beyond state funds.  He recommended that rather than using an outside consultant, he would prefer to have the campuses present the best models they can develop, and whichever campus wins receives the funds that would have been paid to the consultant.  The models would be submitted directly to OCHE with no review by the CEOs.  The recommendations would be worked on by staff and the Budget committee.  Regent Mercer wants to see an allocation model that establishes a system of survival of the fittest, which would justify the importance of a campus to students, taxpayers, and local residents.  When a shortfall occurs, it would be up to the students, communities, or the legislature to decide whether they want to continue to fund that campus.  Regent Mercer believes that is the direction they are going, and fears that if they play around with the allocation model it will simply mask the differences and eventually the entire system will collapse.  Chair Semmens indicated they do need to look at the allocation model.  It has been eleven years since it was set up, and it needs more than tweaking.  He also believes that talking about survival leaves a bad impression.  Chair Semmens didn�t think the theory was to throw everything into a pool and then allocate it.  However, he indicated they would be fooling themselves if they were to create the allocation model and then wait to see what happens to tuition at the campuses.  He believes the Board must consider the resources available to certain campuses, and not to others.  They must also consider tuition and fee policies when working on the allocation model, and he favored using an outside consultant.  Chair Semmens indicated they can�t help but get insular when working only on the inside.  He believes the time frame is aggressive, but it is necessary to get it moving.  He suggested they have key elements of the model at the May meeting, and they need to make a good faith effort to be ready for the FY08-09 budgets.  If there are meaningful revisions, they will need to be phased in over a number of years due to the shock factor to students and families.  Regent Foster indicated that one factor is the structure of the system, and it needs to be included in the analysis.  Ms. Joehler said she envisioned two groups working.  One would be a policy group with the Regents, legislators, budget office, and an external person that would work with the consultant on policy issues.  The other would be a staff working-group with the consultant to do number crunching and research.  Chair Semmens asked if there was other feedback, and Regent Mercer indicated he would like to hear from the CEOs, and then Mick Robinson and Sheila Stearns.

Chancellor Gilmore said he believes that Montana Tech could compete with anyone with the freedom to do so.  However, the Board set the model but didn�t follow it.  Tuition at Montana Tech would have been about $1000 a year more than anyone else in the state.  Campuses are not free to go to the legislature and present their cases.  He indicated he liked the idea of a prize, but believed the proposal would never be accepted, so he preferred to use a consultant.

President Gamble said the whole process had expanded.

President Dennison stated that the narrower the scope the better.  If the structure of the system is to be reviewed, it should be done separately, as well as the financial aid.  The Board has said they want to get to differential tuition.  President Dennison said they will use whatever funds the state gives, allocate them around and then raise tuition to meet the needs.  He said they need to know what the Board wants the state funds to do as the foundation.  He believes if they go to another approach, five years from now they will find that didn�t work either.  He asked what percent of the cost of education should be tuition.

Chancellor Capdeville indicated their concern is to know if the Board wants to set up base funding to sustain both Northern and Western.  He also believes the model should deal with the entire system, instead of two models for the two sides of the system.

Chancellor Sexton recognized the tremendous change that has already taken place, and that there is still change ahead on how they will sustain education.  With demographics, shifting priorities, and the federal level impact the model needs to change significantly.  However, they need to have the tools to make it work.  Chancellor Sexton indicated one hindrance in moving ahead is having policies that enable the campuses to be accountable, while they still don�t have policies that reflect what makes different institutions compete.  He said they can�t have the same strategies for all campuses.  He asked why there had to be a set non-resident tuition.  Chancellor Sexton suggested the smaller campuses might look at non-residents differently than the main campuses to balance their funding.

Dean Moe asked that they take time to do it right.  She said they need to give more attention to the interdependence of the campuses and how they help each other, as well as distance education, and the relationship with the other half of the system and K-12.  Dean Moe would rather do a global look and make it meaningful, even if it takes longer.

Dean Bingham said this is a recurring conversation in other states.  He has seen many consultants, and still individuals in the system will come up with the model.  Dean Bingham believes there are people in the system who know what is happening in the country, and believes tapping that resource is important.  He is concerned that it is a David and Goliath model.  His campus is dependent on other campuses around the state.  He is opposed to looking at every student as a revenue stream rather than someone looking for an education.

Chancellor Storey indicated he is worried about K-12.  He also has had mixed experiences with consultants.

Associate Commissioner for Fiscal Affairs Mick Robinson noted that timing is the first priority since it is directly related to legislative funding.  This is the only window of opportunity that exists to do some planning and change in the model.  It is an aggressive timetable to be ready by May, but they might be able to do it in unison with the budget office.  However, it could slip into fall.  It will be necessary to narrow the spectrum and not include the structure, some of the terms and scopes, and some of the individual requests.  Mr. Robinson indicated that he wants to approach it from the system perspective, with significant priorities being set by the Board.  This meeting, with initiatives and the strategic planning process, are key to moving into developing the budget and the allocation model.  A consultant would be very important to meet the tight time frame.  Staff has the expertise to put into the process, but the consultant would move the process and refine the proposal for the Board.  Mr. Robinson reiterated the need for a phase-in, as there may be significant changes in the model.

Commissioner Stearns said an intriguing notion would be to supplement the consultant with proposals from the campuses.  It would give him a faster start.  Although the different campuses might be a little biased, or leave something out, the Budget Committee would derive from the proposals the needs of the entire system.  She said there are many resources on the campuses, and people are ready to start.  These could be done on parallel tracks, with the campuses submitting with or without competition, then giving credit to the campuses for creativity.  They should start immediately, and at the same time a consultant should be recruited.  Commissioner Stearns believes this plan may scale back the time needed for the consultant.

Chair Semmens wondered what the function of the Board would be since input indicated the campuses wanted the Board to tell them what they want.  He believes the Board should identify the problems, and the cost of the allocation.  However, the ability to find solutions will be found with the bright people in the system.  He told staff that rather than asking what he wanted, they should be telling him what he wants, such as a certain base level.  He indicated that President Dennison made sense when he asked what they wanted to buy with the check the state writes.  Regent Hamilton noted they had spent a considerable amount of time on economic development, and one of the best ways to make it work is to turn out well-educated students.  She reminded the Board that about three years ago they had given guidelines to the campuses, with some flexibility, on tuition.  In discussion with K-12, one of the broader policies was access to education, and it was recommended it should not be competition but a shared goal.  It costs more in some places to provide education.  Regent Hamilton said the Board needed to encourage more entrepreneurial ways to generate revenue, although some sites have greater opportunities to do that than others.  She noted that when the Board first began discussing a change to the allocation model, the state was contributing a little over 50%, but now it is down to 39%.  Regent Foster thought perhaps some revenues could be created from ideas similar to the contracts for athletics.  On the structure issue, it struck him that if it is not included and they go down the road and find the model works well, they may then find that the structure is wrong and they will need to start again.  Chair Semmens indicated it would be necessary to have any questions to the Board early on.  He indicated differential tuition is important.  In reference to the three areas of Ms. Joehler�s memo the scope should not be too broad, the consultant will be discussed tomorrow, and on time and procedure, core issues should be resolved by the May, 2006 meeting.

  Item d. will be taken to the full Board.

The committee meeting adjourned for lunch at 12:00 p.m.

The committee meeting reconvened at 1:00 p.m.

It was noted that funding will be from non-state funds, indirects and endowment funds.

  Item m. will be taken to the full Board.

Mark Bruno gave a brief overview of the operating budgets.  Chair Semmens requested comment from MSU-Northern on their portion of the Negative Fund Balance, which he considered alarming.  Chancellor Capdeville noted that $300,000 was due to a decrease in enrollment last year.  They ended the year with a deficit of $599,000, and they did not eliminate O&M to relieve the deficit.  They plan over the next two years to put $150,000 per year into the deficit to correct it.  Chancellor Capdeville reported they do not want to derail the goal of facing the O&M which had historically balanced the budget by being postponed.  He indicated that auxiliaries are also a historical problem and they continue to be a problem at Northern.  Five years ago there were fewer than 9 students living on campus, and today there are more than 150.  There are commitments from athletes, and across campus and all five floors in Morgan Hall are open following many years with three floors being closed.  The campus is focusing on campus life to bring in more students.  Chancellor Capdeville indicated they needed a certain number on campus to cover the auxiliaries, and they anticipate lowering that portion of the deficit by $60,000 next year.  Regent Mercer asked if there are other areas on campus that are covering for the deficits.  Chancellor Capdeville indicated that with all the funds rolled together, that was true.  He noted that when he arrived on campus, together with Chuck Jensen he discovered quite a bit of this problem in several accounts, and they have been straightforward in reporting them.  Regent Mercer asked if these were real or perceived problems in the accounts, and if there is an indication of some serious financial problem for Northern.  Chancellor Capdeville said they have made progress on their deficit funds.  Craig Roloff said that in the case of the auxiliaries, Northern struggles with having inherited O&M problems that were never addressed.  Something is always breaking down, which affects costs and the popularity of the residence halls.  He noted that MSU-Bozeman has helped them several times, and they view these as serious problems that must be resolved.  They will have a team meeting with members from Bozeman and Northern at the end of this meeting to discuss the next steps to be taken.  Chancellor Capdeville indicated they are trying to sustain the institution and now have students living on campus to cover the auxiliaries.  Cutting programs will create a downward spiral.  They have made significant strides in the deferred maintenance issues.  Chair Semmens said he thought the Board had a policy requiring a deficit reduction plan be submitted with the deficit reports.  He said the key is to develop achievable and effective plans to deal with the issues quickly.  He believed the comfort level of the Board would be higher with that plan on hand.  Commissioner Stearns reported that Pam Joehler did have the plan.  She also concurred that this is a big problem and said that she and President Gamble have had numerous discussions on the problem.

On the issue of the utility surcharge, Chair Semmens noted a dramatic difference in cost increases between UM-Missoula and MSU-Bozeman.  It was explained that underlying factors were the difference in square footage, and the greater number of cold days in Bozeman.  Craig Roloff indicated a big difference was that in last year�s budget they only showed the state funds that went to utilities, rather than all they expected from other sources.  He noted there is a considerable sum in reserves earmarked for utilities.  They gave up on that approach, and in this budget they have shown the total cost expected.  Included is a 10% normalization factor since last winter was warmer than normal.  Regent Mercer indicated the Board would like to have this information presented so that it makes more sense.

END OF FISCAL YEAR REPORT ON THE BUDGET STATUS

Mark Bruno reported that the Governor�s Budget Office wanted to know what is going on in the research component, but the report consists of only one line.  They would like more detail.  He asked if there was a true policy covering what comes before the Board for the budgets.  Pam Joehler noted that the actual enrollment numbers will need to be watched closely.  Mick Robinson told the Board he would look at additional ways to present the deficit fund report to make it more understandable, and will look at the items brought to the Board by his staff, and what is brought by the campuses.  The campuses gave brief overviews of their own budgets.

  A correction was made to Item 128-2000-R0905 increasing President Gamble�s salary from $144,486 to $149,543.

The Committee adjourned at 4:10 p.m.

DRAFT Minutes

The Academic & Student Affairs Committee

Regent Lynn Hamilton, chair of the Academic & Student Affairs Committee, called the meeting to order at 1:00 p.m. and introduced the other voting members of the committee, Regents French and Foster.  Regent Barrett, the fourth member of the committee, was excused.

Regent Hamilton noted that this is an open meeting, invited everyone to join the Committee at the table, and asked everyone to feel free to make comments as the agenda proceeds.  There is a time at the end of the meeting for public comment on non-agenda items, she said.

Roll Call 

Regent Hamilton asked guests to identify themselves, and circulated a sign in sheet.

Review and Adoption of Agenda

Approval of Minutes

From the May 18, 2005 meeting of the Committee.

Regent Foster moved to approve the minutes.  Motion carried.

III.  Portion of the Meeting Devoted to Chief Academic Officers.

A.  Discussion of textbook costs, with special attention to strategies used by college bookstores to hold prices down.

A Bookstore for All Seasons    A New Model for Textbook Pricing    Bookstore Blues    Bundled    Textbooks    Passing the Bucks    Ripoff 101    Ripoff    Stay Independent

Bookstore managers and other staff from both UM and MSU campuses were in attendance.  Some bookstores operate as separate 501(c)3 organizations and others are operated by the campuses.  All face increasing textbook costs and all are trying to reduce those costs in a variety of ways.  Some of the Increased costs are due to �bundling� (inclusion of software, online tutoring, test banks etc. with the books), as well as publishers� need to recoup all of their costs in the first two semesters after publication of a title.

Bryan Thornton, Bookstore manager at UM-Missoula, says they are exploring with publishers the idea of separating intellectual property from the actual textbook.  Students would pay for the intellectual property when they register and could then choose the delivery system�the web, a memory stick etc.  If the bookstore guaranteed the return on investment to the publisher, they could spread the costs over six semesters instead of two and students could share the costs more equitably. 

Other ways that bookstores are trying to control costs is by asking publishers to sell the back stock of new books for used book prices (�new for used�) and by aggressively competing for used books.

Mark Frisby, MSU-Bozeman Bookstore general manager, said that member stores of the Independent College Bookstore Association collaborate nationwide for used books and buybacks.  The MSU-Bozeman Bookstore also discounts new books�their students pay less than any in the country�because as a 501(c)3 they have to distribute their profits.

A question was raised regarding the use of course packs.  Faculty enjoy the flexibility of choosing the best materials for their courses, and it used to be an inexpensive way of distributing a variety of material.  However, since they replace textbooks, in recent years publishers have raised the royalties for materials used in course packs, increasing the price.

Another question was asked regarding whether there is a policy regarding faculty assigning their own texts for a course.  There is no policy, but in practice, faculty don�t accept royalties or other financial gain when they assign their own texts. 

Regent French commented that UM-Missoula is the only campus in the country with links to the Amazon website, allowing students to compare prices.  In fact, she said, some bookstores protect the ISBN number of textbooks to make it more difficult for students to comparison shop.  Regent French asked about ways to help students identify ISBN numbers so that they can look for the best price for their textbooks.  She also wondered if there should be a cap on the amount of money students are required to spend for textbooks per course.  What can the bookstores do without having to set policy?

Bryan Thornton said that bookstore staff can help faculty by making sure that they are aware of price when selecting texts.  Although price shouldn�t be the determining factor, faculty should at least be aware of the cost to students.  Jeni Luft from the Montana Tech bookstore said that sometimes they reduce the markup on the highest priced textbooks to make them more affordable.

The conversation regarding textbook costs will continue at the next meeting.  Regent Hamilton encouraged students and Regents to send additional questions to Roger Barber.  He will try to come to the November meeting with answers from the bookstore folks.

B.      Follow-Up on the mental health discussion from the March 2005 meeting. 

Jim Mitchell, director of student health services at MSU-Bozeman, and Dave Bell, director of student health services at UM-Missoula, were in attendance to discuss the increase in the number and severity of mental health issues on campuses system-wide.

Dave Bell sees this as a campus issue, not just a student problem or a health center problem.  It impacts retention, residence hall life, and student performance and has the potential to create public relations and liability issues.  UM-Missoula is increasing their recognition and referral educational efforts for parents and faculty, and expanding their psychiatric coverage.

Jim Mitchell said that counseling centers were originally established to provide counseling for �normal developmental issues� such as adjusting to independent living and career counseling.  Now most of their resources are used to provide services to students with depression, post-traumatic stress disorder, eating disorders and other mental illnesses.  They are also trying to �extend the safety net� by training people to recognize and refer, and they recently hired a .5 FTE staff psychiatrist to accommodate the increased need for services.

Regent Foster asked how the smaller campuses are providing these kinds of services.  Small campuses work closely with the community mental health services to supplement what the campus staff can do, including awareness programs.

There was some discussion regarding the campuses� responsibility for providing reasonable accommodation under the Americans with Disabilities Act, and how that relates to students with a mental illness.  Another issue is the impact campus policies regarding substance use/abuse have on mental health issues.  Regent Hamilton would like to continue this discussion in the future.

C.            Possible Discussion on Matrix 5.

Regent French asked to see the �holes� filled in by the November meeting.  Roger said that the concern is that the matrix needs to be reworked to accommodate the realities of higher education.  He hopes to present the revised matrix at the November meeting.

Portion of the Meeting Devoted to Topics of Concern to Both Academic & Student Affairs Officers

Reports

1.             College Preparatory Program Report.    Memo

2.             Distance Learning Report.   Memo

3.             Credit by Exam Report.    Memo

4.             Diversity Report.    Memo

5.             Quality Report.   MSU-Bozeman    MSU-Billings    MSU Great Falls CoT

         UM-Missoula    UM-Western    Montana Tech of UM    UM-Helena CoT

Items 1-5 were deferred to the November meeting.

Informational Items

Discussion of the Writing Proficiency Project   Memo    Attachment

Jan Clinard gave a brief history of the project and distributed some additional materials.  Kathy Holt, a member of the Writing Proficiency Steering Committee, and John Moore, Shepherd High School English teacher, spoke in favor of the Writing Proficiency Project, noting that it helps set clear expectations for students, parents, high school English teachers and college professors.  Students need to be able to write to be successful in college, and the test can be used as an assessment tool that students can use to identify weaknesses as juniors and make improvements in the senior year, before starting college.

The proposed policy presents a number of ways for students to demonstrate proficiency, begins with a phase-in stage at less than proficient, allows for provisional admissions, and allows campuses to exempt up to 15% of first-time, full-time undergraduates for students with special talents, minorities and others who demonstrate special needs.

Bud Williams and Linda Peterson from the Office of Public Instruction were in attendance to present the Superintendent of Public Instruction�s position statement in opposition to the adoption of a writing proficiency requirement for admission to Montana�s four-year programs.

Regent Foster asked how the proposed writing proficiency requirement relates to two-year education.  Roger responded that, similar to the mathematics proficiency requirement already in place, the writing proficiency requirement would apply only to four-year programs on MUS campuses.

Regent Hamilton said that it is important to respect the work of the Writing Proficiency Steering Committee, but that we must also be sensitive to concerns of the K-12 community.  As a Board of Education, there needs to be a larger discussion about how to help students succeed in college and in the workplace.  Comments and questions should be directed to Regent Hamilton or Dr. Clinard.

Discussion of the admissions program at UM-Missoula

UM-Missoula has implemented an internal gating process to help direct students toward the area of most likely success.  In Phase I of the program, the campus established �provisional admissions� under the 15% exemption rule.  Now in Phase II, they are finding that students are less likely to succeed when they have been admitted on a provisional basis.  Phase III, steering some students toward the College of Technology, will be implemented in Fall 2007.  The final phase, Phase IV, is scheduled for implementation in Fall 2009, and will complete the move toward a more carefully selected student body in the four-year programs.

Provost Muir wanted the Board of Regents to be aware of the program because it redirects students who meet the criteria for admission to a four-year program if it is determined that the student has an increased chance of success at the College of Technology.  She asked for the Regents� blessing on the program.

1. Memorandum on grade point average values

2. Memorandum on minimum grade policy and its implementation

3. Report on the MSU Rural Nursing Partnership in North Central Montana

4. Discussion of the transfer information on the MUS web site    Index   Minimum Grades     Policies

5. Discussion of �next steps� in the transfer arena

6. Discussion of possible activities for the Academic & Student Affairs Committee

Items 3-8 were deferred to the November meeting.

Action Items

1. Action: Action:ITEM 128-101-R0905:  An Assessment Plan for the Transfer Audit Policies.  Attachment 1    Attachment 2    Attachment 3    Attachment 4    Attachment 5    Attachment 6

Regent French moved to forward this item to the full Board.  Motion carried.

1. Action: ITEM128-102-R0905:  Revision of Board of Regents� Policy 209.2, Coordinator of Community Colleges.    Attachment

Regent Foster moved to forward this item to the full Board.  Motion carried.

1. Action: ITEM 128-104-R0905, Faculty Appeal

2. Action: ITEM 128-105-R0905, Student Appeal

It was moved and carried that items 3 and 4 be forwarded to the full Board.

Portion of the Meeting Devoted to Topics of Concern to Academic Affairs Officers.

Level I memorandum

MSU-Great Falls made a correction to the Lazarus Action on the Level I Memo, to read as follows:

    MSU-Great Falls wishes to remove the moratorium it placed on its Physical Therapy Assistant Program in November of 2003.  MSU-Great Falls placed the program in moratorium because the institution was unable to hire a Program Director that met the criteria stipulated by the program's accrediting agency the Commission on Accreditation in Physical Therapy Education (CAPTA).  CAPTA has been consulted regarding the restoration of the program�s accreditation upon receipt of a written request and payment of back fees.

Level II Items.

1.    Action:  ITEM 128-2003-R0705: Pre-Medical Certificate, Montana State University-Bozeman.     Request    Summary     Proposal    Budget

2.       Action:  ITEM 128-2004-R0705:  Master of Science degree in Ecological and Environmental Statistics, Montana State University-Bozeman.  Request    Summary    Proposal    Budget

3.       Action:  ITEM 128-2005-R0705:  Humanities Institute, Montana State University-Bozeman.    Request    Proposal    Budget

4.       Action:  ITEM 128-2801-R0705:  Associate of Applied Science degree in Electrical Technology, Montana State University-Northern.    Request     Summary     Proposal     Budget    Appendix 1    Appendix 2

5.      Action:  ITEM 128-1001-R0705:  Minor in Central and Southwest Asian Studies, The University of Montana-Missoula.    Request   Summary    Proposal

6.      Action:  ITEM 128-1002-R0705:  Paleontology Center on campus and field station in Glasgow area, The University of Montana-Missoula.    Request    Summary    Proposal    Budget

7.      Action:  ITEM 128-1501-R0705:  Master of Science degree in Interdisciplinary Studies, Montana Tech of The University of Montana-Missoula.    Request    Summary    Proposal    Budget

8.     Action:  ITEM 128-1505-R0705:  Revised mission statement, Montana Tech of The University of Montana.    Request    Vision

9.      Action:  ITEM 128-1506-R0705:  Conversion of option in Medical Assistant to an Associate of Applied Science degree in Medical Assistant, Montana Tech of The University of Montana.    Summary    Proposal    Budget

Questions on items 3 and 6 were raised regarding duplicating programs.  Provost Muir introduced Dr. George Stanley, proposed director of the new UM Paleontology Center.  Dr. Stanley said the focus of the new center would be invertebrates and plants, not dinosaurs as at MSU-Bozeman.  Provost Dooley said that MSU-Bozeman sees this as synergistic with their programs, not competitive or duplicative and supports the creation of the new Center.

Several people spoke in support of item 4, the A.A.S. in Electrical Technology at MSU-Northern, including several members of the business community.

Regent Foster moved to forward items 1-9 to the full Board.  Motion carried.

Information Item

Letterfrom MSU-Billings concerning possible new nursing program

This item will carried forward to the November meeting.

Level II items on submission at this meeting

Other Business

The deferred items will be carried forward to the November meeting.

Public Comment

There was no additional public comment.

Adjourn

Regent French moved to adjourn at 4:00 p.m. Motion carried.

Submitted by Cathy Doyle

Return to Top

Staff and Compensation Committee

Committee Members Present:  Chairman John Mercer, Regent Mark Semmens, and Regent Steve Barrett

Also Present: Commissioner Sheila Stearns, OCHE Staff Member Kathy Crego

The committee convened at approximately 5:10 p.m.

3.

ITEM 128-114-R0905 - Proposed Policy Setting Salaries for the Commissioner of Higher Education, Presidents and Chancellors    Attachment

  Regent Mercer moved to recommend this item to the full Board.

Chair Mercer noted that the Board has a difficult and chronic problem when dealing with salary increases for the CEOs.  He wants to correct the problem in the long term.  Regent Semmens indicated he believed it was worthy of further consideration, but he didn�t know if the referenced 85% was correct.  He asked if there should be some consideration of the size and scope of each institution, or if one size did fit all.  He also asked if the flat rate for the Chancellors should extend to the two deans.  Kathy Crego noted they didn�t look at positions below these since there have been other mechanisms with more flexibility for those positions as opposed to the Presidents and Chancellors.  Kevin McRae indicated that he would guess the Presidents salaries are about 65% of the peer institutions, while the overall data for faculty of all ranks shows that MSU salaries are higher than those at UM, with UM running an average of 103% of Idaho State, 103% of South Dakota, 101% of North Dakota, and 84% of Wyoming.  Chair Mercer noted that the current level for Chancellors is about 85% of the President�s salaries.  He said that later on they could see if the deans of the stand-alone units might be elevated to the level of Chancellor.  The Commissioner as the top person should be making something more than the Presidents.  Chair Mercer indicated he wasn�t sure that it was easier to run a smaller institution in the system because they have greater challenges.  It has become complex and time consuming for the Board to make decisions on salaries for the CEOs and Chair Mercer wants to change the process to something more direct and easier to understand.  He indicated he would be willing to hear other suggestions.  Regent Semmens indicated he was not ready to vote on this item.  He was concerned about the perception that the Board was treating certain individuals materially different from others.  Chair Mercer noted that he had raised this issue for the first time in May, and he believes that drawing the decision out would not be wise.  If the citizens cannot pay the people who run the Montana University System the average of the states around Montana, it sends a strong signal that the Board is not doing their job to ensure they are providing the leadership the people deserve.

4.

1.  ITEM 127-126-R0505 - Amend policy 711.1 Employment Instruments; Professional and Administrative Employees

2.  ITEM 126-108-R0305 - Amend Policy 711.2 - Criteria for Board of Regents Contract; Non-faculty Personnel   Attachment

3.  ITEM 126-109-R0305 - Salary Increases for Contract Administrators

Staff item reporting format

Collective bargaining update