Minutes for the Utah State Board of Regents, December 14, 1982

Minutes of meeting, Utah State Board of Regents, 807 East South Temple, Salt Lake City, Utah, December 14, 1982

MINUTES OF MEETING UTAH STATE BOARD OF REGENTS 307 EAST SOUTH TEMPLE, SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH DECEMBER 14, 1982 CONTENTS Page ROLL CALL 87 GENERAL BUSINESS MEETING 89 Condolences to Regent Taggart 89 Approval of Minutes 89 Report of the Commissioner 89 Executive Committee Actions: Report and Ratification 89 . Capital Facilities Bond Issue 89 Dixie College Loan 89 Admissions Policies at University of Utah 90 Supplemental Appropriation for Snow College 90 Legislative Program for 1983: Report on Additional Legislation 91 Contingency Fees 91 Authority of Director of Facilities Construction and Management 91 State Capital Facilities Requirements 91 Acquisition of Professional Services 92 UPEA Higher Education Proposals 93 Board of Regents' Special Committee on Size of the Board of Regents 93 Liaison Committee Meeting - December 13, 1982 93 WICHE Annual Meeting - December 2-3, 1982 94 Page Curriculum, Roles, and Vocational-Technical Committee 94 Regional Dental Education Program 94 Credit Transfer Policy - Utah System of Higher Education 95 Respiratory Therapy Degree-Option - Weber State College 96 Family Life Endorsement - Southern Utah State College 96 Policy on Academic Preparation and Access - Weber State College 97 Mining Technology Study - College of Eastern Utah 97 Budget and Finance Committee 98 Auxiliary Enterprises Policy Amendments 98 UHEAA Board of Directors 100 Student Loan Revenue Bonds: Proposal to Initiate Preparatory Actions 102 Master Planning and Governance Committee 103 WICHE Pay Back Plans 103 Liaison Committee: Proposed Agenda Items 104 Joint Conference of State Board of Regents and State Board of Education, January 5, 1983 104 Clarification of Position on Community Colleges, and Reaffirmation of Commitment to Vocational-Technical Education 104 Capital Facilities Committee 106 Proposed Capital Facilities Bond Issue 106 Ivie Electronics Facilities - Utah Technical College at Provo 107 Utah Higher Education Facilities Authority 107 General Consent Calendar ~ 107 Grant Proposals 107 Grant of Easement for University of Utah 108 ii Page Sale of Land by Utah State University 108 Authorization for Executive Session 108 Reports from Institutions 108 ADJOURNMENT 108 * * * EXHIBIT A - Amended Policy for Auxiliary Enterprises Operating Revenue and Expenditures, Effective July 1, 1982 109 EXHIBIT B - Amended Uniform Accounting Manual Chapter on Auxiliary Enterprises, Sales and Services of Educational Activities and Service Departments, Effective Date, July 1, 1982 113 iii 87 MINUTES OF MEETING UTAH STATE BOARD OF REGENTS 807 EAST SOUTH TEMPLE, SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH DECEMBER 14, 1982 Board Members Present Board Members Excused Kern C. Gardner, Chairman Donald B. Holbrook W. Hughes Brockbank, Vice Chairman David S. Monson Ralph S. Blackham E. LaMar Buckner J. Lynn Dougan George C. Hatch Reba L. Keele Mary D. Lunt Ernest D. Mariani Neal A. Maxwell Robert L. Newey Wayne Owens Rex G. Plowman Richard S. Southwick Glen L. Taggart Office of the Commissioner Arvo Van Alstyne, Commissioner Don A. Carpenter, Associate Commissioner for Planning C. Gail Norris, Associate Commissioner for Business and Finance Eugene T. Woolf, Associate Commissioner for Academic Affairs Harden R. Eyring, Executive Assistant Janice Fauske, Assistant Director, Academic Affairs Lou Jean Flint, Special Projects Coordinator Joyce B. Fox, Secretary Derald V. Johnson, Director for Budgets Edward J. Peters, Information Officer Russell C. Richards, Research Analyst Institutional Officials Present University of Utah Cedric I. Davern, Vice President for Academic Affairs Walter P. Gnemi, Vice President for Administrative Services Chase N. Peterson, Vice President for Health Sciences Anthony W. Morgan, Executive Assistant to the President L. Robert Fox, Special Assistant to the President, Governmental Relations G. Lynn Powell, Assistant Dean for Dental Education, School of Medicine Wendy P. Smith, Staff Assistant to President Jam's T. Eliason, UPEA 88 Utah State University President Stanford Cazier Richard M. Swenson, Vice Provost Evan N. Stevenson, Vice President for Business George J. Allen, Jr., Budget Officer Brent Israelsen, Newspaper Weber State College President Rodney H. Brady Robert B. Smith, Vice President for Academic Affairs Jerald T. Storey, Vice President for Business Affairs Robert H. DeBoer, Assistant to the President for Governmental Relations A. Dee Vest, Director of Budget Southern Utah State College President Gerald R. Sherratt Terry D. Alger, Vice President for Academic Affairs Michael D. Richards, Assistant to the President Snow College President Steven D. Bennion Robert M. Stoddard, Dean of Academic Affairs Roger Baker, Assistant to the President Alvin Green, Dean of Students Bruce Peterson, Director of Auxiliary Services Dixie College President Alton L. Wade College of Eastern Utah President James R. Randolph F. Dean Walton, Vice President for Administrative and Student Services Utah Technical College at Provo President J. Marvin Higbee Lucille T. Stoddard, Educational Vice President Utah Technical College at Salt Lake President Orville D. Carnahan Max S. Lowe, Vice President for Instruction James R. Schnirel, Vice President for Business Affairs Jerry H. Fullmer, Director, Planning and Research Others Present Mark C. Moench, Assistant Attorney General William A. Paasch, Utah Education Loan Services Incorporated Kent W. Bishop, State Budget Office J. Wayne Lewis, Office of Legislative Research Henry Whiteside, State Planning Office J. Paul Hickman, Jr., Utah Public Employees Association Diane Cole, Salt Lake Tribune Vicki Varela, Deseret News Charles Trentelman, Ogden Standard-Examiner 89 GENERAL BUSINESS MEETING The meeting came to order at 9:45 a.m., under the chairmanship of Regent Kern C. Gardner. He noted that the four standing committees of the Board had met earlier that morning and would present reports to the full Board in the course of the meeting. Condolences to Regent Taggart Chairman Gardner, on behalf of the Regents and all present, expressed sincere condolences to Regent Glen L. Taggart in the recent death of his daughter Elaine Taggart. He noted that Commissioner Van Alstyne had represented the Regents at impressive memorial services held in Logan. Approval of Minutes On motion offered by Regent Maxwell, seconded by Regent Southwick, the Board of Regents unanimously approved the Minutes of the meeting held November 16, 1982. Report of the Commissioner Executive Committee Actions: Report and Ratification. Commissioner Arvo Van Alstyne reported and recommended Board ratification of actions taken by the Executive Committee at a meeting held November 29, 1982. Regent Newey so moved, Regent Brockbank seconded, and the motion was unanimously adopted. The actions, summarized as follows, are explained in greater detail in a memorandum addressed to the State Board of Regents from the Commissioner, in Tab P of the agenda: 1. Capital Facilities Bond Issue. The Executive Committee reviewed a proposed revision of the capital facilities bond issue list that was pending before the Utah State Building Board, and recommended certain changes. (See page 106 for subsequent action.) 2. Dixie College Loan. The Executive Committee approved a change in the amount of borrowing authority being sought for Dixie College for the purpose of completing the stadium and track project. As approved by the Board of Regents at its November meeting, the proposal sought legislative authorization for Dixie College to borrow funds not to exceed $400,000. In view of the terms on which the private gift in support of the project would be paid, it was advisable that the borrowing authorization be increased to an amount not to exceed $900,000. Before any such indebtedness could be incurred, the Board of Regents would have opportunity to review the project in detail and to establish the actual amount at a level consistent with actual need, not to exceed $900,000, provided 90 legislative authorization were obtained. The Executive Committee directed the Commissioner to continue to seek the support of the Governor in having the proposed legislation considered at a special session of the Legislature, if called. 3. Admissions Policies at University of Utah. In response to concerns expressed by a member of the State Legislature, the Executive Committee reviewed in detail the admissions policies and procedures followed by the College of Law and the School of Medicine at the University of Utah. The Commissioner noted, in this connection, that related questions as to the extent to which nonresident students were admitted to graduate programs had been considered by the Board of Regents in June 1982, when the Board had concluded that institutional practices relating to the admission of nonresident students in graduate programs were satisfactory and that no occasion for policy intervention by the Board of Regents appeared to be present. After discussion of the admissions policies with respect to Law and Medicine at the University of Utah, the Executive Committee concluded that the present practices in both colleges are as fair and objective as is possible under the circumstances; the criteria being used to select students for admission to these programs out of the enlarged numbers of applications received are acceptable and consistent with practices followed by other professional schools; the selection and composition of the selections committees that pass on applications for admission to these programs are fair and appropriate and also consistent with practices in other professional schools; and that the procedures in general are carefully designed to insulate the admissions process from being influenced by political or financial pressures that might otherwise be imposed upon the schools in question. The Executive Committee recommended that the 3oard of Regents strongly reaffirm its existing policy that the practices and criteria for admissions to the College of Law and School of Medicine at the University of Utah be left to the institutional decisions at the University of Utah, and that the Commissioner be requested to prepare a letter to the interested member of the Legislature advising him of this decision. In light of all the circumstances, the Executive Committee felt that this position and its strong reaffirmation was well calculated to protect the integrity of both the Board of Regents and the University of Utah in this sensitive area of professional admission. 4. Supplemental Appropriation for Snow College. Snow College experienced a significant decline in nonresident admissions in 1982-83, resulting in a total anticipated shortage of tuition collections that may exceed $70,000. After discussion with officials of Snow College, the Commissioner determined that the College was prepared, through internal resource reallocations, to absorb approximately one-third of the loss of revenue, but needed legislative assistance with respect to the other two-thirds. The Executive Committee authorized the Commissioner to submit to the 91 Governor and legislative leadership a request for a supplemental appropriation for Snow College for 1982-83 in the amount of $50,000 to assist in meeting the financial problems associated with this declining revenue picture. Legislative Program for 1983: Report on Additional Legislation. Commissioner Van Alstyne, in a memorandum addressed to the Board of Regents (Tab Q), summarized and reported the actions taken on four bills considered by the Legislative Interim Committee on State and Local Government at a meeting held November 17, 1982, at which he had made a presentation on behalf of the System of Higher Education. On motion offered by Regent Newey, seconded by Regent Hatch, the Board of Regents approved the Commissioner's recommendations on the first three bills, as follows: Contingency Fees. This proposed bill, as originally drafted, would limit contingency fees for both construction and remodeling to 2-1/2 percent, and would provide that any savings in construction and remodeling projects be returned to the contingency fund for real location by the State Building Board. The Interim Committee adopted changes proposed by the Commissioner, namely: (a) The 2-1/2 percent ceiling on contingency funds would be limited to new construction, and in the case of remodeling a "reasonable" contingency fund would be provided for. (b) The existing language, under which savings in construction costs revert to the benefit of the institution, would be retained. By the above motion, the Board of Regents supported the bill in its amended form. Authority of Director of Facilities Construction and Management. The bill, as drafted, raised a question as to whether designs, plans, and specifications for all construction and management in system institutions would have to be prepared either by employees of the Division of Facilities Construction and Management or by private firms under contract; also, as to whether the direct supervision of all remodeling and improvement work on college campuses would be vested in the Division of Facilities Construction and Management, or whether arrangements could be worked out between the institution and the division for sharing of these responsibilities. The Committee adopted the Commissioner's suggestion that the bill be amended to make it clear that agreements between institutions and the Division of Facilities Construction and Management, as authorized by present law, would be in the public interest. By the above motion, the Board of Regents voted to support the bill, as amended. State Capital Facilities Requirements. This bill, as drafted, would: (1) delete the requirement that the State Building Board follow the priorities of the Board of Regents in connection with capital facilities; (2) require the Director of the Division of Facilities Construction and Management to negotiate all leases for space in real property to be occupied by any state agency, including institutions of higher education; (3) amend the State Procurement Code to require the Legislature to authorize the amount of square footage to be obtained by state agencies and institutions of higher education 92 through the mechanism of leases, and forbid the execution of any lease for square footage or for cost in excess of the square footage and cost expressly authorized in advance by the State Legislature. The bill evoked discussion. Chairman Gardner agreed with the observation of the Commissioner that the prevailing law, requiring the Building Soard to adhere to the priority lists prepared by the Board of Regents, was working reasonably well and helped"to facilitate discussions between the Regents and the Building Board leading to agreement on higher education capital facilities priorities. He felt the Board of Regents needed to do a better job in terms of a composite capital facilities list. Regent Hatch noted that language in the Higher Education Act of 1969 required the two boards to cooperate and consult. Agreement was expressed that higher education institutions should be excepted from limitations on leasing of space, since they often need flexibility in leasing real property, particularly with respect to research programs funded with nonstate dollars, and for the purpose of accommodating unanticipated growth in student enrollments. By the above motion, the Board of Regents opposed this bill as drafted, and instructed the Commissioner to seek to obtain support to retain in the bill the current language requiring the Building Board to adhere to the priorities established by the Board of Regents, and to exempt institutions of higher education from the limitations on leasing of space. Acquisition of Professional Services. The bill, as drafted, would require contracts for architectural and engineering services to be let by a competitive bidding process to the lowest qualified and responsible bidder; and would provide a selection process under which architects and engineers might pre-qualify as bidders on public construction projects administered by the Division of Facilities Construction and Management. The Commissioner suggested that the bill could be improved by changing its language to assure that contracts for architectural and engineering services would be awarded to persons identified not merely as the "lowest" qualified bidder, but as the "lowest and best" qualified and responsible bidder. This would change the emphasis from mere price considerations to qualitative evaluations of bidders, as well. He also suggested that the selection process for pre-qualification of architects and engineers should expressly provide for the receipt and consideration of written comments and suggestions from agencies and institutions that would be the principal users or occupants of the building or facility for which architect/engineer services were being sought; thus, the special qualifications of particular architects and engineers, due to familiarity with institutional needs, could be given appropriate consideration. The Commissioner recommended that efforts be made during the legislative session to obtain amendments to this bill consistent with his recommendations summarized above. The Chairman felt the bill should be defeated. Regent Hatch, however, said the Board of Regents should address the items it opposed, but support those that would improve the process. He offered a motion to attempt to amend the bill in line with the thinking expressed above but, failing that, to attempt to defeat the bill. Regent Newey seconded the motion and it was unanimously adopted. 93 UPEA Higher Education Proposals. At the September and October, 1982, Board meetings, Mr. J. Paul Hickman, Employee Relations Representative, Utah Public Employees' Association, presented several higher education proposals, including: (1) Higher Education Classified Salary Act, (2) reciprocal tuition remission benefits within the Utah System of Higher Education, (3) longevity benefits for transferring employees of higher education, and (4) sick leave conversion. After considerable study of these UPEA proposals, it was the recommendation of the Connvjssioner that the Board of Regents not support them at this time, for reasons set forth in a memorandum in Tab R. Mr. Hickman, in responding to the Commissioner's recommendation, said that each of the UPEA proposals would be benefits that higher education could give its employees, whereas it might not be able to afford salary increases, in this difficult budget year. Mr. Hickman distributed copies of a letter addressed to the Board of Regents, with further comments on the proposals. Regent Plowman offered a motion that the Board of Regents not support the UPEA proposals at this time. In addition to other reasons cited, he said these were matters that should be left to the institutions, recognizing institutional differences and geographical locations. Regent Southwick seconded, and the motion was unanimously adopted. Report of Regents' Special Committee on Size of the Board of Regents. Fo11owing action taken by the Board of Regents at its November meeting, with respect to the study of the optimum size of the Board of Regents, Chairman Gardner had appointed a special committee to review the report of the three-person committee of former Regents. The members of the Regents' committee assigned for this purpose were: W. Hughes Brockbank, Chairman, Donald B. Holbrook, Reba L. Keele, Robert L. Newey, and Rex G. Plowman, with Richard S. Southwick invited as a nonvoting member. The special committee had convened and arrived at a conclusion which was set forth in a report in Tab S. Commissioner Van Alstyne recommended that the views of the Regents' special committee, together with the views of the previous committee of former Regents, be transmitted to the Governor and to the Speaker of the House and President of the Senate for their information, without further action by the Board of Regents. The Regents concurred, on motion offered by Regent Brockbank, seconded by Regent Keele. Liaison Committee Meeting - December 13, 1982. A summary of the Liaison Committee meeting held the previous day was distributed at the meeting. The Liaison Committee focused on four items: (1) unfinished business; (2) completion of the agenda for the joint conference of the two boards set for January 5, 1983, with the theme "High Schools and Higher Education in Utah: Working Together for Quality," (3) agenda for the breakfast meeting of the two boards scheduled for 7:30 a.m. on January 5 at Utah Technical College/Salt Lake; and (4) joint interim committee action and legislative intent. Chairman Gardner announced that Regent Maxwell had been invited to chair the special working breakfast meeting of the two boards on January 5, on the subject of joint master planning for vocational education, and urged all Board members to be present for this significant meeting. 94 Regent Maxwell commended Commissioner Van Alstyne and Superintendent Burningham for the excellent way in which they are augmenting agreements reached by the two boards. WICHE Annual Meeting - December 2-3, ]982. In a report in Tab T, Commissioner Van Alstyne outlined the highlights of the annual meeting of the Western Interstate Commission for Higher Education, held in Seattle, Washington, December 2-3, 1982. All three Utah members of the Commission (Regent Holbrook, Senator Karl G. Swan, and Commissioner Van Alstyne) were in attendance. On motion offered by Regent Maxwell, the report of the WICHE meeting was made a part of the records of the meeting. Curriculum, Roles, and Vocational-Technical Committee The meeting then turned to reports of the four standing committees of the Board of Regents, which had met that morning in individual sessions prior to the convening of the Board meeting. Chairman Rex G. Plowman reported on behalf of the Curriculum, Roles, and Vocational-Technical Committee. Regional Dental Education Program. In compliance with language adopted by the Legislature in 1982, an extensive study was launched to determine the feasibility of continuing the Utah Regional Dental Education Program (RDEP), effective Fall 1983. The study was carried out by Dr. G. Lynn Powell, Assistant Dean for Dental Education at the University of Utah, working closely with Dr. Eugene T. Woolf, Associate Commissioner for Academic Affairs. Tab A of the agenda contained a report and recommendation to the Regents, with supporting data. The RDEP study considered a number of proposals, which were subsequently trimmed to three candidates (Creighton University, Omaha, Nebraska; Washington University, St. Louis, Missouri; and the University of California at Los Angeles), all of which currently offer programs following the RDEP concept. Ultimately, it was the recommendation of the Commissioner that the Board of Regents approve UCLA as the favored contract school for the Regional Dental Education Program and approve the allocation of eight positions each year in the UCLA program, reserving two additional slots to be filled through the WICHE program. It was his further recommendation that the Board of Regents specifically and strongly reaffirm the existing policy of the Board in opposition to the establishment of a dental school in the State of Utah at this time or in the near future. Regent Plowman so moved, based on the decision of the Curriculum and Roles Committee that morning, and Regent Maxwell seconded. Commissioner Van Alstyne pointed out that at the November Board meeting, Regent Holbrook, who was absent today due to illness, had raised some concerns regarding the proposal, particularly with respect to the data relating to dental manpower needs of the State of Utah. Since then, Regent Holbrook and Commissioner Van Alstyne had both attended the annual meeting of the Western Interstate Commission for Higher Education, and had had opportunity to discuss 95 the RDEP proposal further. There was still some disagreement, the Commissioner said, as to the interpretation of certain information on manpower studies. He had concluded, however, that the data presented in the RDEP report were accurate and that the differences in interpretation were not material. He said the UCLA proposal, as well as the proposals of the other schools studied, would assure access of Utah students to dental school without significantly raising costs. The motion was adopted by unanimous vote. Credit Transfer Policy, Utah System of Higher Education. Chairman Plowman reviewed the history of a revision to the credit transfer policy. In April 1982, the 1970 policy governing the transfer of credits within the Utah System of Higher Education was revised to accommodate the general education course requirements of all system institutions. In May 1982, the Regents changed the wording of the policy to read "may be accepted" in place of "will be accepted." Because the change in wording had the effect of partially nullifying the policy, the members of the Task Force for Academic Planning were in support of restoring the original wording of the revised policy. To make this change more palatable, President Gardner's recommendation to include the words "baccalaureate level" in the description of general education courses was adopted and made a part of the policy governing the transfer of general education credit. In addition, the section of the Access and Roles paper dealing with the transfer of credit provided for the establishment and review of a systemwide matrix describing the general education requirements at all institutions in the Utah System of Higher Education. In order to provide for credit transfer for other than general education credits, a companion statement was approved by the Task Force for Academic Planning and submitted to the Board of Regents for approval along with the revised policy applying to the transfer of general education credits. This policy recognizes the autonomy of institutions in determining the appropriateness of applying transfer credit to specific degree programs and graduation requirements for all courses numbered 100 or above which are not submitted as part of an institution's general education requirements. Chairman Plowman, on behalf of the Curriculum and Roles Committee, offered a motion to adopt the Commissioner's recommendation that the Credit Transfer Policy, Utah System of Higher Education, be approved by the Regents with the recommendation that it be effective beginning Fall Quarter, 1983, and that it be carried in the catalogs of all institutions in the System. Regent Southwick seconded the motion and it was unanimously adopted, as follows: CREDIT TRANSFER POLICY OF THE UTAH SYSTEM OF HIGHER EDUCATION Policy on Transfer of Credits Intended Wholly to Meet An Institution's General Education Requirements An Associate of Arts or an Associate of Science degree earned at any institution within the Utah System of Higher Education will be considered as meeting the General Education requirements of any institution in the 96 System. When the General Education requirements of an institution not offering the Associate of Arts or Associate of Science degree have been met in earning a 93 to 96 credit hour certificate or diploma, a registrar's certification that the transferring student has completed baccalaureate-level General Education requirements at the sending institution will b"e~ accepted by the receiving USHE institution in lieu of the AA/AS degree. In the latter case, the registrar at the sending institution will forward to the receiving institution an up-to-date description of the General Education requirements. Policy on Transfer of Credits Other Than Those Intended Wholly To Meet an Institution's General Education Requirements Credit for courses numbered 100 or above earned in the Utah System of Higher Education are transferable within the System and will be carried on the student's transcript by the receiving institution. Acceptance of credit should not be confused with its application. Transfer credit may or may not apply to the graduation requirements of an institution, regardless of the number of credits transferred. Credit other than that intended wholly to meet the General Education requirements of the receiving institution will be applied on the basis of the appropriateness of credit to a particular institution's specific degree program requirements as determined by the receiving institution. Regent Hatch said he believed it was important for the Committee to pursue the matter of properly advising students of the acceptability of courses they are taking and of the requirements of the universities. Commissioner Van Alstyne noted that Associate Commissioner Woolf had been working with the institutions to develop a transferability matrix. Chairman Plowman said the institutional catalogs should list the names of contact persons who could respond to questions concerning credit transfer. Respiratory Therapy Degree-Option - Weber State College. Chairman Plowman offered a motion to authorize Weber State College to award the Associate of Science or Associate of Arts degree in Respiratory Therapy in addition to the Certificate and Associate of Applied Science degree previously authorized. It was noted (Tab C) that Weber State College currently offered both technician-level and therapist-level programs in Respiratory Therapy. The technician program culminated in a Certificate of Completion and the therapist program with the Associate of Applied Science degree. The motion would authorize Weber State College to also grant the Associate of Science or Associate of Arts degree to students who complete not only the Respiratory Therapy curriculum at the therapist level but also the General Education courses required for the respective associate degrees. Regent Plowman noted that the additional degree offering would strengthen the program without requiring additional funding or infringing on role assignments. Regent Taggart seconded the motion and it was unanimously adopted. Family Life Endorsement - Southern Utah State College. Southern Utah State College had requested authorization to add a secondary teaching endorsement to the existing Family Life Major, which had been the subject of a 97 nonaction report at the November Board of Regents meeting. However, Chairman Plowman stated that some conflicting interpretation had been encountered and that the Curriculum and Roles Committee had not had sufficient time to review the proposal in adequate detail. He recommended that it be deferred to the January Board meeting, meanwhile requesting the Commissioner's Office to obtain further information and prepare a report for the Committee's review. Policy on Academic Preparation and Access - Weber State College. A paper, entitled "Maintaining Quality in a Time of Scarce Resources," was presented to the Board of Regents (Tab E). The paper had been prepared by President Rodney H. Brady and Vice President Robert B. Smith, and had been approved by the Weber State College Institutional Council at its November meeting. Commissioner Van Alstyne stated in a cover memorandum that, contrary to publicity given to the paper as a report on specific new restrictive admission standards for the college, it essentially outlined a policy for managing enrollment growth. Weber State College, on the one hand, sought to retain open admission and, on the other, to screen entering freshmen in terms of demonstrated skills in selected subject areas. The policy further attempted to suggest to secondary school students the need to prepare adequately for the college experience. President Brady explained further the applications of the policy, and said he was assured that it was reasonable and practicable. Regent Hatch suggested that it would be helpful to add specific reference to vocational programs. He further suggested that each institution offering vocational/technical education should have a policy statement on these course opportunities as well as on academic course offerings. Regent Dougan expressed hearty approval of the policy and congratulated its authors. He said it provides the essence for improvement of quality within the institution and hopefully will have a direct impact on both public education and higher education. He seconded the motion of Chairman Plowman to endorse the policy, which was subsequently adopted by unanimous vote. Regent Buckner said the impelling reason for the report on "Maintaining Quality in a Time of Scarce Resources" was economic; and he believed such a policy should be made uniform among the institutions. Commissioner Van Alstyne observed that while the general concepts enjoyed a measure of systemwide acceptance, important grounds for institutional differences in details did exist. He further recalled that all nine institutions had been directed to reexamine their admissions policies and submit them to the Board by spring, at which time the policies could be checked for any discord and adjusted as necessary. Mining Technology Study - College of Eastern Utah. Under House Joint Resolution 7 of the 1962 Legislature, the 8oard of Regents was requested to conduct a needs assessment and feasibility study on the creation of a new Bachelor of Science degree curriculum in Mining Technology to be offered on 98 the campus of the College of Eastern Utah. The agenda materials (Tab F) contained a progress report of that study, which had included a needs assessment, hearings with coal mining industry personnel, consultation with the four-yaar institutions, and finally the convening of an Ad Hoc Committee on Baccalaureate Mining Education at the College of Eastern Utah. Associate Commissioner Eugene T. Woolf, at the request of Chairman Plowman, reviewed the recommendations of the Ad Hoc Committee, which he chaired, as follows: Recommendation 1: that because of the current unfavorable economic market conditions facing the Utah coal operators, which have brought about vast layoffs of coal and mineral mining personnel, the further planning for a four-year baccalaureate degree program in mining technology be deferred until market conditions and corporate postures are improved to the point where adequate manpower demand projections can be determined with validity and the coal operators can significantly provide support to their employees and a program. Recommendation 2: that a representative of the College of Eastern Utah serve as a broker between the coal operators and the University of Utah and/or Utah State University for the purpose of identifying among relevant current course offerings at the institutions those which may be offered through extension and continuing education programs in the Price area in support of those mine personnel who may wish to upgrade their educational skills. Such a brokering plan will provide a focal point to which coal operators can communicate the need for educational programs relevant to their employees' needs. Recommendation 3: that the University of Utah and Utah State University determine mechanisms for offering condensed, short-term course offerings as opposed to the customary full quarter-term schedules found more routinely on the university campuses. Such intensive course offerings will more adequately accommodate potential students in the mining industry. On motion of Regent Plowman, seconded by Regent Keele, the Board of Regents endorsed the findings and recommendations of the study for transmittal by the Commissioner to the Legislative Interim Committee on Higher Education. It was noted that the final report will be reviewed by the Ad Hoc Advisory Committee before being forwarded over the Commissioner's signature. Budget and Finance Committee Auxiliary Enterprises Policy Amendments. Committee Chairman J. Lynn Dougan reported. The Budget and Finance Committee had reviewed and recommended approval of amendments to the auxiliary enterprises policy and related provisions of the Higher Education Accounting Manual, as considered and concluded by the Task Force on Postsecondary Finance in several discussions of the auxiliary policy, and by the Commissioner. The amendments were explained in detail in a memorandum and attachments in Tab G and in a 99 handout distributed at the meeting. The issues and recommendations relating to the auxiliary enterprises policy were summarized as follows: 1. Souse of the smaller institutions have experienced difficulties in operating specified auxiliary enterprises - particularly housing - on a fully self-supporting basis. a. It is desirable to avoid seeking special legislative subsidies for auxiliary enterprises as far as possible. b. Aggressive institutional management may improve operating performance of auxiliary enterprises as a whole, but problems still will arise in the short run that will limit performance in a given year for individual auxiliary enterprises. c. In 1980 the Board of Regents adopted an "Auxiliary Policy Addendum..." regarding Housing, providing for temporary use of revenues from other auxiliary operations to help finance housing facilities, and, as a last resort, subject to specified conditions, allocation of a portion of student building fees for that purpose. The meaning of "temporary" use of other revenues, however, needed clarification (i.e., a loan or a one-time transfer). 2. Existing Board.policy defines a specific list of activities to be operated as auxiliary enterprises "unless otherwise provided by the Board." Current practice does not conform to the list in all cases. The situation should be reviewed and either the list adjusted appropriately (to reflect institutional realities at small colleges) or practice brought into conformity with the list. 3. The proposed amended policy, with commensurate changes in the accounting manual, will do the following: a. Clarify a policy intent that auxiliary enterprises at each institution must be operated on a self-supporting basis in the aggregate if at all possible, even when individual auxiliary enterprise entities are not achieving sufficient revenues in the short run. Included in this clarification is languaqe that permits transfers between auxiliary enterprise entities (as distinguished from a requirement for repayable loans only). b. Retain explicit policy direction that "institutions are obligated to take timely and specific corrective action with respect to each auxiliary enterprise unit that is not self-supporting...." c. Establish a procedure and specific justification requirements for any institutional requests to the Board for recommendations for legislative subsidies for auxiliary enterprises. (This eventuality, however, would fall at the end of the list of 100 responses, only in the event auxiliary enterprises in the aggregate, after considering application of a portion of student building fees, have revenues insufficient to meet operating expenses and bonded indebtedness.) d. Require explicitly (as does the current accounting manual) that "transfers from one auxiliary enterprise to another and financial support for auxiliary enterprises received from legislative appropriations should be reported separately from revenue," and that "the accounting records shall disclose the source and amount of such transfers and support." e. Require that all actions establishing mandatory transfers be approved by the Board of Regents, but delegate authority to the institutional president or his designee to approve non-mandatory transfers (expected to be not regularly recurring) and temporary loans. On motion of Regent Maxwell, seconded by Regent Buckner, the Board of Regents unanimously adopted a resolution to approve the "Amended Policy for Auxiliary Enterprises Operating Revenue and Expenditures, Effective July 1, 1982," and amended Section 3 - Housing, of the Uniform Accounting Manual Chapter (Appendix L) on "Auxiliary Enterprises, Sales and Services of Educational Activities, and Service Departments," as included in the agenda for the December 1982 meeting of the Board of Regents,, with additions to the Amended Policy, as distributed at the December 1982 meeting, to be included as paragraph 5 thereof. It was further resolved that the Commissioner is requested to submit a report to the Board of Regents at its regular February 1983 meeting as to current progress being made in complying with the policies expressed in paragraphs 5 (b) and 5 (c) of the Amended Policy. It was requested that the Institutional Council reports referred to in paragraph 5 (e) be presented to the Commissioner in time to be placed on the agenda of the Board of Regents for its regular meeting in April 1983. The "Amended Policy for Auxiliary Enterprises Operating Revenue and Expenditures, Effective July 1, 1982," is annexed to these Minutes as Exhibit A (Page 109). The "Amended Uniform Accounting Manual Chapter on Auxiliary Enterprises, Sales and Services of Education Activities and Service Departments, Effective Date, July 1, 1982," is annexed as Exhibit B (Page 113). UHEAA Board of Directors. On motion of Chairman Dougan, seconded by Regent Taggart, the Utah State Board of Regents unanimously adopted the following resolution relating to the Utah Higher Education Assistance Authority: WHEREAS, the Utah State Board of Regents, in its statutory authority as the board of directors of the Utah Higher Education Assistance Authority (UHEAA), has been authorized by the state legislature (Utah Code Annotated § 53-47a-2) to create a subsidiary board of directors for UHEAA, the members of which will be appointed and serve at the pleasure of the Board of Regents; and 101 WHEREAS, the appointed UHEAA board of directors is authorized to exercise only the UHEAA responsibilities and functions of the Board of Regents which are expressly delegated to it by the Board of Regents, and the Board of Regents retains the power to reassume for itself those responsibilities and functions, in whole or in part, at any time; and WHEREAS, the volume of outstanding student loans guaranteed by UHEAA (more than 55,000 borrowers, with approximately $147,000,000 in loans) has increased to the point that more continuous and intensive policy supervision should be given by the board of directors of UHEAA than can reasonably be given by the Board of Regents; and WHEREAS, an appointed UHEAA board of directors will be able to concentrate upon and develop a detailed and comprehensive understanding of the student loan guarantee program, together with functional and operating policies that are independent from those adopted by the Board of Regents in connection with its secondary market and related servicing functions; NOW, THEREFORE, THE UTAH STATE BOARD OF REGENTS HEREBY RESOLVES THAT: 1. A subsidiary board of directors is established, pursuant to Utah Code Annotated § 53-47a-2, to govern and manage Utah Higher Education Assistance Authority (UHEAA) for and on behalf of the Board of Regents. The UHEAA board of directors shall report to and serve at the pleasure of the Board of Regents, and shall have the specific duty and obligation to provide the entire Board of Regents with complete and timely information as to all activities, decisions, policies, and recommendations of the UHEAA board of directors. 2. The UHEAA board of directors shall consist of five members, of whom two shall be members of the Utah State Board of Regents, appointed by the Chairman, one shall be the Commissioner of Higher Education, ex officio, and two shall be residents of the State of Utah, appointed by the Board of Regents from nominees recommended by the first three members, who are experienced in commercial or student lending operations. The appointed members shall serve for staggered two-year terms as designated by the Board of Regents. The chairman of the UHEAA board of directors shall be designated by the Board of Regents and shall serve for such term as the Board of Regents determines. 3. Subject to the provisions of paragraph 4, below, the UHEAA board of directors is authorized to exercise on behalf of the Board of Regents all of the powers, duties, and responsibilities of the Utah Higher Education Assistance Authority, except for those which specifically relate to the approval and execution of notes, bonds, certificates, or other documentation for the incurring of indebtedness to fund the student loan secondary market, which are retained by the Board of Regents. The board of directors shall adopt its own bylaws, and determine its own procedures. 102 4. It is the intent of the Board of Regents, and the UHEAA board of directors is specifically directed, that the Utah Higher Education Assistance Authority will receive all necessary staff support, technical and policy adYice, and professional services relating to the functions of the Authority in connection with the Utah Guaranteed Student Loan Program, from and through the auspices of the Utah Education Loan Services Incorporated (UELSI), a non-profit private corporation, pursuant to the terms of contracts which have been entered into between UELSI and the Authority and the Board of Regents. It is further the intention of the Board of Regents, and the UHEAA board of directors is specifically directed, that the President of Utah Education Loan Services Incorporated be engaged by contract to serve as the executive director of UHEAA in order to discharge more effectively the continuing contractual obligations contemplated by this paragraph, which are hereby reaffirmed. 5. This resolution shall be effective January 1, 1983, with respect to all matters other than the selection and organization of the UHEAA board, and as to those matters shall take effect immediately. Student Loan Revenue Bonds: Proposal to Initiate Preparatory Actions. In a memorandum in the agenda (Tab I), Commissioner Van Alstyne recommended that it would be prudent for the Board of Regents to proceed with initial preparation for the issuance of a student loan revenue bond, should market conditions warrant. Accordingly, Chairman Dougan reported the concurrence of the Budget and Finance Committee and offered a motion to instruct the Commissioner to: 1. Initiate steps, in the near future, consistent with the Utah Procurement Code, to identify and recommend to the Board of Regents the selection of an investment adviser and underwriting firm to advise and assist the Board in the management of a proposed revenue bond issue. 2. Request the Attorney General to appoint special counsel to serve as legal adviser to the Board of Regents, and to draft the necessary legal documents in connection with the proposed bond issue, at the earliest possible time. 3. Take other appropriate steps necessary to assure that the requisite legal documents and other preparatory steps can be taken at the earliest possible time so that the Board of Regents will be in a position, should a "window" in the revenue bond market open up, to proceed without delay in the issuance of a revenue bond to support the secondary market for the Guaranteed Student Loan Program. Regent Mariani seconded the motion and it was unanimously adopted. 103 Master Planning and Governance Committee WICHE Pay Back Plans. Vice Chairman Neal A. Maxwell chaired the Committee, in the absence of Chairman Donald B. Holbrook, and reported the Committee's actions and recommendations. The Higher Education Interim Study Committee had requested the viewpoint of the Utah State Board of.Regents regarding various pay back plans that might be required of Utah students receiving WICHE support. Specifically, the Committee sought advice on whether WICHE supported students should be required to pay back part or all of their WICHE support, or otherwise receive a forgiveness of any obligation to repay any such support to the state to the extent that they may engage in professional practice in Utah. A report for the Interim Study Committee, prepared by Associate Commissioner Don A. Carpenter, was included in Tab J, and it was the recommendation of the Commissioner that the Regents oppose any pay back plan for Utah students supported through the WICHE program, based upon the following rationale, and that this view be conveyed to the Higher Education Interim Committee: 1. Any pay back plan for students participating in the WICHE student exchange program would increase the costs of administering the WICHE program in the Commissioner's Office; 2. Students in a host of other graduate and professional programs offered in the State of Utah are already being subsidized by the state and a requirement that WICHE supported students return all or part of their state supported fees or return to Utah to practice would raise serious questions of equity with students being supported in other professional disciplines; 3. Despite the examples of Nevada and Arizona, serious doubts remain regarding the constitutionality of requiring WICHE supported students to return to the state to practice or requiring them to pay back to the state all or part of their support fees; 4. Since nearly all WICHE states originally adopted pay back schemes and only one (Arizona) has over the years attempted to maintain a pay back program, there appears to be strong sentiment that such plans are unwise, inequitable, difficult and costly to administer, or unconstitutional to participating students. The pay back legislation adopted in Nevada in 1977 must still be considered to be experimental, since students are only now completing their professional studies and student contracts to repay support fees have not been completed or tried in the courts. Chairman Maxwell offered a motion to endorse the Commissioner's recommendation, Regent Southwick seconded, and the motion was unanimously adopted. 104 Liaison Committee: Proposed Agenda Items. A list of proposed agenda items that might be considered during future meetings of the Liaison Committee of the State Board of Regents and State Board of Education was included in Tab K, with the Commissioner's suggestion that it would be helpful to members of the Liaison Committee if these items were discussed and prioritized by the Master Planning and Governance Committee of the Regents. Chairman Maxwell recommended that initial focus be placed upon long-range planning in vocational education, which would be the topic of discussion at a breakfast meeting of the two boards on January 5, 1983. The Committee would be happy to receive any suggestions regarding the remainder of the list of items. Joint Conference of State Board of Regents and State Board of Education, January 5, 1983. The Regents reviewed the agenda for a joint conference, entitled "High Schools and Higher Education in Utah: Working Together for Quality," set for January 5 at Utah Technical College at Salt Lake. Clarification of Position on Community Colleges, and Reaffirmation of Commitment to Vocational-Technical Education. In order to clarify any misunderstandings, and for inclusion in the packet of materials for the joint conference to be held January 5, 1983, Chairman Maxwell proposed the adoption of a statement reaffirming the position of the Utah State Board of Regents endorsing the comprehensive community college philosophy as the basic mission of the Utah Technical Colleges at Salt Lake and Provo/Orem while pledging to cooperate fully with the State Board of Education in planning to accommodate the vocational-technical needs of Utah students, business and industry. Copies of a draft were distributed, and suggestions were offered for refinement of the statement. Ultimately, Chairman Maxwell moved to adopt the statement for the captioned purpose, giving the Commissioner and Chairman editorial freedom to refine it as necessary; and to direct the presidents of the technical colleges to report to the Board in January on their current admissions policies and practices and how they are complying with the Board's guidelines to maintain a 75:25 ratio for vocationalrgeneral education. Regent Newey seconded the motion and it was unanimously adopted. Presidents Higbee and Carnahan both confirmed that general education courses had not increased materially at the two technical colleges as a consequence of offering Associate of Science degrees; there was no compliance problem with the 75:25 ratio. The text of the statement, as refined to accommodate the suggestions offered, is as follows: Regents Clarify Position on Community Colleges and Reaffirm Commitment to Vocational-Technical Education In supporting the comprehensive community college concept for the Utah Technical Colleges at Salt Lake and Provo/Orem, the Utah State Board of Regents stresses that the mission of these institutions is to respond to broad-based community needs, which in the large and growing industrial 105 communities of Salt Lake City and Provo includes a primary emphasis on vocational-technical education. The Regents reaffirm that the traditional and historic role of the two technical colleges in providing vocational-technical education to meet the business, industrial and employment needs of the state shall be retained and enhanced under the umbrella of comprehensive community colleges. The Regents recognize that there is considerable misunderstanding in Utah regarding the mission of community colleges, since these institutions have not developed in Utah to the extent that they have elsewhere in the country. It is the Regents' firm belief,.based upon the repeated experience of other states in which comprehensive community colleges are located, especially in urban areas, that the doors are opened through community colleges to far more vocational and occupational students trained to meet business and industrial manpower needs of the community and state than through the maintenance of more limited and narrowly defined technical colleges. Designating the technical colleges as community colleges, the Regents reaffirm their position that vocational-technical courses should constitute 75 percent of the total curriculum at these schools in line with past legislative intent. The Regents will continue to insist upon a strong and primary vocational education emphasis at these two institutions. Experience elsewhere has shown clearly that when a well-established vocational institution expands its mission to include general education programs and offerings, the vocational programs and faculty retain their strong status and position within the institution. Vocational students thrive within this environment and, in fact, become more effective employees and better adjusted citizens through enrollment and exposure to general education courses. In order for students to be effective in a highly technological society, they must have adequate preparation in communication and computing skills, be prepared to read sophisticated blue prints and instructions, and make mathematical computations. They must be able to communicate effectively with peers and employers in their working relationships. For this reason, the Regents endorsed and the Legislature approved general education Associate of Science degrees at these institutions during the past two years. Some of these degrees are offered in vocational fields. Because of misinformation being circulated regarding the role and mission of a comprehensive community college, the Regents believe that the roles of these two colleges must be clarified. A community college is not a junior college because its mission is much broader than the typical transfer function of a junior college. Community colleges across the country retain a strong major thrust in vocational-technical education, and in most urban communities the number of vocational education students enrolled far exceeds the number of those pursuing mainly academic and baccalaureate pursuits. A comprehensive community college strives for educational balance in the curriculum as it ascertains and meets community needs. Many vocational students seek and need general education offerings. Conversely, many students enrolled in 106 general education programs find that exposure to the excellent programs and offerings of vocational education laad them to seek further vocational training in preparation for the work force. A community college focuses foremost on identifying and meeting student and community needs and provides strong counseling and student support services to assist students where they can explore options and pursue both vocational and academic interests within one institution without the stigma and difficulties associated with transferring schools. The Regents reaffirm a strong commitment to cooperate with the State Board of Education to provide a proper emphasis on vocational education, including evaluating the direction of the technical colleges as they assume the role of comprehensive institutions. By the same token, the Regents want to cooperate fully with the State Board of Education in master planning efforts to develop the role of the area vocational centers which should assume roles complimentary to those in higher education so that student and community needs are met throughout the state. While stressing the role of vocational education in the technical colleges at Salt Lake and Provo, the Board of Regents noted that it also had consistently encouraged the development of, and had recommended funding for, strong vocational-technical offerings provided at Utah's three rural community colleges-Snow, Dixie, and the College of Eastern L)tah--as well as at Southern Utah State College, Weber State College, and Utah State University. The Board stressed the fact that the master plan for the System of Higher Education specifically calls for the vocational needs of Utah's communities to be met not only through institutions other than the two technical colleges, but also, where feasible, through continuing education and outreach programs in all parts of the state. Capital Facilities Committee Proposed Capital Facilities Bond Issue. Committee Chairman Robert L. Newey recalled that at the November meeting the Board of Regents had referred back to the Capital Facilities Committee the task of "restructuring" the capital facilities list and meeting with representatives of the State Building Board to review the projects proposed to be included in a bond issue. The Capital Facilities Committee had met on November 29, 1982 to accomplish the assignment, and Commissioner Van Alstyne reported that he and Dr. Harden R. Eyring had subsequently met with the State Building Board and acquainted them with the Regents' views. The members of the State Building Board felt, however, that it would be inadvisable to make further changes, particularly additions or deletions to the list, except that they did move the Southern Utah State College Special Events Center ahead of the heat plant conversion to accord with institutional priorities. Chairman Newey moved to support the Commissioner's recommendation that all Regents and institutions support the bonding issue package as now constituted and encourage legislative support at the Special Session to 107 convene on December 15, 1982. Regent Southwick seconded the motion and it was unanimously adopted. Chairman Newey then moved that, should a bond issue come up at the General Session, the final revised list of proposed higher education projects be submitted to the General Session. He added that, if there were any changes in the list as a result of actions at the Special Session, it was understood that the list would be submitted to the Capital Facilities Committee and Executive Committee for restudy before submission to the General Session. Regent Buckner seconded and the motion was unanimously adopted. Ivie Electronics Facilities - Utah Technical College at Provo. Chairman Newey reported that President Higbee had met with the Capital Facilities Committee that morning to make a progress report concerning the feasibility of leasing or purchasing the Ivie Electronics facilities contiguous to the Orem Campus. Two parcels were involved, one with 2.75 acres and a building of 36,996 square feet with an appraised value of $1,500,000, and an adjoining 5 acre tract valued at $437,000. The Committee's recommendation, which Chairman Newey offered as a.motion, was that the Board not at this time authorize the lease or purchase of the property, due to budget stringencies. President Higbee confirmed for the record that he supported the position of the Committee. Regent Brockbank seconded the motion and it was unanimously adopted. Utah Higher Education Facilities Authority. Tab 0 contained an information report, entitled "Utah Higher Education Facilities Authority: A Possible Method to Help Meet Higher Education's Needs for Capital Facilities Funding." The Commissioner noted that the higher education facilities authority approach has been used in various forms in almost half the states, and might offer some advantages that the Regents would want to consider at a future date. General Consent Calendar On motion offered by Regent Maxwell, seconded by Regent Brockbank, the Board of Regents adopted the following items on the consent calendar: Grant Proposals. Approval was given for submission of three grant proposals: 1. University of Utah: National Institutes of Health, "Genetic and Nutritional Epidemiology in Cancer Kindreds;" $601,541, 1 July 1983 to 30 June 1984, total $1,952,863, July 1983 through June 1986; Dr. J. W. Gardner, Principal Investigator. 2. University of Utah: National Institutes of Health, "Genetic and Environmental Determinants of Hypertension;" $672,631, 1 February 1983 to 31 January 1984; Dr. Roger R. Williams, Principal Investigator. 108 3. University of Utah: National Institutes of Health, continuation "BME Center for Polymeric Implants;" $510,202, 1 February 1983 to 31 January 1984; Dr. D. J. Lyman, Principal Investigator. Grant of Easement for University of Utah. The motion approved the granting of an easement by the University of Utah to Salt Lake City Corporation to permit maintenance and repair of a relocated water main that is necessary to accommodate the new Energy and Mineral Research Building now under construction on the campus. An explanatory letter from the Vice President for Administrative Services, and a copy of the text of the easement, were included in Tab Y. Sale of Land by Utah State University. The motion approved the sale of three parcels of land in the Logan area, in the total amount of $358,300 as summarized below, the proceeds of which are to be used to assist in paying for the Skeen property and other costs associated with the Dairy project at Utah State University: Parcel No. 3 - 1 9 acres: Bid $37,000 Parcel No. 4 - 1 0 acres: Bid $71,300 Parcel No. 7 - 1 0 acres: Bid $250,000 Total amount of bids: $358,300 Authorization for Executive Session. Regent Maxwell offered a motion to authorize an executive session of the Board of Regents at the meeting to be held January 18, 1983. Regent Brockbank seconded, and the motion was unanimously adopted by raise of hands of the Regents present. Reports from Institutions Reports from President Gardner of the University of Utah, President Cazier of Utah State University, and Gerald R. Sherratt of Southern Utah State College were distributed in writing at the meeting. Chairman Gardner declared the meeting adjourned at 12:15 p.m. ecretary January 18, 1983 Approved 109 EXHIBIT A AMENDED POLICY FOR AUXILIARY ENTERPRISES OPERATING REVENUE AND EXPENDITURES EFFECTIVE JULY I, 198? 1. Auxiliary Enterprises Shall Be Conceptually Self-supporting This policy sets forth in broad terms the requirements of the Board of Regents as related to the operation of auxiliary enterprises by Utah's institutions of higher education. Intercollegiate athletic revenues and expenditures are excepted from this policy since a separate policy for those operations will be considered at a later date. Each member institution shall use this policy for auxiliary enterprise units operated on its campus. Substantial departures from this policy must have prior approval of the Board of Regents. The criteria used to determine whether or not a unit is considered an auxiliary enterprise are based on the description contained in College and University Business Administration. "An auxiliary enterprise furnishes a service to students, faculty and staff, and charges a fee directly related to but not necessarily equal to the cost of the service. The public may be served incidentally in some auxiliary enterprises. Auxiliary enterprises are essential elements in support of the educational program, and conceptually, should be regarded as self-supporting." For the purpose of this policy, auxiliary enterprise units, therefore, include the following unless otherwise authorized by the Board: (1) bookstore, (2) food services, (3) housing, (4) student union buildings, (5) vending machine operations, (6) parking services, (7) special events centers, (8) student health services, (9) others that from time to time meet the definition of an auxiliary enterprise. Self-supporting is defined as producing sufficient revenue to cover applicable direct operating costs, allocated indirect expenses, charges for renewal and replacement, debt service requirements, working capital needs including recovery of losses. Accounting principles and procedures as set forth in the CUBA Manual and the Accounting Manual for Utah Higher Education are acceptable and are recommended under this policy. Sound financial and business management practices shall be applied to auxiliary enterprises in order that these entities can be self-supporting while furnishing quality goods or services at reasonable prices. no Appropriate fees shall be charged to all users of auxiliary enterprises whether for educational or other purposes; and whether such users include academic departments, administrative departments, or off-campus groups, etc. Auxiliaries are expected to pay their share of general administrative and general institutional expenses. Allocation of such indirect expenses to auxiliaries shall be made on a basis consistent with other indirect cost allocations made by the institution, and as described in the chapter for auxiliary enterprises contained in the Accounting Manual for Utah Higher Education. Attention is directed to the following material paraphrased from the CUBA Manual issued in 1974: Auxiliary enterprise operations include all revenue, expenditures and transfers relating to these enterprises, including expenditures for operation and maintenance of plant and for institutional support; also included are other direct and indirect costs, whether charged directly as expenditures or allocated as a proportionate share of costs of other departments or units. The auxiliary enterprise units of each institution, considered in the aggregate, should be self-supporting from net revenues generated from fees, other income appropriate to operations of these units, and/or accumulated fund balances from prior years. Institutions are obligated to take timely and specific corrective action with respect to each auxiliary enterprise unit that is not self-supporting, so as to assure that the auxiliary enterprises of the institution are maintained on a self-sufficient basis in accordance with this policy. 2. Method of Requesting Auxiliary Subsidy If the consolidated revenue of, and intrafund transfers between, auxiliary enterprise units are insufficient to meet the financial commitments of applicable bond resolutions and pay operating expenses, a written request for legislative subsidy may be made to the Board of Regents. Such requests may be considered by the Board of Regents and recommended in whole or in part to the Legislature. An institutional request for legislative subsidy of auxiliary enterprise operations should accompany the annual legislative budget request submitted to the Commissioner of Higher Education. The statement of justification submitted in support of the request for subsidy must include a concise explanation of pricing policies, volume of operations, key operating statistics and ratios, and debt service commitments. Financial statements for the current year and three prior years should also accompany the request for subsidy. m 3. Reporting Auxiliary Enterprise Transfers and Legislative Support Transfers from one auxiliary enterprise to another and financial support for auxiliary enterprises received from legislative appropriations should be reported separately from revenue. The accounting records shall disclose the source and amount of such transfers and support. Since transfers may be either mandatory or non-mandatory, the reporting of transfers should so designate the type of transfer and report mandatory transfers separately from non-mandatory transfers. 4. Authorization of Fund Transfers Mandatory transfers generally arise out of or pursuant to the terms of binding legal agreements, such as bond resolutions, and the authorization of and process for making such mandatory transfers should be approved by the Board of Regents as part of the bond resolution or other contractual proceedings. Non-mandatory transfers and/or temporary loans usually arise in connection with the internal operation and management of an institution. Therefore, non-mandatory transfers and temporary loans should be approved by the institutional president or his designee in accordance with institutional policy and the principles of good internal control. 5. Procedures to Assure Accountability a. Each auxiliary enterprise of each institution will continue to be accounted for and reported on individually, in accordance with the Auxiliary Enterprises Chart of Accounts contained in the Uniform Accounting Manual. b. The Commissioner is directed to review existing auxiliary enterprise designations at each institution periodically, and recommend to the Board such changes in designations as are found to be appropriate. c. The Commissioner is directed to review auxiliary enterprises accounting practices at each institution and consult with presidents as necessary to ensure uniform compliance with the provisions of the Uniform Accounting Manual. d. Each institution is expected to manage to achieve self-supporting status for each auxiliary enterprise entity on a long-term basis, and should seek to accumulate a modest operating reserve for each such entity to provide for short-term operating revenue problems. 112 The several institutional councils and institutional presidents are requested to undertake an annual review of the auxiliary operations at their respective institutions, and submit to the Board of Regents, for its information at the regular April meeting of the Board, a report based on that review regarding the financial operations, quality of services being provided, and management status of the auxiliary operations of the institution. The report should indicate the extent to which the institution's auxiliary operations are or are not in full compliance with the applicable policies of the Board of Regents, and, if necessary, set forth a specific plan of action, with goal and timetables, for correcting any departures from such policies. ri3 EXHIBIT B AMENDED UNIFORM ACCOUNTING MANUAL CHAPTER ON AUXILTJRY ENTERPRISES, SALES AND SERVICES OF EDUCATIONAL ACTIVITIES AND SERVICE DEPARTMENTS EFFECTIVE DATE, JULY Tt 1982 3. Housing Housing operations include rentals of dormitories to single students and apartment or other dwelling rentals for married students. It is desirable from the standpoint of managerial control to account for single student dormitory operations separately from married student housing. Generally, the food service operation is reported separately from the rental or dormitory space. Therefore, board charges are recorded in accounts which distinguish this revenue from room rental income. Institutions should study the student housing market and local living conditions to determine appropriate adjustments in revenue and/or operating cost necessary to make student housing operationally self- supporting. Housing operations should report their expenditures for direct and indirect costs separately. Allocated indirect costs should be charged to housing units using appropriate apportionment methods. To the extent that head residents or student counselors are performing functions beyond those that are generally accepted as landlord responsibilities, the institutions may allocate a portion of the head residents' or counselors' salaries to the general fund student services. Any such allocation should be well documented and rationally related to the responsibilities of the employees. Unoccupied housing units should be utilized for other institutional purposes to the extent practicable, subject to payment of a reasonable rental fee by the user. Some useful operating reports which should be prepared for management purposes include statements of revenues, expenditures, and transfers, occupancy reports, expenditures for repairs, custodial services and utilities, and reports of expenses for counseling, student government activities and other student activity programs. The most significant statistic relative to room rentals is the percent of occupancy. Management of resident halls has both business and educational aspects. Close cooperation between business officers and student affairs officers is especially important in development of budgets and of provisions for counseling and other student services. If occupancy of a residence hall 114 decreases to the point that the auxiliary enterprise unit is not self-supporting, the president of the institution should examine the reasons for the condition. Based on the findings, a recommendation should be made as to the steps to be taken to correct the situation. Supporting computations should be made to show that the auxiliary unit may become self-supporting if the proposed recommendation is successful.