Oregon University System logo

OREGON STATE BOARD OF HIGHER EDUCATION
MINUTES OF REGULAR MEETING
ROOMS 327/8/9, SMITH MEMORIAL CENTER
PORTLAND STATE UNIVERSITY
PORTLAND, OREGON

July 21, 2000

CALL TO ORDER

The meeting of the State Board of Higher Education was called to order at 11:34 a.m. by President Imeson.

ROLL CALL

On roll call, the following Board members answered present:

Dr. Herb Aschkenasy
Mr. Bill Williams
Mr. Shawn Hempel
Mr. Jim Willis
Ms. Leslie Lehmann
Ms. Phyllis Wustenberg
Dr. Geri Richmond
Mr. Tim Young
Mr. Tom Imeson

Absent: Mr. Jim Lussier (business conflict) and Mr. Don VanLuvanee (personal conflict).

APPROVAL OF MINUTES

The Board dispensed with the reading of the June 16, 2000, regular meeting minutes. Mr. Willis moved and Ms. Lehmann seconded the motion to approve the minutes as submitted. The following voted in favor: Directors Aschkenasy, Hempel, Lehmann, Richmond, Williams, Willis, Wustenberg, Young, and Imeson. Those voting no: none.

The Board also dispensed with the reading of the June 16, 2000, Committee of the Whole meeting minutes. Ms. Lehmann moved and Mr. Willis seconded the motion to approve the minutes as submitted. The following voted in favor: Directors Aschkenasy, Hempel, Lehmann, Richmond, Williams, Willis, Wustenberg, Young, and Imeson. Those voting no: none.

PRESIDENT'S REPORT

Tim Young/Tom Anderes

Mr. Imeson welcomed new Board member Tim Young and new Vice Chancellor for Finance and Administration Tom Anderes to the table. Bidding farewell to former Vice Chancellor Bill Anslow, Mr. Imeson described his work as "remarkable." Mr. Imeson went on to express his appreciation for the contributions of Mr. Anslow and his staff in creating the new budget model.

Role as Chair

Explaining his role as chair of the meeting, Mr. Imeson said that neither incoming President VanLuvanee nor Vice President Lussier could be present, thereby necessitating an extension of his term through the July meeting only. He said that he would continue to preside over the Budget and Finance Committee in 2000-01.

Future Meeting Schedule

Mr. Imeson reiterated the adjusted schedule in September and October, in lieu of a renewal work session. He announced that Dr. David Nygren, the facilitator who worked with the Board at its 1999 renewal, has agreed to return both months to work with the Executive Committee and the full Board to create the 2000-01 work plan. He encouraged all Board members to attend the September 15 Executive Committee work session, at which point an initial draft work plan will be developed.

SOU Presidential Search

Announcing that the first meeting of the SOU Presidential Search Committee was held on July 11, Mr. Imeson said that Search Chair Williams named Mr. Willis vice chair. The purpose of the meeting, he added, was to set the stage for work necessary to perform a successful search.

Economic Development Joint Boards Working Group

A contingency of OUS Board members and staff, along with Oregon Economic and Community Development Department staff, met with the Governor recently, said Mr. Imeson, and presented the final recommendations of the Economic Development Joint Boards Working Group. Indicating the Governor's support for the recommendations, Mr. Imeson said that one of the likely outcomes will be the formation of a new group that will likely include one or two Board members.

CHANCELLOR'S REPORT

Intel Update

Chancellor Cox deferred his report and invited Intel Vice President/Oregon Site Manager Mr. Jim Johnson to present an update on the technology industry.

Noting Intel's recent announcement to build a new research and development facility in the Portland area, Mr. Johnson indicated that between 2,000 and 6,000 engineering positions would be created as a result, therefore punctuating the need for increased support for engineering education in the state. In order to accomplish this, Mr. Johnson said that the focus of funding to produce a top tier engineering school should be limited to one institution, OSU. While somewhat disappointed at the Board's decision to more closely review the engineering portion of the 2001-2003 biennial budget request before issuing its final approval, Mr. Johnson expressed optimism that the current data available will make a compelling case to fully support the budget request.

IFS Report

IFS President Tiedeman indicated that there had not been an IFS meeting since his last report in June. Speaking to both the merits and disadvantages of distance education, Dr. Tiedeman cautioned that too many computer/television hours erode the social capital, the "conceptual cousin to community." Therefore, he applauded the support of the Board to bring a branch campus to Central Oregon, seeing it as a step in the direction of returning some of the "community" to higher education.

PURCHASE OF LEWIS PROPERTY, SOU

Staff Recommendation to the Budget and Finance Committee

Staff recommended that the Board authorize Southern Oregon University officials to purchase the Lewis property, located at 1349 Oregon Street, Ashland, Oregon, within the SOU campus boundary, for a price not to exceed $130,500 plus closing costs. The purchase will be financed from Article XI-F(1) bonds to be repaid by rental income and student housing auxiliaries.

Budget and Finance Committee Recommendation to the Board

Chair Imeson reported that the Committee unanimously approved forwarding the request to the Board for its consideration.

Board Discussion and Action

Mr. Willis moved and Mr. Young seconded the motion to approve the request as submitted. The following voted in favor: Directors Aschkenasy, Hempel, Lehmann, Richmond, Williams, Willis, Wustenberg, Young, and Imeson. Those voting no: none.

OAR 580-040-0040, ACADEMIC YEAR FEE BOOK, 2000-01

Staff Recommendation to the Budget and Finance Committee

Staff recommended that the Board amend OAR 580-040-0040 as follows: (underlined text is added; brackets denote deletions)

OAR 580-040-0040, Academic Year Fee Book
The document entitled Academic Year Fee Book, dated July 21, 2000 [July 16, 1999], is hereby amended by reference as a permanent rule. All prior adoptions of academic year fee documents are hereby repealed except as to rights and obligations previously acquired or incurred thereunder.

Through the amendment, the Board adopts the document entitled Academic Year Fee Book, memos of attachment amending the draft document, and other amendments and attached schedules as noted.

Budget and Finance Committee Recommendation to the Board

Chair Imeson reported that the Committee unanimously approved forwarding the request to the Board for its consideration.

Board Discussion and Action

Ms. Lehmann asked if members of the Budget and Finance Committee considered what the market might bear for the resident tuition rate of certain graduate programs, as a possible additional source of revenue. Mr. Imeson responded that, in the creation of the new budget model, the suggestion was made to have the Board set ceilings with respect to tuition, rather than actually set tuition. He pointed out that the discussion was deferred to a later date, but that the Committee could possibly review the option and make recommendations to the Board in the coming year.

Dr. Aschkenasy expressed some concern over the suggestion, noting that a necessary concurrent discussion would be the role of a public university. For undergraduates, Ms. Lehmann said that she completely agreed, but that some employers might be willing to subsidize employee participation in certain graduate programs.

Ms. Wustenberg moved and Dr. Richmond seconded the motion to approve the Academic Year Fee Book amendments for 2000-01 as submitted. On roll call vote, the following voted in favor: Directors Aschkenasy, Hempel, Lehmann, Richmond, Williams, Willis, Wustenberg, Young, and Imeson. Those voting no: none.

2000-01 ANNUAL OPERATING BUDGET

Staff Recommendation to the Budget and Finance Committee

Staff recommended that the Board approve: (1) the proposed Annual Operating Budget and allocations for 2000-01 as described in the Budget and Finance Committee docket dated July 21, 2000, with corresponding details provided in the 2000-01 OUS Budget Report Summary (2000-01 BRS); (2) continue with the policies governing the new model (adopted in September 1999) as relating to all previous budget allocations of state General Fund and/or other resources, indicating that only those items specifically identified as part of the 2000-01 Targeted Programs will be covered in Year Two of implementation and added targeted program items may only be included by Board consideration and resolution; (3) delegate authority to the Chancellor to make adjustments to the OUS Annual Operating Budget for 2000-01 as required; and (4) approve the proposed travel reimbursement rates a summarized.

Budget and Finance Committee Recommendation to the Board

Chair Imeson reported that the Committee unanimously approved forwarding the request to the Board for its consideration.

Board Discussion and Action

Mr. Imeson asked Vice Chancellor Anderes to briefly summarize the Committee's actions. Explaining that part of the Committee's discussions focused on settle up procedures for fiscal year 1999-00, Mr. Anderes indicated that one component of that process was maintaining an enrollment reserve in order to accommodate fluctuations. He added that another topic of discussion was what to do with the overall reserve, which is at $2.2 million, a relatively small amount.

Mr. Hempel moved and Dr. Richmond seconded the motion to approve the 2000-01 Annual Operating Budget as submitted. The following voted in favor: Directors Aschkenasy, Hempel, Lehmann, Richmond, Williams, Willis, Wustenberg, Young, and Imeson. Those voting no: none.

2001-2003 BIENNIAL OPERATING BUDGET REQUEST

Staff Recommendation to the Budget and Finance Committee

Staff recommended that the Board approve the following actions on the Oregon University System 2001-2003 Biennial Operating Budget request:

Budget and Finance Committee Recommendation to the Board

Chair Imeson reported that the Committee approved forwarding the request to the Board with one adjustment relating to the Engineering Tier 1 Spires of Excellence proposals. The Committee, he explained, agreed to put a placeholder in the budget for the proposals, and directed the Chancellor to initiate additional review. This review would be done in collaboration with the Board and possibility the Budget and Finance Committee in September, with a final proposal presented at the October Board meeting. Chancellor Cox indicated that the Governor's Office permitted this course of action.

Board Discussion and Action

Pointing out that the decision to postpone the request did not signal a lack of support for the proposals, Mr. Imeson said, "I think this underscores the desire of the Board to really think this through carefully, to be well informed, to have a good context for what we propose, and to take some decisive action. We'll put a good effort into this and we'll get it resolved in October so that it will fit into the budget process for the state."

Ms. Lehmann, concurring with Mr. Imeson's comments, asked that the Board, within the motion brought forth, express its strong support for pursuing a program that would bring a high level of engineering education to Oregon and that the Board is studying the best way to do that. Mr. Imeson agreed to with her suggestion, noting that he felt it reflected the sense of the Board.

Dr. Richmond asked for comments from campus presidents about the biennial budget request, and if there were critical areas where they felt their campuses might be affected. Those who were present offered the following:

Dr. Aschkenasy recalled that former Vice Chancellor Anslow prepared a ten percent current service level budget reduction exercise, as directed by the Department of Administrative Services. Mr. Anslow confirmed that was a project yet to be completed, but would be in the coming months. Dr. Aschkenasy suggested that, as an extension of that exercise, staff take that ten percent and examine the initial intent of the funds to determine if any adjustments might be made. Mr. Imeson pointed out that although the new budget model does not lend itself well to the current service level budget reduction exercise, the process must be done in order to comply with state budget requirements and preparation processes.

Ms. Lehmann moved and Ms. Wustenberg seconded the motion to approve the 2001-2003 Biennial Operating Budget request, noting the expression of strong support for the engineering proposal, by putting a placeholder in the budget until further study is completed and analyzed by the Board. The following voted in favor: Directors Aschkenasy, Hempel, Lehmann, Richmond, Williams, Willis, Wustenberg, Young, and Imeson. Those voting no: none.

2001-2007 CAPITAL CONSTRUCTION PROGRAM REQUEST

Staff Recommendation to the Budget and Finance Committee

Staff recommended that the Board approve the proposed 2001-2007 Capital Construction program budget request. With this approval, the Board was asked to authorize the Vice Chancellor for Finance and Administration to prepare and submit to the Department of Administrative Services a proposed 2001-2007 Capital Construction program request in accordance with information provided in the July 21, 2000, Budget and Finance Committee docket and supplemental materials. Further, it was recommended that staff be authorized by the Board to apply for the necessary grants and seek the necessary bonding authority and Certificates of Participation authorizations to effect the projects and purchase the equipments and systems described in the Budget and Finance docket item, as mentioned above, for the 2001-2003 biennium. In addition, staff recommended that the Vice Chancellor for Finance and Administration be authorized to make any technical adjustments required to the programs during the ensuing period prior to the 2001 Legislative Session.

Budget and Finance Committee Recommendation to the Board

Chair Imeson explained that in order to be coordinated with the 2001-2003 Biennial Operating Budget, all portions of the capital budget related to engineering were pulled out of the final recommendation to the Board, and will be voted on in concurrence with the engineering program proposal at the October Board meeting, following further analysis by the Board.

Board Discussion and Action

Dr. Richmond moved and Dr. Aschkenasy seconded the motion to approve the 2001-2007 Capital Construction Program request with modifications as recommended by the Budget and Finance Committee. The following voted in favor: Directors Aschkenasy, Hempel, Lehmann, Richmond, Williams, Willis, Wustenberg, Young, and Imeson. Those voting no: none.

M.S., APPLIED PSYCHOLOGY, SOU

Staff Recommendation to the System Strategic Planning Committee

Staff recommended that the Board authorize Southern Oregon University to establish a program leading to the M.S. in Applied Psychology. The program would be effective fall 2000, and the OUS Office of Academic Affairs would conduct a follow-up review in the 2005-06 academic year.

System Strategic Planning Committee Recommendation to the Board

Chair Willis reported that the Committee unanimously approved forwarding the program request to the Board for final consideration on its consent agenda.

Board Discussion and Action

Mr. Willis moved and Ms. Lehmann seconded the motion to approve the program proposal as submitted. The following voted in favor: Directors Aschkenasy, Hempel, Lehmann, Richmond, Williams, Willis, Wustenberg, Young, and Imeson. Those voting no: none.

ENDORSEMENT, ESOL/BILINGUAL, SOU

Staff Recommendation to the System Strategic Planning Committee

Staff recommended that the Board authorize Southern Oregon University to establish a program, effective immediately, leading to the teaching endorsement in ESOL/Bilingual.

System Strategic Planning Committee Recommendation to the Board

Chair Willis reported that the Committee unanimously approved forwarding the endorsement request to the Board for final consideration on its consent agenda.

Board Discussion and Action

Mr. Willis moved and Ms. Lehmann seconded the motion to approve the program proposal as submitted. The following voted in favor: Directors Aschkenasy, Hempel, Lehmann, Richmond, Williams, Willis, Wustenberg, Young, and Imeson. Those voting no: none.

B.A./B.S., GENERAL SOCIAL SCIENCE, UO

Staff Recommendation to the System Strategic Planning Committee

Staff recommended that the Board authorize the University of Oregon to implement a program at the Central Oregon University Center (COUC) leading to the baccalaureate degree in General Social Science. The program would be effective fall 2000, and the OUS Office of Academic Affairs would conduct a follow-up review in the 2005-06 academic year.

System Strategic Planning Committee Recommendation to the Board

Chair Willis reported that the Committee unanimously approved forwarding the endorsement request to the Board for final consideration on its consent agenda.

Board Discussion and Action

Mr. Willis moved and Ms. Lehmann seconded the motion to approve the program proposal as submitted. The following voted in favor: Directors Aschkenasy, Hempel, Lehmann, Richmond, Williams, Willis, Wustenberg, Young, and Imeson. Those voting no: none.

RESOLUTION REGARDING CLASSIFIED INFORMATION FOR THE U.S. DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE, PSU

Staff Recommendation to the System Strategic Planning Committee

Staff recommended the Board adopt the following resolution regarding access to classified information related to the Department of Defense material.

RESOLUTION

WHEREAS, current Department of Defense directives contain a provision making it mandatory that the university president, and all principal officers or officials who are specifically and properly designated by the Board as the managerial group with the authority and responsibility for the negotiation, execution, and administration of classified contracts, meet the personnel security clearances requirements established for a contractor's facility security clearance; and

WHEREAS, said Department of Defense directives permit the exclusion from the personnel clearance requirements of certain members of the Board and other officers, provided that this action is recorded in the corporate minutes.

NOW IT IS FURTHER DECLARED that the president, and all principal officers or officials who are specifically and properly designated by the Board as the managerial group with the authority and responsibility for the negotiation, execution, and administration of classified contracts, at the present time do possess, or shall be processed for, the required security clearance; and

BE IT RESOLVED that in the future, when any individual enters upon any duties as president, as one of the principal officers or officials who are specifically and properly designated by the Board as the managerial group with the authority and responsibility for the negotiation, execution, and administration of classified contracts, such individuals shall immediately make application for the required security clearance; and

BE IT RESOLVED FURTHER that the following members of the Board and other officers, shall not require, shall not have, and can be effectively excluded from access to all classified information in the possession of Portland State University, and do not occupy positions that would enable them to affect adversely corporate policies or practices in the performance of classified contracts for the Department of Defense or the User Agencies of the National Industrial Security Program.

Name; Title

Donald VanLuvanee; Board President
James Lussier; Board Vice President
Herbert Aschkenasy; Board Member
Shawn Hempel; Board Member
Thomas Imeson; Board Member
Leslie Lehmann; Board Member
Geraldine Richmond; Board Member
William H. Williams; Board Member
James Willis; Board Member
Phyllis Wustenberg; Board Member
Timothy Young; Board Member

System Strategic Planning Committee Recommendation to the Board

Chair Willis reported that the Committee unanimously approved forwarding resolution to the Board for final consideration on its consent agenda.

Board Discussion and Action

Mr. Willis moved and Ms. Lehmann seconded the motion to approve the resolution as submitted. The following voted in favor: Directors Aschkenasy, Hempel, Lehmann, Richmond, Williams, Willis, Wustenberg, Young, and Imeson. Those voting no: none.

In addition to the items requiring Board approval, Mr. Willis noted that the System Strategic Planning Committee heard reports on diversity in OUS, follow-up reviews of several programs, and an update on the Western Undergraduate Exchange (WUE) program. Ms. Lehmann added that the Committee agreed to review for response a recent suggestion by Mr. Williams to study compensation levels of faculty and its effects on factors such as recruitment, retention, and quality.

PUBLIC INPUT SESSION

Ms. Barbara Schenck, speaking on behalf of the Central Oregon Regional Advisory Board (CORAB), expressed her gratitude to the Board for its support of bringing higher education to Central Oregon in the form of a branch campus.

WHERE HAVE OREGON'S GRADUATES GONE? CLASS OF 1999 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

Staff Report to the Board and Discussion

Vice Chancellor Clark introduced OUS Chief Information Officer and Director of Institutional Research Susan Weeks, who highlighted some of the more notable findings in the survey (full reports of survey findings are on file in the Board's office). The biennial survey, the fourth since its inception with the class of 1993, was a telephone survey of a random sample, or about 1,200 respondents, of 1999 Oregon high school graduates or their parents. The survey identified a percentage of students attending college in the fall or winter terms following their graduation and sought to determine the type of college that students chose and the reasons for their choices, explained Ms. Weeks.

Pointing out the continual increase in the proportion of students enrolling in college since the first survey was conducted, Ms. Weeks said that nationally, the 1998 figure (most recent) for graduates going on to college was approximately 65.6 percent, and in Oregon, 66.9 percent of the 1999 graduates were enrolled. Moreover, of the remaining percentage of students, another 14 percent indicated they planned to enroll at a later date, translating into nearly 84 percent enrollment within 18 months after graduation.

In terms of college choices, approximately 23.9 percent of students reported enrolling in an OUS institution, compared with 19.4 percent in 1997. While Oregon independent institution numbers were down slightly, Ms. Weeks indicated that the proportion of students enrolling in out-of-state four-year institutions was up a few percentage points. She attributed this slight increase to more Portland-area students going out-of-state. There are numerous theories for the statistic, said Ms. Weeks, among them a larger population, a greater number of people residing there from other states, affluence, and more private high schools.

Top choices of majors for the class of 1999 are business, natural sciences, computer science, and math, reported Ms. Weeks. Chancellor Cox asked if there were fluctuations in computer science and engineering-related enrollments. Ms. Weeks indicated that the question was asked somewhat differently from the last survey, but said that she could likely extrapolate that information.

Dr. Richmond asked if any conclusions could be drawn from the data indicating the percentage of students who begin and end with the same major, versus changing midstream. Feeling that enough data existed that some tracking could be accomplished, Ms. Weeks said that she would pursue those numbers.

Ms. Weeks reviewed the top four reasons students gave for attending OUS institutions, including 1) available programs; 2) low cost, including financial aid and available scholarships; 3) academic reputation, and 4) proximity to home. Sources of information for making college choices, said Ms. Weeks, included booklets and brochures, family and friends, guidance counselors, and on-site visits. Fifty-six percent of students are using campus websites to gather information, she indicated.

Concluding her presentation, Ms. Weeks said that overall, more students are enrolling in OUS institutions than ever before. She noted that the 1999 cohort appeared more college-focused than prior classes, with the enrollment of high achievers (GPAs between 3.75 and 4.0) increasing by six percent. Those in the 3.5 to 3.75 GPA group enrolled in stronger numbers as well. She attributed much of the success to recruiting efforts by campuses and by making scholarships available to high-achieving students.

Ms. Weeks said one negative survey finding was an increase in the proportion of students factoring concerns about potential program cuts when making choices about college. While unable to derive a true sense of why the numbers jumped for the first time since the survey began, Ms. Weeks said that campuses are attempting to gain a better sense of why the numbers increased. Further, she said that it confirmed people's understanding that students are very responsive, very critical consumers.

Vice Chancellor Clark observed, "What we have learned this last decade is that to communicate our anxieties without any solutions sends a very negative message." The Chancellor urged further analysis to determine the cause for the increased concern.

Dr. Richmond described the findings as exciting and energizing. She encouraged that the news be provided to faculty, who often are concerned about the quality of students. Suggesting that prospective students don't generally visit the OUS website, Dr. Richmond said that campuses should add some kind of a tag line to their home pages about the increased numbers of high-achieving students enrolling at OUS institutions.

OTHER COMMITTEE REPORTS

Education Joint Boards Working Group

Dr. Richmond, reporting on behalf of the Working Group, summarized the highlights of the meeting held on July 19. These included:

OHSU

Mr. Imeson reported that the OHSU board recently passed its budget for 2000-01, and that the strategic planning process continues. He pointed out an article in Board members' packets, which was alluded to at the June Board dinner at OHSU by Dr. Michael Gehab, relating to the transformation of academic health centers nationwide.

Provost Hallick announced a turnaround from a negative to a positive cash flow in the previous quarter at both the health system hospital and the clinics.

ITEMS FROM BOARD MEMBERS

Mr. Hempel encouraged ongoing Board scrutiny of its priorities, in terms of program decisions related to the four overarching goals and how they are balanced with the preferences of students.

Mr. Willis said that he felt the first SOU Presidential Search Committee meeting went very well, indicating there was a good deal of energy in the group. Mr. Williams, Chair of the Committee, concurred with Mr. Willis' assessment.

On an unrelated note, Mr. Willis pointed out that it was Philip Bransford's last day as OUS Director of Communications. Mr. Bransford announced that he had accepted a position at the Oregon Association of Counties as its first communications director.

Ms. Lehmann reported that she recently participated in a meeting with the Oregon Business Council, the American Electronics Association, and the Oregon Forest Resources Institute, of which she is director. The meeting focused on higher education, deemed a common priority for CEOs of Oregon businesses from the technology and forestry industries.

Ms. Wustenberg, along with other Board members, expressed her gratitude toward Mr. Imeson for his chairmanship and leadership over the past two years. "It's been an education for all of us to better learn how the political system works in the state," she said.

Ms. Wustenberg thanked the Board for its support of the Central Oregon Regional Advisory Board. Understanding the time and effort put into the ultimate outcome of a branch campus model, Ms. Wustenberg said she was proud to have been a part of the group.

DELEGATION OF AUTHORITY TO THE BOARD'S EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE

Board Secretary Vines read the statement pertaining to delegation of authority to the Board's Executive Committee:

"Pursuant to Article II, Section 5 of the Bylaws of the Board of Higher Education, the Board delegates to the Executive Committee authority to take final action as here designated or deemed by the Committee to be necessary, subsequent to the adjournment of this meeting and prior to the Board's next meeting, which is scheduled for October 20, 2000. The Executive Committee shall act for the Board in minor matters, any matter where a timely response is required prior to the next Board meeting, including possible grievances."

Board members agreed to the delegation of authority as stated.

ADJOURNMENT

The Board meeting adjourned at 12:55 p.m.


Diane Vines
Secretary of the Board



Tom Imeson
President of the Board