Meeting Minutes - June 2000
Minutes of the Meeting of the Board of Regents of the University System of
Georgia
Held At 270 Washington St., S.W., Atlanta, Georgia
June 13 and 14, 2000
CALL TO ORDER
The Board of Regents of the University System of Georgia met on Tuesday, June 13 and Wednesday, June 14, 2000 in the Board Room, room 7007, 270 Washington St., S.W., seventh floor. The Committee on Real Estate and Facilities met as a Committee of the Whole on Tuesday, June 13. On Wednesday, June 14, the following Committees met: the Committee on Finance and Business Operations as a Committee of the Whole; the Committee on Real Estate and Facilities; the Committee on Education, Research, and Extension; and the Committee on Organization and Law. After the Committee meetings on Wednesday, the Chair of the Board, Regent Kenneth W. Cannestra, called the meeting of the full Board to order at 9:00 a.m. Present on Wednesday, in addition to Chair Cannestra, were Regents Connie Cater, Joe Frank Harris, Hilton H. Howell, Jr., George M. D. (John) Hunt III, Charles H. Jones, Donald M. Leebern, Jr., Elridge W. McMillan, Martin W. NeSmith, Glenn S. White, Joel O. Wooten, and James D. Yancey.
[ return to top ]RECOGNITION OF NATIONAL TENNIS CHAMPIONS
Chair Cannestra called upon the Chancellor to make a special presentation.
Chancellor Portch explained that the University System was privileged to have three national championship tennis teams this year. The University of Georgia ("UGA") Lady Bulldogs shocked the number one Stanford University Cardinals in a five to four win, the Lady Bulldog's second National College Athletic Association ("NCAA") Division I title. The last time the team reached the finals in 1994, they also beat the Cardinals five to four. Additionally, the All-American duo of Marissa Catlin and Lori Grey ranked number one in the doubles championship. Moreover, Coach Jeff Wallace was named the Intercollegiate Tennis Association's Coach of the Year. The team was not able to be present at this meeting.
Two other national championship teams were able to attend this meeting of the Board of Regents. Chancellor Portch stated that the Georgia Perimeter College ("GPC") women's tennis team beat Central Florida Community College 43 to 37 to win their first ever national championship at the National Junior College Athletic Association's ("NJCAA") Division II Championship in Tucson, Arizona. Then, the GPC men's team won its third consecutive NJCAA Division II Championship in Tyler, Texas. These championships bring great honor to the University System, said the Chancellor, and he called upon President Jacquelyn M. Belcher to introduce the teams.
President Belcher greeted the Board. She remarked that there are many champions at GPC, but at this meeting, the tennis champions and their coaches were represented at the Board meeting. She introduced Head Coach Joyce Garrett, the women's team coach.
Coach Garrett greeted the Board. She introduced the following members of the women's team: Ms. Mayumi McDowell, Ms. Mary Brooke Spearman, and Ms. Cindy Delgado. Ms. McDowell was the number one doubles champion along with Joy Mitchell. Ms. Spearman was a semifinalist in number two singles and doubles. Ms. Delgado was the national champion in number four singles. Coach Garrett stated that she was very proud of the team and that she appreciated the support of the Board and GPC.
Next, President Belcher called upon Assistant Coach Chris Becker for the men's team.
Assistant Coach Becker greeted the Board and stated that Head Coach Billy Pate sent his regards. He then introduced the following members of the men's team: Mr. Mario Toledo, Mr. Bartosz Koldej, Mr. Brendan Zackey, Mr. Marco Grangeiro, and Mr. Gilberto Alvarez. He remarked that the championship game against the Tyler, Texas team was challenging to the end, but the team did a great job.
President Belcher noted that the Regents had been given brochures about each of the teams, and she thanked the Chancellor and the Board for this recognition.
Chancellor Portch congratulated President Belcher and the tennis teams.
After this presentation, the Board adjourned for Committee meetings, beginning with the Committee on Finance and Business Operations as a Committee of the Whole. At approximately 10:00 a.m., the full Board reconvened for its regular session.
INVOCATION
The invocation was given on Wednesday, June 14 by Regent Donald M. Leebern,
Jr.
ATTENDANCE REPORT
The attendance report was read on Wednesday, June 14 by Secretary Gail S. Weber,
who announced that Regent Edgar L. Jenkins had asked for and been given permission
to be excused both Tuesday, June 13 and Wednesday, June 14. Additionally,
Regent White had asked for and been given permission to be excused Tuesday,
June 13, and Regents Allgood and Baranco had asked for and been given permission
to be excused Wednesday, June 14.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
Motion properly made and duly seconded, the minutes of the Board of Regents
meeting held on May 9 and 10, 2000 were unanimously approved as distributed.
[ return to top ]
RECOGNITION OF DR. DAVID H. BOTTOMS AS GEORGIA'S POET LAUREATE
Chair Cannestra called upon Chancellor Portch to make a special presentation.
Chancellor Portch remarked that he was pleased to announce that Governor Barnes had recently appointed Dr. David H. Bottoms Georgia Poet Laureate. Dr. Bottoms is a Professor of English and Creative Writing at Georgia State University ("GSU"). The Chancellor noted that each of the Regents had been given a copy of Dr. Bottoms' poem, "The Boy Shepherds' Simile," which was designed, set, and printed on the occasion of his inauguration. The Chancellor stated that being Poet Laureate is an onerous position, because a person can be called upon to write a poem specifically for a particular occasion. Dr. Bottoms was born in Canton, Georgia. He earned his bachelor's degree from Mercer University, his master's degree from State University of West Georgia (formerly West Georgia College), and his doctorate from Florida State University. He is a prolific writer of poetry books and novels. His work has appeared in numerous magazines and anthologies, and he has held over 150 readings and writing workshops at colleges and universities across the nation. His first book, Shooting Rats at the Bibb County Dump, was chosen by Robert Penn Warren as winner of the 1979 Walt Whitman Award of the Academy of American Poets. Chancellor Portch then introduced Dr. Bottoms.
Dr. Bottoms thanked the Chancellor. He thanked each of the Regents for this honor and for their appreciation of the importance of literature and the arts to the University System and to the State at large. He also thanked President Carl V. Patton for his support of the creative writing faculty at GSU. He remarked that he is very proud of what GSU is doing in the State, in the nation, and internationally. Too often in our culture, literature and the arts are thought to be impractical, frivolous, and unimportant, but this is true foolishness, remarked Dr. Bottoms. Indeed, just the opposite is true, he contended. The arts are among the greatest of human endeavors, he said. We know of past cultures from the artistic endeavors of those cultures. We define ourselves spiritually and culturally through the arts. Robert Penn Warren was fond of saying that the world is always trying to tell the poet something. Dr. Bottoms found it intriguing that the poet does not tell the world something, but vice versa. We all have that element of the poet in us, he said, if we just listen to the way the world speaks to us. He explained that to him, a poem is an act of interpretation, being humble enough to listen to the signals the world sends and trying to put those signals into words to make some sense out of things. Poetry has a sense of revelation, he said. He then explained that "The Shepherd Boy's Simile" is a poem about his childhood in Canton, Georgia. One of his major distinctions growing up in Canton was that his mother was the superintendent of the Sunday School of the Canton First Baptist Church. This meant that when Christmas came around, he was always drafted into the Christmas program as one of the characters at the manger, having to stand out on the cold front lawn of the church dressed in a sheet. Dr. Bottoms then read the poem, which was about that experience. He then thanked the Board again and stepped down.
Chair Cannestra thanked Dr. Bottoms and proceeded to the Committee reports.
EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE
The Executive Committee met on Tuesday, June 13, 2000 at 10:15 a.m. in the Chancellor's Conference Room, room 7019, for the purpose of discussing fiscal year 2001 compensation for the Chancellor. Committee members in attendance were Chair Kenneth W. Cannestra and Regents Juanita P. Baranco, Edgar L. Jenkins, and Donald M. Leebern, Jr. No actions were taken at this meeting, and the full Board further discussed the compensation issue during Executive Session on Wednesday, June 14. (See page 68.)
[ return to top ]
COMMITTEE ON FINANCE AND BUSINESS OPERATIONS
The Committee on Finance and Business Operations met as a Committee of the Whole on Wednesday, June 14, 2000 at 9:00 a.m. in the Board Room. Committee members in attendance were Chair Glenn S. White, Vice Chair Hilton H. Howell, Jr., and Regents Connie Cater, George M. D. (John) Hunt III, Charles H. Jones, Donald M. Leebern, Jr., and James D. Yancey. Chair White reported during the full Board meeting on Wednesday that the Committee as a Whole had reviewed one item, which required action. With motion properly made, seconded, and unanimously adopted, the Board approved and authorized the following:
1. Approval of Institutional Operating and Capital Budgets for Fiscal Year 2001
Approved: The Board approved the institutional operating and capital budgets for University System of Georgia institutions and agencies. The list of those institutions as well as tables providing a comprehensive picture of their recommended budgets from several perspectives and breakdowns of the budgets by functional category are on file with the Office of Capital Resources. These budgets have been reviewed by Capital Resources staff for compliance with Board of Regents' policies and directives.
This item was discussed in full by the Committee on Finance and Business Operations as a Committee of the Whole. (See pages 7 to 9.)
Background: The fiscal year 2001 educational and general operating budget for the University System of Georgia is $3.79 billion. This represents an increase of $119 million, or 3 % over fiscal year 2000. The Systemwide auxiliary enterprise budget, which includes housing, food services, intercollegiate athletics, bookstores, and shops, is $306.9 million for fiscal year 2001, an increase of $13.6 million over last year. The student activity budget, which supports educational, recreational, cultural and social activities for students, is $60 million, an increase of $4.5 million. Finally, the recommended fiscal year 2001 capital budget, including all sources of funds (auxiliary enterprise funds, interest income, and institutional and other funds) is $169.9 million. This is an increase of $3.3 million above last year's approved amount, exclusive of general obligation ("G.O.") bond funded projects. Like last year, G.O. bond-funded projects were approved in the fiscal year 2000 supplemental budget.
The fiscal year 2001 operating and capital budget recommendations were the culmination of the process begun in late January 2000. The senior leadership group in the Central Office held campus budget conferences via the Georgia Statewide Academic and Medical System ("GSAMS") with each institutional president and senior staff. From these meetings, which centered on key institutional budget priorities and enrollment trends, allocation recommendations for State appropriations were developed. These were approved by the Board of Regents in April 2000. Also at the April meeting, the Board approved recommendations on tuition and mandatory student fees, including technology fees. These actions by the Board formed the basis for the institutional budgets presented at this meeting. In addition to budget requests reflecting State appropriations and tuition revenues, each institutional budget includes auxiliary enterprise funds, student activity funds, capital funds, and all other sources of revenue.
The tables presented to the Board provided a comprehensive picture of recommended institutional budgets. The recommendations include a breakdown of budgets by fund source (i.e., educational and general, capital, auxiliary enterprises, and student activity) and a detailed description of educational and general budgets by revenue source and expenditure category (personal services, operating expenses, and equipment). The capital budget recommendation indicated sources of funds and types of projects. Capital projects that are to be supported by institutional funds will be subject to appropriate review, as required by policy. The staff also provided a table that depicted the breakdown of the budget by functional category: instruction, research, public services, and academic, student, and institutional support.
COMMITTEE ON FINANCE AND BUSINESS OPERATIONS, "COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE"
At approximately 9:05 a.m. on Wednesday, June 14, Chair Cannestra convened the meeting of the Committee on Finance and Business Operations as a Committee of the Whole. He then turned the chairmanship of the meeting over to Regent White. Board members in attendance at this meeting in addition to Regents Cannestra and White were Regents Connie Cater, Joe Frank Harris, Hilton H. Howell, Jr., George M. D. (John) Hunt III, Charles H. Jones, Donald M. Leebern, Jr., Elridge W. McMillan, Martin W. NeSmith, Joel O. Wooten, and James D. Yancey.
Chair White thanked Regent Cannestra and explained that this presentation would be the final phase of the budget process. He noted that each of the Regents had been sent a copy of the proposed fiscal year 2001 institutional operating and capital budget prior to this meeting. This budget is the culmination of a tedious year-long process that the staff takes on with each of the institutions in the University System. At this meeting, the staff was presenting the budget for Board approval. Chair White called upon Senior Vice Chancellor for Capital Resources Lindsay Desrochers to begin the presentation.
Dr. Desrochers reiterated that this is the culmination of the year-long budget process. All revenue sources and expenditures are represented within the budget. She noted that the budget is created by Associate Vice Chancellor for Fiscal Affairs William R. Bowes and Budget Director Shelley Nickel, and she asked them to present it to the Board.
Mr. Bowes greeted the Board and said that, for the benefit of the newer Regents, he would review the budget process. In September 1999, the Board approved the fiscal year 2001 budget request, and at this meeting, the Board would consider the annual fiscal year 2001 budget, which is based on the actions taken by the Board in April 2000 to allocate the State appropriations and to implement some of the tuition and fee recommendations. For the last month or so, the institutions had been developing their annual budgets based on those actions, and the staff were submitting the final recommendations for the Board's approval. The total budget is $4.33 billion, all funds included. There are four major categories of funds. The education and general fund is used to support the central mission of the institutions: instruction, research, and public services. The fund's revenue comes from State appropriations, tuition, and other sources, such as continuing education revenues, which are included as part of departmental sales and services. The fund comprises approximately 87.6% of the total budget. The auxiliary enterprise fund supports those activities that are ancillary to the central mission, such as intercollegiate athletics, student health, housing, food services, and the like. These activities are considered to be self-supporting, meaning that the amount of revenue raised must be sufficient to cover total costs, and are supported by elective fees. The auxiliary enterprise fund comprises about 7.1% of the total budget. The student activity fund supports the cultural, social, and recreational activities provided for the benefit of students. These are supported by mandatory fees, which are now subject to review by campus committees that have a minimum of 50% student membership. This fund comprises about 1.4% of the budget. Finally, the capital outlay fund reflects funds that are used for construction, renovation, and ongoing repair of facilities. The fund sources include major repairs and rehabilitation ("MRR") funds, auxiliary enterprise funds, interest income, and general operating funds. This comprises about 3.9% of the total budget. Mr. Bowes noted that the capital outlay presented as part of the budget did not include funding for major construction projects, which are funded separately by general obligation ("G.O.") bond funds that were approved in the fiscal year 2000 amended budget.
Next, Mr. Bowes discussed some of the recent budgetary trends. The educational and general fund is $3.791 billion, an increase of approximately 3.2% over last year. Increases in this fund in recent years have been in the range of 6% to 8%. This year, the appropriation was relatively flat except for the additional funds received for salary increases. Mr. Bowes noted that this fund also includes funds received for the transfer of the public library system to the University System and the creation of the State Data and Research Center (the "Data Center") at the Georgia Institute of Technology. The State appropriation of $1.574 billion represents a 4.2% increase over last year. This matches last year's budget increase, but the bulk of the new funds are for the public library system and the Data Center, which totals about $55 million, not including lottery funds. The average increase in State appropriations over recent years has been about 4.5%. Finally, tuition and other revenue comprise $854 million of the budget this year, an increase of about 2.8% over last year. Tuition represents about half of this figure. The balance includes funds for indirect cost recoveries, gifts and grants, endowment income, departmental sales and services, and new funds for the recently approved technology fees.
Mr. Bowes stressed that the University System budget functions in a very dynamic environment, in which some of the revenue and expenditure assumptions can be affected by changing enrollment, economic conditions, and other factors that are unforeseeable at the beginning of the fiscal year. The institutions are therefore encouraged to continually reevaluate their budgets and the underlying assumptions and to make adjustments as needed. Mr. Bowes reported that this year, the Central Office budget staff have been working closely with the Pappas Consulting Group, Inc. on the issue of the budget process to find ways to make improvements in the process for the benefit of the institutions and the Central Office. He then turned the floor over to Ms. Nickel.
Ms. Nickel thanked Mr. Bowes and stated that she would be focusing on the fiscal year 2001 education and general budget broken into categories by function and by source of revenue. Then, she would review the capital budget. She showed the Regents a PowerPoint slide of the education and general budget broken into functions and explained that the functions describe how the funds are intended to be spent. The functions are used in higher education nationwide, which allows for comparisons between systems and institutions. The percentages for functions are consistent with last year's budget, with about 50% of the funds being spent in instruction, research, and public service. Ms. Nickel noted that the Medical College of Georgia's hospital and clinic function represents about $312 million this year. That will be diminished in the future as the MCG Health, Inc. contract goes into effect. The sponsored funds and patient fees will no longer be part of the University System budget, which will only reflect the State appropriation supporting that function. Turning to the sources of revenue, Ms. Nickel reported that the State appropriations continue to be the largest source of revenue at approximately $1.7 billion this year, including about $32 million in lottery funds and $67 million in special funding initiatives. She stressed that these are funds that the University System requests on an annual basis and are appropriated on an annual basis. In other words, they are not considered part of the University System's ongoing base budget. Within those funds is about $26 million that supports the technology infrastructure, which the staff are in discussion with the Office of Planning and Budget and the Legislative Budget Office in trying to make them part of the base budget in the future, since those expenditures will not go away. Sponsored funds account for about $1.1 billion, or 30%. Tuition and other revenue account for approximately $850 million, or 23%. These percentages are both very similar to those of last year's budget. The last and smallest source of funds is sales and services, which is where continuing education fees are budgeted.
The capital budget is supported with MRR funds, investment income, lottery funds, and auxiliary funds, explained Ms. Nickel. This year, the MRR fund is about $52 million, which is $22 million more than it was five years ago. Some examples of the projects that will be begun or completed this year are the housing renovations at the University of Georgia, a book store expansion at Georgia Southern University, and some classroom renovations at the Georgia Perimeter College Decatur campus. In closing, Ms. Nickel noted that all in all, this was a healthy capital budget. She then stepped down.
Chair White asked whether the Regents had any questions or comments about the institutional operating and capital budget. Seeing that there were no questions or comments, he asked whether Dr. Desrochers had any final remarks.Dr. Desrochers invited the Regents to call her if they had any questions. She recognized that this is a different kind of budgeting than that to which many people are accustomed.
Chair White asked for a motion to approve the budget.
Regent Leebern made the motion, which was variously seconded. With motion properly made, seconded, and unanimously adopted, the Board approved the operating and capital budget.
In closing, Chair White thanked Dr. Desrochers, Mr. Bowes, and Ms. Nickel for their work. He then adjourned the Committee on Finance and Business Operations as a Committee of the Whole and turned the floor back to Chair Cannestra.
There being no further business to come before the Board, Chair Cannestra adjourned the Board into its regular Committee meetings.
[ return to top ]
COMMITTEE ON REAL ESTATE AND FACILITIES
The Committee on Real Estate and Facilities met on Wednesday, June 14, 2000 at approximately 9:20 a.m. in the Board Room. Committee members in attendance were Chair Charles H. Jones, Vice Chair Donald M. Leebern, Jr., and Regents Connie Cater, Hilton H. Howell, Jr., George M. D. (John) Hunt III, Glenn S. White, and James D. Yancey. Chair Jones reported to the Board on Wednesday that the Committee had reviewed six items, all of which required action. With motion properly made, seconded, and unanimously adopted, the Board approved and authorized the following:
1. Resolution, 2000B and 2000C G.O. Bond Issue, Georgia State Financing and Investment Commission, University System of Georgia
Approved: The Board adopted a resolution prepared by the Revenue Division of the Department of Law covering the issuance of 2000B and 2000C general obligation ("G. O.") bonds by the State of Georgia through the Georgia State Financing and Investment Commission for use in funding projects for the University System of Georgia.
Background: The Revenue Division of the Attorney General's Office prepared on behalf of the Board of Regents a resolution to cover the sale of 2000B G. O. bonds for the following projects:
| I-41 | Nursing, Health Science & Outreach Macon State College (Design) |
$650,000 |
| I-42 | Agricultural Sciences Abraham Baldwin Agricultural College (Design) |
$285,000 |
| I-54 | Renovation Classroom E Georgia Perimeter College |
$2,900,000 |
| Governor's Traditional Industries Program | $1,500,000 | |
| TOTAL | $5,335,000 |
Additionally, the Revenue Division of the Office of the Attorney General prepared on behalf of the Board of Regents a resolution to cover the sale of 2000C G. O. bonds for the following projects:
| I-14 | University Learning Center Clayton College & State University |
$22,300,000 |
| I-31 | Technology & Commerce Center Columbus State University |
$14,930,000 |
| I-43 | Physical Education Building Darton College (Design) |
$729,000 |
| I-44 | Recreation /Athletic/Student Center Georgia Southwestern State University (Design) |
$1,144,000 |
| I-45 | Classroom & Convocation Center Kennesaw State University (Design) |
$1,425,000 |
| I-81 | Classroom Replacement, Phase II Augusta State University (Design) |
$1,202,000 |
| I-82 | 10th Street Chiller Plant Phase I Expansion Georgia Institute of Technology | $4,800,000 |
| I-65 | Planning & Design of Wellness/Dorms/Classroom Middle Georgia College |
$310,000 |
| I-90 | Renovation of Dormitories Middle Georgia College |
$280,000 |
| I-58 | Underground Electrical Distribution Gainesville College |
$1,300,000 |
| I-89 | Plan/Design Renovation of Classroom/Gym South Georgia College |
$250,000 |
| Herty Foundation | $620,000 | |
| TOTAL | $49,290,000 |
2. Rental Agreement, Office of Information and Instructional Technology Athens Space
Approved: The Board authorized the continuation of a rental agreement between Ivey Realty Associates, Inc., Landlord, and the Board of Regents, Tenant, covering approximately 18,600 square feet of office space located at 1865-1867 W. Broad Street, Athens, Georgia for the period beginning July 1, 2000 and ending June 30, 2001 at a monthly rental of $22,475 ($269,700 per year/$14.50 per sq. ft. per year) at the same rental rate for the use of the Board of Regents' Office of Information and Instructional Technology ("OIIT").
The Board also authorized the continuation of a rental agreement between Ivey Realty Associates, Inc., Landlord, and the Board of Regents, Tenant, covering approximately 11,520 square feet of office space located at 1150 Dearing Extension, Athens, Georgia for the period beginning July 1, 2000 and ending June 30, 2001 at a monthly rental of $13,920 ($167,040 per year/$14.50 per sq. ft. per year) for the use of OIIT.
At its April 1999 meeting, the Board approved this rental agreement with each of the four annual extensions of the agreement to be presented to the Board for approval. This was the approval of the first annual extension of the agreement.
As part of the technology master planning initiative, the Arthur Andersen LLP consultants were asked to consider the location of the Athens-based staff as part of their review. Since this report is being made to the Board at the June 2000 meeting and the lease expires June 30, 2000, permission is being requested to renew the lease with the understanding that the recommendations contained in the consultant's report will be assessed and action will be taken to develop a long-range plan based on the findings.
Background: The facility at 1865-1867 W. Broad Street is used for office space for OIIT staff who provide help desk, instructional technology, Student Information System, PeopleSoft project, standard operating system, and local area network ("LAN") support for the non-research universities, as well as support for the Regents' Central Office consolidated reporting systems. There is also an instructional classroom, which is used for faculty and staff development activities.
The space at 1150 Dearing Extension is immediately adjacent to the space at 1865-1867 Broad Street and offers space for the technology initiatives, such as Teachers & Technology, Connecting Students & Services, desktop distance learning initiative, Georgia Library Learning Online ("GALILEO"), and GALILEO Interconnected Libraries. This space also provides expanded help desk services for PeachNet and support for GALILEO. Additionally, this space provides offices for the customer service area, the distance education and academic innovation division as a result of the desktop distance learning initiative, PeopleSoft project support personnel, support for the BANNER Student Information System and Regents' consolidated reporting systems, the ongoing institutional operating system, and LAN support personnel.
3. Amendment to Lease, Georgia Perimeter College, Lawrenceville
Approved: The Board authorized an amendment to the lease agreement between Gwinnett Industries, Inc., Landlord, and the Board of Regents, Tenant, covering approximately 81,725 square feet of space at 5155 Sugarloaf Parkway and 1800 MacLeod Drive at a monthly rental rate of $107,449.86 ($1,289,398.32 per year/$15.78 per square foot per year) through June, 2001 with option to renew on a year-to-year basis for four consecutive one-year periods beginning July 1, 2001 with rent increasing 2.5% per year for the use of Georgia Perimeter College("GPC"), Georgia State University, and the University of Georgia.
That the terms of this amendment are subject to the review and legal approval of the Office of the Attorney General.
Background: GPC has been leasing space at this location since July 1989 for classrooms, computer labs, faculty offices, and other functions related to providing instruction. The previous monthly rental rate is $104,829.13 ($15.39 per square foot per year). The new rental rate is a 2.5% increase from the previous rent amount. The rent includes all operating expenses.
In December 1998, the Board approved the Gwinnett Center to be established on Collins Hill Road. This new facility, which is projected for occupancy in fall 2002, will house the library, an interactive learning commons, 14 high technology classrooms, and computer/technical support spaces.
Bids were received for the site work package on June 6. Site work should begin in late June and will be completed in September 2000. Building construction will begin in October 2000 and should be completed in March 2002. Move-in will occur during the spring and summer of 2002 with classes to begin in August 2002 for the fall semester.
In March 2000, the Board received an information item concerning the need to pursue a privatized development for 120,000 square feet to replace the existing leased space and provide immediate expansion space for upper-division programs. This space would be located on or adjacent to the Collins Hill Road property. Occupancy is projected for August 2001.
4. Acquisition of 1724 Metropolitan Parkway, Atlanta, Atlanta Metropolitan College
Approved: The Board authorized the purchase of property at 1724 Metropolitan Parkway, Atlanta, Georgia from Republic Bank, St. Petersburg, Florida at a purchase price of $370,000 for the use of Atlanta Metropolitan College ("AMC"), using a fiscal year 2001 legislative appropriation for this purchase.
The legal details involved with this acquisition are subject to the review and legal approval of the Office of the Attorney General.
The Board also declared the building on the property to be not advantageously useful to AMC or other units of the University System of Georgia and authorized the demolition and removal of the building.
The Board requested that the Governor issue an Executive Order authorizing the demolition and removal of this building.
Background: This property is contiguous to the southern boundary of the AMC campus. Master planning for the campus includes acquisition of this parcel to permit a new, identifiable main entrance to the campus.
Funds for the acquisition have been provided by a legislative appropriation (fiscal year 2001) for this purpose for the price set by Republic Bank based on an appraisal by Ronald W. Curry, MAI, Atlanta, Georgia.
A phase I environmental assessment has been completed, indicating no significant problems.
The building on the property is a 62,000-square-foot former bowling alley, which is in poor condition.
5. Major Repairs and Rehabilitation Funds
Approved: The Board authorized distribution of major repairs and rehabilitation ("MRR") funds in accordance with staff recommendations.
In May 2000, the staff reviewed for the Committee the target allocation methodology used for MRR funds. At this meeting, staff recommended MRR projects to the Board which will be funded according to the campus funding targets. Proposed projects from each institution have been reviewed by the Board of Regents' Office of Facilities staff for priority, quality, and cost. Recommendations generally follow campus priorities, although all must meet the test of quality and cost.
Guidelines are used to screen campus requested projects for MRR funding. MRR funds are not used for new construction, land acquisition, or auxiliaries. Funds are devoted exclusively to maintenance of current facilities. Institutions are expected to perform adequate annual maintenance and operation; MRR is intended to cover non-routine larger expenditure items. MRR is intended to be used for building system and building integrity purposes before other uses; for example, roofs and HVAC systems take priority over sidewalks and driveways. MRR should be focused on critical building systems and utility infrastructure to reduce building outages due to failed central systems.
6. Major Capital Projects
Each year, the Board of Regents staff review the priority list of major capital projects and evaluate any additional projects submitted by the institutions for consideration. In previous years, the Board has added to the list in roughly the dollar volume of projects that were funded for construction in the prior budget cycle. The objective was to hold the overall priority list of major capital projects to a total cost of approximately $500 million. This process also includes consideration of inflation and other related matters. While these matters were discussed as a Committee of the Whole (pages 16 to 28), the Board actions are as follows:
- Approved: The Board approved a 3.75% increase in project
funding for projects currently on the capital projects list.
Background: Last year, based on a study conducted by an independent construction cost estimating firm, project costs were increased by 5% to reflect the construction inflation being realized in Georgia. For consistency, the staff asked the same firm to compute an appropriate inflation factor for this year. The recommendation was that projects currently on the major capital outlay projects priority list be increased by a 3.75% inflation factor.
- Approved: The Board adopted the rank order of projects 21-26 for a cumulative cost of $514,668,000 and added these projects to the fiscal year 2001-2005 five-year capital outlay rolling plan, as presented below:
| Institution | Project | Requested State Funds |
Cumulative Costs |
|
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 21. | Georgia State University | Teaching Laboratory Building | $45 million | $445,668,000 |
| 22. | University of Georgia | College of Pharmacy | $35 million | $480,668,000 |
| 23. | Georgia Southwestern State University | Health and Human Sciences Building | $12.5 million | $493,168,000 |
| 24. | Albany State University | Liberal Arts Building | $21.5 million | $514,668,000 |
Altogether, nine major capital outlay projects were presented for consideration and placement on the major capital outlay projects priority list. For further information on these items, see pages 16 to 28, "Committee on Real Estate and Facilities, 'Committee of the Whole.'"
| Institution | Project | Requested Payback Funds |
Cumulative Costs |
|---|---|---|---|
| University of Georgia | Parking Deck | $12,800,000 | $12,800,000 |
| Augusta State University | New University Center | $5,200,000 | $18,000,000 |
| Georgia State University | Parking Deck Acquisition | $2,100,000 | $20,100,000 |
| Kennesaw State University | Parking Decks | $15,000,000 | $35,100,000 |
For further information on these items, see pages 16 to 28, "Committee on Real Estate and Facilities, 'Committee of the Whole.'"
On Tuesday, June 13, 2000 at 11:00 a.m., Chair Cannestra convened the meeting of the Committee on Real Estate and Facilities as a Committee of the Whole. He then turned the chairmanship of the meeting over to Regent Jones. Board members in attendance at this meeting in addition to Regents Cannestra and Jones were Regents Thomas F. Allgood, Sr., Juanita P. Baranco, Connie Cater, Joe Frank Harris, Hilton H. Howell, Jr., George M. D. (John) Hunt III, Donald M. Leebern, Jr., Elridge W. McMillan, Martin W. NeSmith, Glenn S. White, Joel O. Wooten, and James D. Yancey.
Chair Jones explained that the rolling five-year capital projects program is four years old. He noted that this system, which was devised by Senior Vice Chancellor Lindsay Desrochers, works very well for the System. He then introduced the Chancellor.
Chancellor Portch thanked Chair Jones and recognized former First Lady Rosalynn Carter, who would be contributing to Georgia Southwestern State University's presentation. He reiterated that this was the fourth year of the capital outlay planning process that was introduced in 1997 in support of the System's comprehensive plan. It is a method which has gained considerable support both within the System and with the Governor and legislature. The proof is in the results., said the Chancellor. In that four-year period, 20 new projects have been funded by the legislature for over $400 million. At this meeting, the Regents would be replacing the projects that were funded in the last legislative session with new projects. The Board would again use the established principles because they continue to be valid and relevant today. This process is part of the strategic plan, which looks at academic programming, enrollment planning, workforce planning, and then capital priorities. Presidents present their institutions' proposed projects, and this personal interaction between the presidents and the Board is one of the great strengths of the process. The Chancellor reminded the Board that the staff reexamine the list every year. There were no changes in enrollments or circumstances that would warrant changing the existing list, so at this meeting, the Board would add additional projects totaling approximately $100 million to $120 million, which would continue the five-year rolling plan. In closing, Chancellor Portch thanked the Board for the work that is involved in this process. He then asked Dr. Desrochers to approach the Board.
Dr. Desrochers greeted the Board. She thanked Chair Jones for his compliments and invited the Regents to suggest any improvements to the process. She explained that the funding sources for capital outlay projects include general obligation ("G.O.") bonds from the State. The projects selected at this meeting would be recommended to the State for G.O. bond funding. Some of the projects also are payback projects. While the Board asks the State to provide the funding for these projects up front, the institutions pay back on those projects based on the fees that are collected from housing, parking, etc. General operating funds are also used for capital construction in the University System. During Wednesday's meeting of the Committee on Finance and Business Operations as a Committee of the Whole, the staff would explain the plans for capital construction by campus based on the general operating funds available to the institutions. There are also major repairs and rehabilitation ("MRR") funds and lottery funds that are specifically identified for capital projects. Finally, institutions have interest income that they have been committed to earn over the years to use for capital construction in appropriate areas of the campuses. Dr. Desrochers noted that it had been four years since the staff and the Board developed the principles for how to evaluate majors and minors projects. The principles were listed under Section I of the Regents' capital projects notebooks, and Dr. Desrochers reviewed them with the Regents. These principles are on file with the Office of Facilities in the Central Office. In closing, Dr. Desrochers complimented Vice Chancellor for Facilities William K. Chatham and his staff for their continuing efforts to work with the institutions on this process. There would be nine presentations at this meeting, she said, and they all have merit. Dr. Desrochers then called upon Mr. Chatham to tell the Regents more about the process.
Mr. Chatham greeted the Board and reiterated that this is a rolling plan concept. It allows institutions to present to the Regents concepts of projects with estimates of cost without expending a large amount of money to develop a full project that may or may not be accepted. So, the presentations at this meeting are simply concepts of projects. Those that are selected to go on the five-year rolling capital projects list will then be developed over the next several years to become a full project. Next year, the projects that are placed on the list this year will be developed with regard to their physical characteristics and a report will be submitted to the Office of Facilities. The following year, a report will be submitted concerning the academic characteristics of the facility. The third year, all of these issues will be integrated by a professional consulting firm and a cost validation will be performed. The project will then be funded. This process allows the best chance for the most worthy projects to be developed and fine-tuned using a standardized process. Six of the projects on the top of last year's list have been funded by the legislature and have rolled off the list. The next eight projects are currently in design using revolving funds or funds provided by the legislature for design purposes. The rest of the projects on the list (approximately $236 million) remain unfunded. Mr. Chatham showed the Regents the 20 projects left on the list, eight of which are in design. At this meeting, the Board would fill in the spaces at the bottom of the list, and their target total for the final list would be $500 million. He stressed that this is only a target; it is not a finite number.
To improve the five-year rolling capital projects process, the Board recognized that a plan with projects going through a five-year cycle needs to have an annual cost escalation due to inflation, explained Mr. Chatham. A project goes on the list at the bottom, and it matures over a number of years. The cost for the same project when it reaches the top of the list is going to be affected either positively or negatively by factors of cost escalation. Over the last few years, an independent cost estimating firm has given the Board an estimate of cost inflation. This year, the staff asked the same firm to make a recommendation on escalation this year, and using that information, the staff were recommending a 3.75% inflation escalation this year. Mr. Chatham asked for a motion to approve this cost escalation.
Regent Leebern moved to approve this recommendation, and the motion was variously seconded.
Chair Jones asked whether there was any further discussion.
Regent Baranco asked how the staff determined that figure.
Mr. Chatham explained that the staff asked an independent cost-estimating firm to take a survey of Georgia-based construction for the last year and estimate in the aggregate the estimate for cost escalation for all types of projects.
Regent Baranco remarked that some building costs are beginning to go down because the market is going in other directions.
Mr. Chatham responded that the staff are regularly asked to defend this figure in various committees and have done so.
Regent Leebern asked whether the consultants break down the individual escalations of the different types of projects.
Mr. Chatham replied that they do not. Basic construction projects are at a lower percentage of increase this year, while more technical projects, such as laboratories, are at higher percentages. Overall, the consultants were recommending an escalation of 3.75%.
Regent Leebern asked whether the consultants had broken down the escalation figures between renovations of old buildings and building new projects.
Mr. Chatham responded that they had not been asked to do that, but the general consensus is that if there is a 5% to 10% contingency factor for new construction, it should be at least double that amount for renovation. So, the escalation factor in this case would likely be about 7.5% or more. However, Mr. Chatham was only estimating.
Regent Hunt remarked that if interest rates go up, construction costs will come down and projects will be cheaper in general as a result of supply and demand.
Chair Jones stated that he had never seen construction costs come down.
Mr. Chatham responded to Regent Hunt that the staff had expected that type of phenomenon after the Olympic period boom, but there was not a decrease in cost after that period.
Chair Jones then called for a vote. Motion properly made and seconded, the Board voted by a majority to approve the 3.75% escalation.
Regent Baranco voted against the motion and explained that she wanted to encourage the staff to monitor the escalation of capital outlay costs.
With that, Chair Jones called upon the first presenter.
The following presidents, representing their respective institutions, presented their proposed capital projects to the Board:
| President | Institution | Project (Cost) |
|---|---|---|
| G. Wayne Clough | Georgia Institute of Technology ("GIT") | Undergraduate Learning Center ($46 million; $33 million State, $13 million institution) |
| Harold Loyd | Abraham Baldwin Agricultural College ("ABAC") | Renovate Three Historic Buildings ($9 million) |
| Michael Hanes | Georgia Southwestern State University ("GSSU") | Health and Human Sciences Building ($12.5 million) |
| Portia Holmes Shields | Albany State University ("ALSU") | Liberal Arts Building ($21.5 million) |
| Frank Butler | Armstrong Atlantic State University ("AASU") | Technology Resource Center & Infrastructure ($19 million) |
| Frank Brown | Columbus State University ("CSU") | Center for Information Resources (Library) ($26.5 million) |
| Jacquelyn M. Belcher | Georgia Perimeter College ("GPC") | Fine Arts & Humanities Buildings ($12 million) |
| Carl V. Patton | Georgia State University ("GSU") | Teaching Laboratory Building ($68 million; $45 million State, $23 million institution) |
| Michael F. Adams | University of Georgia ("UGA") | College of Pharmacy Facility ($35 million) |
After each presentation, the Regents had the opportunity to ask questions of the respective president or make comments regarding the project. Those questions and comments were as follows:
Georgia Institute of Technology
Regent Cannestra noted that the original documentation said that there would be 20 classrooms, 20 administrative offices, and 20 technology support offices. Another document says there will be 30 administrative offices and 30 support offices. He was concerned that the undergraduate learning center was shifting from the undergraduates to the administrators and technology support staff.
President Clough responded that the administrative offices are not necessarily for administrators. Rather, they are for the people who run the co-op program, the study abroad programs, and other student-focused programs.
Regent Cannestra stated again that it seemed the proportion was moving in the wrong direction.
President Clough concurred that the emphasis should be on undergraduates and stressed that the number of classrooms was not reduced. He called upon Mr. Robert K. Thompson, Senior Vice President for Administration and Finance, to elaborate on this.
Mr. Thompson stated that the facility would be a "one-stop shop" for students to attend class and obtain technical support as well.
Regent Cannestra restated his position.
President Clough remarked that his comment was well taken.
Chair Jones asked whether the $149 per square foot cost excluded private contributions.
President Clough replied that this was the amount the State would be funding relative to the size of the building.
Chair Jones asked whether the map of the campus presented was a current map or the master plan.
President Clough replied that it was the master plan.
Chair Jones then asked Dr. Desrochers whether all of the presentations at the meeting would be incorporating their respective master plans.
Dr. Desrochers responded that each project had been reviewed in accordance with the respective campus master plan.
Mr. Chatham added that all of the projects to be considered at this meeting were consistent with the campus master plans.
Abraham Baldwin Agricultural College
Regent Baranco asked why it is more cost-effective to renovate the buildings than to demolish them and start over, particularly with Tift Hall.
President Loyd responded that it probably is not more cost-effective, but they are historical buildings and to demolish them would change the entire look of the campus. He asserted that this project somewhat compensates for the cost by doing all three at once. To renovate the buildings one by one would likely cost much more than doing them together.
Regent Leebern remarked that it did not seem the college had been a very good steward of those facilities. It seemed to him the student facilities had been neglected, while the administrative offices were preserved.
President Loyd responded that the college had maintained the exteriors of the buildings.
Regent Leebern reiterated his remark.
President Loyd replied that the buildings were ex-residence halls.
Chancellor Portch noted that President Loyd had written him, saying that he did not want the dormitories to fall into disrepair.
Regent Hunt asked whether the interiors of the buildings would have to be completely excavated, leaving only the structures of the buildings.
President Loyd responded that this was correct. Everything inside the buildings will change, while everything outside will remain relatively the same.
Regent Hunt noted that the girls' dormitories have been abandoned for approximately 40 years.
President Loyd replied that the buildings were abandoned before he came to the college in 1971. Because they were classified as residence halls, the college could not request State funds, but had to use auxiliary funds instead. That likely played a role in the fact that they were never renovated.
Georgia Southwestern State University
After his presentation, President Hanes called upon former First Lady Rosalynn Carter to make a few comments about the Rosalynn Carter Institute (the "Institute").
Mrs. Carter greeted the Board and remarked that she is excited about the proposed project at GSSU. She explained that when she and former President Carter returned to Georgia after his presidency, the then president of GSSU and a delegation from the community came to see her and asked her to help the university work on the issue of mental health. However, she had already established a very good mental health program at the Carter Center. So, they decided to work with those people caring for people with mental illnesses, which grew to include all caregivers. At the time, they did not realize the significance of that decision. In 1998, when the Institute was established, nobody was working on the issue, but everyone agreed that it was much needed. So, the Institute found itself on the cutting edge of this issue, which is a major issue today and will become more important as the population ages. Because of its importance, the Institute has become known nationally and internationally. GSSU has helped to put caregiving on the map. The Institute has received major research and technical assistance grants from the Pew Charitable Trusts and the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation. Core operations funding comes from the Charles L. Mix Fund, and major individual contributions have been made to the Institute. The Institute has a relatively small staff, including an eminent scholar. The Institute has been very good for the community and many people come to GSSU to visit the institute. It has established partnerships across the country, and it has become a real resource and research facility for them. The Institute's current location was formerly a residence, and it does not have enough meeting space nor access for those with disabilities. The long-range goal of the Institute is to integrate its programs with the range of disciplines at GSSU. This building will give the Institute much-needed space so that it can grow and support the related research. In closing, she thanked the Regents for their consideration of this project.
Regent Hunt remarked that bringing mental health and nursing under the same umbrella was impressive.
Mrs. Carter stated that it was wonderful to have use of the facilities of the university.
Regent Howell asked whether the four buildings referenced in the proposal would be demolished.
President Hanes replied that two of the buildings would be demolished. The President's house will remain, and the student health center will become the campus police station. The School of Nursing (old library) will be held because there are many renovations planned over the next five to six years with nowhere else to move faculty and staff during that time. So, the old library will serve as swing space while other buildings are being renovated. President Hanes noted that 9 out of 34 buildings on campus are in poor or unusable condition. In fact, there was a MRR project needed in every building on campus. All of the MRR projects in academic buildings have been completed, but there are still a number of renovations planned over the next five to six years.
Regent Howell asked whether the funds for this project will do anything with the existing facility used by the Institute.
President Hanes replied that it would not, but $1 million will be put into the old library for removal of hazardous materials and some major systems updates.
Chair Jones noted that the cost per square foot is considerably less than other projects. He also commended the work of Mrs. Carter.
President Hanes stated that he was also very proud of Mrs. Carter. She has not only given to GSSU, but has also provided leadership throughout the State of Georgia and the world.
Mrs. Carter remarked that she is very proud of GSSU and its activities.
Chair Jones stated that the Board was very pleased to have Mrs. Carter at this meeting and to know that she is part of the GSSU community.
After this discussion, at approximately 12:30 p.m., Chair Jones adjourned the meeting for lunch. The Committee meeting reconvened at approximately 1:20 p.m.
Albany State University
Regent Hunt asked whether this project was outside of the flood zone on the east side of the highway.
President Shields replied that it was. The existing building is in the flood plain.
Regent Allgood asked whether the building was damaged in the flood.
President Shields responded that it was, but it was repaired and brought up to code.
Regent Howell asked where Holley Hall is located.
President Shields responded that it is near the river, but it will be demolished.
Assistant Vice Chancellor for Design & Construction Linda M. Daniels showed the Regents where the building is currently located on a map.
Regent Howell asked how much of the campus master plan is already constructed, and Ms. Daniels showed him.
Chair Jones asked whether there is a bridge across the river.
President Shields responded that Albany Tomorrow is planning to build a bridge as well as buildings and hotels.
Chancellor Portch noted that ALSU's master plan was the inspiration for the master planning process Systemwide.
Regent Allgood asked whether the master plan was developed after the flood, and the Chancellor responded that it was. Regent Allgood recalled the original presentation of the master plan and remarked that he had never seen a campus master plan before. The Board recognized that the concept would be useful for every institution.
Regent Baranco stated that after the flood, there was some discussion of whether buildings would be renovated or demolished. She asked whether Holley Hall was supposed to be renovated or demolished.
Vice President for Fiscal Affairs Kenneth Dyer responded that Holley Hall was originally slated for renovation, because the Federal Emergency Management Association's flood management program mandates that if a building is more than 50% damaged, it will be demolished and replaced outside of the flood plain. Holley Hall was determined to be less than 50% damaged. So, minimal renovations were done in order to bring the building back up to code in order to get another five years' life out of it.
Regent Wooten asked how large the existing building is.
Mr. Dyer replied that Holley Hall is less than 60,000 square feet.
Regent Wooten remarked that the proposed project will nearly double the existing square footage.
Armstrong Atlantic State University
Chair Jones asked about Georgia Global Learning Online for Business and Education ("Georgia GLOBE").
President Butler explained that this initiative will put the core curriculum on the Internet to create an e-Core.
It was noted that this project had been presented for consideration on the rolling capital projects list before. President Butler responded that this was the third time it had been presented.
Columbus State University
Regent Baranco remarked that it seemed to be a trend in the capital projects proposals to incorporate a classroom setting in the library. She asked whether this is a trend around the nation.
President Brown replied that it is a trend in terms of the university's need. The master plan identified an inadequate number of classrooms, library spaces, and audio-visual spaces on the campus. So, this project includes classroom space to satisfy that need as well as to provide the technology access that students so badly need. He did not know whether this was a national trend.
Georgia Perimeter College
Chair Jones asked President Belcher on which campus her office is located.
President Belcher replied that her office is located on the Decatur campus.
Chair Jones asked how many campuses Georgia Perimeter College has.
President Belcher responded that it has three large campuses and two other locations. Additionally, the college has recently entered into another relationship with Georgia State University in Alpharetta.
Chair Jones asked how many students the college serves.
President Belcher replied that the college has over 14,000 students.
Chair Jones asked how many languages the students speak.
President Belcher estimated that they speak approximately 90 languages and represent over 100 countries.
Chair Jones remarked that this was interesting. He asked to which campus this project related.
President Belcher responded that it was the Clarkston campus.
Georgia State University
Regent McMillan asked whether there was the possibility that Kell Hall would be condemned.
President Patton replied that there are a number of code issues in the building, but there is a program in place to address the most difficult ones. He agreed that the building is not up to the Americans with Disabilities Act standards. While it seems that all of the ramps would make the building handicap-accessible, the ramps are too steep.
Regent Hunt asked whether Kell Hall will be demolished.
President Patton responded that the plan is to demolish it, but first it will be used as swing space while a few other projects are constructed. Nothing will be moved into the building permanently.
Regent Hunt asked how long it will be before the building is demolished.
President Patton replied that it depends on when this building is funded, but approximately three to four years thereafter.
Regent Howell asked where the new facility would be located.
President Patton responded that it would be at the corner of Decatur Street and Central Avenue where a small walk-up McDonald's currently stands. The location is directly across the street from the natural science laboratory and diagonally across from the General Classroom Building.
It was asked whether the private funding was primarily from one major donor or whether there were many different sources.
President Patton responded that there are many different contributors, including some local foundations, but he expects to be able to name this building after a major contributor. There will also be a broad campaign among the alumni and friends of the university as well.
Chancellor Portch reminded the Regents that with the classroom building project, there were some significant land acquisition issues. He asked about the acquisition of this property.
President Patton replied that this property has only one owner and that this will likely be a much simpler transaction. He added that the issue with regard to the classroom building project was simply price, and once the individual was paid his price, the Board never heard from him again.
University of Georgia
Chair Jones remarked that the Board should do what it can to produce more pharmacists in this State. He asked which universities produce pharmacists other than the UGA and Mercer University.
President Adams responded that there are no other universities in Georgia that produce pharmacists. He noted that the shortage numbers that he had reported during his presentation take into account these two universities' projected productivity. So, this is a very critical State need.
Chair Jones commented that Georgia must be importing some pharmacists from other states.
President Adams replied that not only is Georgia importing significant numbers of pharmacists, but also there is still a strong demand for more pharmacists. In fact, the industry often contacts the university looking to meet that need.
Regent Hunt asked whether biotechnology will be included in this facility.
President Adams responded that there will be additional biotechnology research and coordination with the Medical College of Georgia and the School of Veterinary Medicine.
Regent Leebern asked whether President Adams had a vision to retrofit the existing facility.
President Adams replied that the buildings will be connected. He did not include the dollar figures for that in this proposal because he did not know them at this time. However, the retrofit of the existing building will be funded by monies the university raises on its own. Some estimates for the retrofit are between $6 million and $10 million.
Regent Leebern asked how much this facility will alleviate the demand for pharmacists.
President Adams responded that it is very hard to project far in advance, because so much is based upon the migratory patterns in the State. If Georgia continues to have the inmigration that it has had for the last ten years, then this issue may need to be revisited in another ten years. Realistically, this project is the facility that the current site will bear. It will meet the needs for this decade and probably two or three decades beyond, based on the best projections available. The site is such that if this project is pushed back beyond a foreseeable time frame, it would probably have to be developed on another site and include a major pharmacy building costing approximately $100 million. He asserted that this is the most cost-effective way of addressing the problem at the present time.
Regent Cannestra asked whether using the Internet and telephone to obtain prescriptions was taken into account in President Adams' projections.
President Adams replied that they were taken into account. However, it is very early to project how the Internet will affect the field. It is one of the reasons that the university is training pharmacists on the doctor of pharmacy professional degree level rather than on the bachelor's degree level. In the future, pharmacists may be the center hub directing others in the actual filling of prescriptions. Even taking that into account, President Adams did not think this project would create an oversupply of pharmacists.
Regent Leebern noted that pharmacies now only fill prescriptions at certain hours of the day because of the pharmacist shortage.
President Adams added that another problem is quality control. Georgia is importing some pharmacists who are not trained at the levels that historically Americans have expected, and there are major issues of licensing that exist because of the shortage.
Regent Baranco asked President Adams about the federal grant and what it would add to this project.
President Adams responded that he and the dean of the college are confident that the project can receive grant money. There are two things that are required to increase the number of pharmacists. One is space, and the other is people. The university has already created three endowed positions in the last year, and there are two more in the strategic plan. The university could do much more research in many fields if it had the space. President Adams is working with the university's foundation to come up with an approximately $30 million building for the area of biomedicine to enhance the research being done in that field. So, this facility will not address the overarching need for additional research productivity, but it will dramatically enhance the research productivity in the field of pharmacy.
Chair Jones asked President Adams how many students are in the School of Pharmacy.
President Adams replied that the program accepts approximately 100 applicants per year and there is very little attrition. This project will allow the program to grow to approximately 150 accepted applicants per year, an approximate 50% increase in class size.
Regent Wooten noted that there will be 57 research labs in the new facility, which will significantly increase the graduate program as well as the collaborations with biomedicine.
President Adams said that this will allow more joint participation between the college and the industry than there has been historically.
Regent Hunt commented that it is even more difficult to attract pharmacists to South Georgia.
After the presentations, Mr. Chatham stated that each Regent had been given a green ballot sheet, and he explained how to mark the ballots. He suggested that the Regents take a short break to consider the projects.
Regent Baranco asked how much all of the proposed projects would cost together.
Mr. Chatham replied that they totaled approximately $235 million, but it would only take about $114 million to bring the rolling list up to its approximate goal of $500 million.
The Chancellor stated that after a short break, the staff would collect the ballots. They would then tally the scores and prepare a report to be presented to the Board when it reconvened on Wednesday, June 14.
At approximately 3:00 p.m., the Committee of the Whole took a short break.
Chair Jones reconvened the meeting at 3:10 p.m., after the staff had collected all of the ballots. He then called upon Mr. Chatham to present the payback projects.
Mr. Chatham reiterated that the staff would tally the scores on the ballots, adding the new projects to the bottom of the revolving list for the review and approval at the full Board meeting on Wednesday, June 14. He explained that the last agenda item of this meeting was to consider the payback projects.
There were four projects for the Board's consideration. The first was a parking deck at Kennesaw State University ("KSU") ($15 million). It is the only one of the four that has previously received State funding. During the last session of the legislature, the budget provided $600,000 for the planning and design of that project. The second project was also a parking deck ($12.8 million) for UGA. Mr. Chatham reminded the Regents that UGA's master plan calls for a series of parking decks to be created to move automobiles off the campus and onto the perimeter so that roads and asphalt can be replaced with green spaces. The third project was a new university center ($5.2 million) at Augusta State University. This project will go a long way toward completing the master plan of that campus. All of the first three projects were considered last year and recommended as part of the budget, but the KSU project was the only one that received any State funding. Finally, the fourth project was another parking deck ($2.1 million) at Georgia State University. Mr. Chatham stressed that these are payback projects, which means that the funds are made available to the University System via bonds and then paid back from student fees or other forms of revenue. He asked the Regents to vote on the order in which these projects would be ranked and presented to the legislature for consideration. After the Regents voted, Ms. Daniels collected their ballots. Mr. Chatham reported that this concluded the day's business.
Chair Jones adjourned the Committee on Real Estate and Facilities as a Committee of the Whole at approximately 3:20 p.m. and turned the floor back to Chair Cannestra.
Chair Cannestra adjourned the meeting. In closing, he reminded the Regents that the Committees would meet at 9:00 a.m. on Wednesday, June 14, followed by the meeting of the full Board.
[ return to top ]
COMMITTEE ON EDUCATION, RESEARCH, AND EXTENSION
The Committee on Education, Research, and Extension met on Wednesday, June 14, 2000 at approximately 9:20 a.m. in room 6041, the Training Room. Committee members in attendance were Vice Chair Elridge W. McMillan and Regents Joe Frank Harris, Martin W. NeSmith, and Joel O. Wooten. Vice Chair McMillan reported to the Board that the Committee had reviewed 11 items, 9 of which required action. Additionally, 446 regular faculty appointments were reviewed and recommended for approval. With motion properly made, seconded, and unanimously adopted, the Board approved and authorized the following:
1. Establishment of the Master of Science in Bioinformatics, Georgia Institute of Technology
Approved: The Board approved the request of President G. Wayne Clough of the Georgia Institute of Technology ("GIT") to establish the master of science in bioinformatics, effective June 14, 2000.
Abstract: GIT has developed the master of science in bioinformatics to satisfy the demand of industry and academy professionals for qualified graduates in this field. Bioinformatics is the interdisciplinary combination of information technologies and applied mathematics with molecular biology and genetics. The interdisciplinary program integrates mathematical, statistical, and computer methods to analyze biological, biochemical, and biophysical data. Demand for the program is found in the pharmaceutical and biotechnological industries. Emory University and GIT have jointly established a biotechnology incubator for small companies in this emerging field. A master's degree is preferred for many entry-level positions in the field; and, a doctoral degree in this discipline is primarily focused upon research. The master of science in bioinformatics degree was developed with support from the Alfred Sloan Foundation. The foundation established a grant program to fund several new programs in the country. Because bioinformatics is an emerging field, GIT will be one of the few institutions in the country with a master's degree in this area, rivaling programs offered at such institutions as Boston and Stanford Universities.
Need: The proposed master of science in bioinformatics is designed to fulfill specific needs for focused scientific knowledge and skill in the marketplace. Because of the genes and proteins identified and sequenced each year, there is a need for professionals with expertise in both biological and computational science to manage and interpret the biological information. According to SmithKline Beecham's senior computational scientist, Mr. James Fickett, "The need for high[ly] qualified workers in this field is currently so strong, that in many groups, new hires are often people from related fields who need several months of on-the-job training before they are ready to work in bioinformatics." Dr. Wendy Bailey of Merck Research Laboratories indicated, "The proposed program will produce graduates with the necessary cross-disciplinary education required to fulfill the needs of a growing bioinformatics field within the pharmaceutical industry." The human genome project lies at the center of the new drug-discovery paradigm that relies on bioinformatics to generate analysis and research data in pharmaceutical development. Other companies that have pledged to support the program include Microcide Pharmaceuticals, Inc. (Mountain View, CA), Incyte Pharmaceuticals (Palo Alto, CA), Human Genome Sciences, Inc. (Rockville, MD), and Genome Therapeutics Corporation (Waltham, MA). Dr. Yury Khudyakov, Chief of the Diagnostic Development Unit at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention ("CDC"), stated, "The establishment of a new graduate program in bioinformatics will be of significant interest at CDC as the need for qualified professionals increases in this discipline." In recruiting life science companies to Georgia, a strong presence in bioinformatics has already proven to be a significant advantage. This is perhaps best illustrated by the fact that EmTech Bio, a multi-million dollar informatics company and commercial joint venture of GIT, Emory University, and the Georgia Research Alliance, is in the process of finalizing plans to relocate an operational facility to the region.
Objectives: The curriculum is geared toward training professionals for industrial jobs. The goal of the program is to provide graduates with advanced skills in mathematics and computer science and a broader, intensive knowledge of biology and biochemistry. It is expected that students will enter private-sector employment after completing the program.
Curriculum: The program will be administered collaboratively among the Schools of Biology, Mathematics, Chemistry & Biochemistry, Physics, and Biomedical Engineering, as well as the College of Computing. The 37-semester-hour program requires three semesters of coursework and does not require a thesis. The stand-alone degree requires the following: 1) the first two semesters cover foundation courses in biology and biochemistry, computational courses in computer science and mathematics, and advanced courses in molecular genetics; and 2) the third semester is devoted to specialized courses in bioinformatics and provides some flexibility in other courses (i.e., mathematics, computer science, etc.) to meet the diverse needs of the students in the program. With the exception of a course in biology, mathematics, and computer science, most of the courses were already offered through other graduate programs. Undergraduate prerequisites in the program are the following: introductory course in biology, one semester of computer programming, introductory course in organic chemistry, one year of calculus, and one year of physics. Faculty members interface with industry on many projects, all of which provide experience in establishing close industrial relations that contribute to graduate training experiences. Student fellowships will be obtained through an "industrial affiliates' program." Corporate gifts to the Georgia Tech Foundation will also be used for student fellowships. For example, students enrolled in the program may be asked to serve on a team that manages databases of biological data, including nucleic acid, protein sequences, and macromolecular structures. Another student experience may involve the use of graphics-oriented tools for molecular sequence analysis or the use of a phylogenetic profile to detect genetic recombination and align nucleotides with encoded amino acids.
Projected Enrollment: The program is projected to attract traditional and non-traditional students. It is anticipated that for the first three years of the program, student enrollment will be 14, 16, and 18.
Funding: The institution will initiate and maintain the program through institutional resources and internal redirection.
Assessment: The Office of Academic Affairs will work with the institution to measure the success and continued effectiveness of the proposed program. In 2004, this program will be evaluated by the institution and the Central Office to determine the success of the program's implementation and achievement of the enrollment, quality, centrality, viability, and cost-effectiveness goals, as indicated in the proposal. In addition, an industrial advisory board has been established to ensure that the program is meeting the needs of the targeted applied area.
2. Establishment of the Major in Applied Computer Science Under the Existing Master of Science Degree, State University of West Georgia
Approved: The Board approved the request of Acting President Thomas J. Hynes to establish the major in applied computer science under the existing master of science degree, effective June 14, 2000.
Abstract: The program will produce highly skilled information technology professionals ready to join the workforce and contribute to the progress of the State. The graduate program has been designed to provide a balance among theoretical concepts, effective training in current technologies, and practical applications leading to certification and licensure.
Need: The State's need for information technology and computer science professionals mirrors the shortages experienced by the nation. The September 1999 Atlanta Journal Constitution reported that Georgia has one of the fastest-growing workforce populations of information technology professionals in the country. The number of such workers will double by the year 2006. The proposed program will assist in alleviating the shortage of information technology and computer science professionals documented by the U.S. Department of Commerce. According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, the projected increase in information technology occupations is much higher than any other type of occupation. The projected growth in all occupations by year 2006 is 14%; however, the projected growth in information technology occupations is approximately 100%. According to a 1997 study conducted by the Department of Labor, "America's New Deficit: The Shortage of Information Technology Workers," the anticipated demands for information technology professionals will reach 1.6 million by the year 2005. In an article published by the American Association of Computing Machinery, at least 190,000 information technology jobs went unfilled in 1997. The same year, the production of information technology students nationally was about 35,000 students. The following is a brief list of companies with multiple job openings requiring graduates of this degree: MCI Worldcom, IBM Corp., SCI of Atlanta, Inc., Management Decisions Inc. (MDI), CDI Corporation, Remington International, Interactive Business System, People Network Inc., Maxim Group Opportunities, Metro Information Services, Ablest Staffing Services, Metamor Industry Solutions, Surfair, Inc., Management Recruiters International, and Superior Technical Resources. Documented reports in the State have also supported the development of the program. According to the April 2000 Carroll Tomorrow: Economic Development Strategy Report, the West Georgia region is a vital part of the strategy to educate and retrain information technology professionals. In addition, the need for more information technology graduates was supported in the report, Occupational Employment, Demand for College Graduates, and Migration: A Statewide View, which was prepared for the Intellectual Capital Partnership Program ("ICAPP").
Objectives: The master of science with a major in applied computer science will prepare students for further academic pursuits leading to advanced managerial and technical skills in information technology. The degree will prepare students for advanced roles in such areas as network programming and support, database programming and administration, software development, Internet/Intranet development and support, multi-media systems, and software engineering. The program will admit students holding undergraduate degrees in fields other than computer science to accommodate career changes and the retooling/retraining required for information technology professionals. Students admitted to the program who do not have an undergraduate background in computer science will be required to take specific prerequisite courses before being admitted to candidacy for the degree. The program has been developed to retrain students in the field, further the educational attainment of those just entering the field, provide opportunities for advanced professional certification, and increase access through flexible program delivery. State University of West Georgia plans to offer select courses at satellite campuses located in Newnan and Douglasville. In addition, some courses will be offered online, but not 50% of the program. When State University of West Georgia decides to offer 50% or more of the curriculum via a distance technology medium, the institution will submit an external degree request to the Central Office for recommendation to the Board.
Curriculum: The 36-semester-hour program will consist of seven required core courses that cover the main subject areas of computer science. Students admitted to the program without an undergraduate degree or major in computer science will be required to complete specific prerequisite courses. The core courses lead to specialization in different areas. The core courses have a theoretical and quantitative emphasis, and the depth courses have an applied emphasis. The core courses cover the following subject areas: telecommunication networks, database systems, software engineering, operating systems, computer architecture, artificial intelligence, and autonomous agents. Students must complete two depth courses. These courses prepare students to obtain appropriate professional technical certification. The technical certification would include, but not be limited to, Microsoft, Novell, Oracle, Cicso, and Linux certification. Technical certification extends beyond the PC platform and Microsoft-based certifications to specialized enterprise and infrastructure technologies. The program was developed based on the Computer Science Accreditation Commission's draft report on the Computing Curriculum 2001.
Projected Enrollment: The program is projected to attract traditional and non-traditional students. It is anticipated that for the first three years of the program student enrollment will be 15, 30, and 45.
Funding: The institution will initiate and maintain the program through institutional resources and internal redirection.
Assessment: The Office of Academic Affairs will work with the institution to measure the success and continued effectiveness of the proposed program. In 2004, this program will be evaluated by the institution and the System Office to determine the success of the program's implementation and achievement of the enrollment, quality, centrality, viability, and cost-effectiveness goals, as indicated in the proposal.
3. Approval of Associate of Applied Science Degree Programs, Georgia Southwestern State University in Cooperation With Middle Georgia Technical Institute
Approved: The Board approved the request of President Michael L. Hanes that Georgia Southwestern State University ("GSSU") be authorized to offer associate of applied science degrees in business, health, services, and technology in cooperation with Middle Georgia Technical Institute ("MGTI"), effective June 14, 2000.
Abstract: In November 1995, both the Board of Regents and the State Board of Technical and Adult Education approved the Student-Centered Collaboration for Public Postsecondary Education in Georgia with Annotations. In compliance with this agreement, GSSU and MGTI requested approval for the following associate of applied science degree programs and specific options:
Associate of applied science in business with options in:
- Accounting
- Business and office technology
- Computer information systems
- Marketing management
Associate of applied science in health with options in:
- Practical nursing
- Radiologic technology
- Surgical technology
Associate of applied science in services with options in:
- Cosmetology
- Culinary arts
Associate of applied science in technology with options in:
- Air conditioning technology
- Aircraft structural technology
- Automotive fundamentals
- Automotive technology
- Aviation maintenance technology
- Drafting
- Electronics fundamentals
- Electronics technology
- Industrial maintenance
- Industrial maintenance technology
- Machine tool technology
- Welding and joining technology
To ensure program quality and compliance with the criteria of the Commission on Colleges of the Southern Association of Colleges and Schools, GSSU and MGTI have agreed to appoint a joint coordinating committee to manage the programs. Membership of the coordinating committee consists of the following individuals:
- Vice President of Academic Affairs, GSSU
- Vice President for Instructional Services, MGTI
- Two faculty members, GSSU
- Two faculty members, MGTI
- One student services/admissions officer, GSSU
- One student services/admissions officer, MGTI
The coordinating committee will meet annually to examine program offerings on a course-by-course basis and to ensure that criteria requirements have been satisfied; to ensure that the faculty members teaching courses in the program are qualified; and to determine the adequacy of educational support services. An annual report will be submitted to the presidents of GSSU and MGTI concerning the progress of the programs.
4. Major Program Revision: Major in Early Childhood Education Under the Existing Master of Education Plus Teacher Certification, Georgia State University
Approved: The Board approved the request of President Carl V. Patton that Georgia State University ("GSU") be authorized to make significant changes in the existing master of education degree program with a major in early childhood education plus teacher certification, effective June 14, 2000.
Abstract: The Department of Early Childhood Education proposed major changes in the existing Master of education degree program with a major in early childhood education plus teacher certification. This program is for individuals who already hold a baccalaureate degree in a field other than education and who aspire to become early childhood teachers in an urban setting and simultaneously earn a master's degree. It is analogous to an master of business administration degree in that a variable number of prerequisites are required, dependent upon the student's undergraduate major. The changes proposed are intended to strengthen the program in ways that conform to the Regents' 1998 Principles and Actions for the Preparation of Educators for the Schools (the "Principles"). The Principles require the following major changes in early childhood education programs that lead to teacher certification:
- 12- to 15-semester-hour concentrations in reading and in mathematics
- Stronger emphasis on classroom management and use of technology
- Completion of the equivalent of a full academic year in field experiences in the schools
- Follow-up mentoring of new teachers during their first two years of teaching.
GSU will continue to offer two options through which individuals who do not have a higher education teacher preparation background may become certified to teach in early childhood education: 1) this master of education program plus teacher certification, and 2) the traditional baccalaureate degree program in early childhood education (also under revision to meet the Principles).
Need: A master of education degree program with a major in early childhood education plus teacher certification already exists at GSU for individuals without undergraduate education in the field. Since 1991, 240 individuals have graduated from the existing program. The current program does not conform to the Principles. It will be replaced with the revised program.
Objectives: Graduates of the revised program will be able to diagnose difficulties in reading and mathematics and know what to do about them, use telecommunication and information technologies as tools for learning, manage a classroom effectively, and bring students from diverse groups to high levels of learning.
Curriculum: The program consists of 30 semester hours of master's level work preceded by up to a maximum of 53 semester hours of prerequisites. The prerequisites include two required concentrations, one in reading and one in mathematics; the required field hours; development of classroom management and technology skills; and other courses needed for certification.
Students apply for admission to the master's program prior to beginning any prerequisites. The actual number of prerequisites each student needs (dependent upon the student's field of study at the undergraduate level) is determined at the point of admission to the program. If all prerequisites are needed, the program may be completed in two full academic years plus summers, beginning with the May inter-session.
After the successful completion of needed prerequisites, the student will be recommended for teacher certification and may exit the program at that time with a teaching certificate in early childhood education but without a master's degree. In order to remain in the program after receiving teacher certification, the student must be employed full-time as an early childhood teacher in an urban setting and concurrently complete program requirements for the master's degree.
Coursework in the master's program includes courses that all students take in common, individualized courses to meet individual needs, and one-on-one mentoring by GSU faculty in the school setting. Courses the students take in common are intended to reinforce and extend what was learned during completion of the program prerequisites. The individualized courses focus on areas of need by each first-year teacher in the program. GSU faculty provide extensive mentoring of these teachers while they are completing their master's degrees in order to help them become effective teachers with children from diverse ethnic, racial, cultural, international, and socioeconomic groups and to encourage them to continue teaching in an urban setting.
Projected Enrollment: It is anticipated that approximately 30 students will complete the master's program each year beginning with the graduating class of 2002.
Funding: No new State allocation has been requested.
Assessment: The Office of Academic Affairs will work with the institution to measure the success and continued effectiveness of the proposed major program revisions. In 2004, the program will be evaluated by the institution and the System Office to determine its success.
5. Restructuring of the Academic Division of Natural Sciences and Nursing to Establish Two Separate Divisions: Mathematics and Natural Sciences and Nursing and Health Sciences, Gordon College
Approved: The Board approved the request of President Jerry M. Williamson to restructure the existing academic Division of Natural Sciences and Nursing to establish two separate divisions: 1) Mathematics and Natural Sciences and 2) Nursing and Health Sciences, effective June 14, 2000.
Abstract: President Williamson requested permission to establish separate Divisions of Mathematics and Natural Sciences and Nursing and Health Sciences by splitting the existing Division of Natural Sciences and Nursing. This change was recommended due to the enrollment growth and increase in the size of faculty in the nursing and health science program areas. In addition, recent site visit reports by the Georgia Board of Nursing have recommended that a separate division be established to house the nursing program. The faculty and administration suggested that the reorganization will enable the institution to more adequately support students who are pursuing career and transfer degrees. Since the restructuring involves the splitting of an existing structure, no new costs will be associated with the development of the divisions.
The resultant Division of Mathematics and Natural Sciences will offer the following program areas: agriculture/environmental sciences, astronomy, biological sciences and biology, chemistry, computer science, forestry, geological sciences and geography, horticulture, mathematics, and physics.
The new Division of Nursing and Health Sciences will offer the following academic programs and areas: associate of applied science in health (with options in medical assistant, paramedic technology, and surgical technology), associate of science in nursing, dental hygiene, diagnostic medical sonography, health and physical education, health information management, medical technology, nuclear medicine technology, nursing, physical therapy, pre-pharmacy, radiologic technology, and recreation and leisure studies. This division will house the Medical College of Georgia-based external bachelor of science in nursing program.
6. Termination of the Major in Apparel Manufacturing Under the Existing Bachelor of Science in Manufacturing Degree, Georgia Southern University
Approved: The Board approved the request of President Bruce F. Grube of Georgia Southern University ("GSOU") to terminate the major in apparel manufacturing, effective June 14, 2000.
Abstract: GSOU requested approval to terminate the major in apparel manufacturing under the existing bachelor of science in manufacturing due to low enrollments and graduation rates for the past five years.
The program is no longer viable because there is no student interest in the program at GSOU. From its inception, the program has had low enrollments and has been unable to overcome a tremendous lack of interest among students. This lack of interest can be attributed to several factors, not the least of which is job availability. One must only scan the newspaper headlines to discern that the job market for the apparel industry is moving out of the continental United States. Additionally, GSOU students who are interested in manufacturing careers (e.g., apparel, plastics, metalworks, etc.) have the option of pursuing the existing major in industrial management offered under the bachelor of science in manufacturing. It is perceived that students choose the industrial management major because of its broader applicability and career potential.
There will be no impact on faculty teaching in the program. Faculty members with expertise in apparel manufacturing also teach in the industrial management major offered under the bachelor of science in manufacturing degree. There are currently no students declared as apparel manufacturing majors and none are in the pipeline. Students wishing to pursue a management/supervisory position in the manufacturing industry may pursue the bachelor of science in manufacturing degree with a major in industrial management.
7. Termination of the Major in English Under the Education Specialist Degree, Georgia State University
Approved: The Board approved the request of President Carl V. Patton of Georgia State University ("GSU") to terminate the major in English under the education specialist degree ("Ed.S."), effective June 14, 2000.
Abstract: In accordance with Board Policy 2.03.03, a program may be deactivated for a period not to exceed two academic years. GSU received permission to deactivate the Ed.S. with a major in English during fall 1998. At this meeting, GSU requested the termination of the major due to a restructuring of the academic programs, institutional self-studies, and strategic planning processes. This program termination will not have an adverse impact on faculty or students. The program was first deactivated to ensure that students already majoring in the program would have time to graduate or be accommodated through a restructured program. By combining concentration areas, faculty members feel that they can better serve students and manage resources.
8. Revised Institutional Statutes, Bainbridge College
Approved: The Board approved the request of President Clifford Brock to revise the institutional statutes of Bainbridge College, effective June 14, 2000.
Abstract: The revision of the statutes reflects a thorough review and brings them into line with current Board of Regents policies and procedures. The revised statutes were presented as a result of a recent Southern Association of Colleges and Schools accreditation visit. The self-study committee recommended a change in the wording of the description of the Academic Council. The statutes were revised to allow the Academic Council to approve any institutional admission criteria that are more stringent than those minimums established by the University System of Georgia.
These changes were approved by the general faculty of Bainbridge College. They have been reviewed by the Office of Legal Affairs and were found to be consistent with the current organization and administrative process at Bainbridge College. The revised statutes are on file in the Office of Academic Affairs of the Board of Regents.
[ return to top ]
9. Administrative and Academic Appointments and Personnel Actions, Various System Institutions
The following administrative and academic appointments were reviewed by Education Committee Chair Juanita P. Baranco and were approved by the Board. All full-time appointments are on file with the Office of Academic Affairs.
Summary of Full-Time Faculty Appointments
|
Summary of Part-Time Retiree Appointments
|
GEORGIA INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY EMERITUS APPOINTMENTS: RICHMOND, EDMUN B.: PROFESSOR EMERITUS, DEPARTMENT OF MODERN LANGUAGES, EFFECTIVE JUNE 14, 2000. ZALKOW, LEON H.: PROFESSOR EMERITUS, SCHOOL OF CHEMISTRY AND BIOCHEMISTRY, EFFECTIVE JUNE 14, 2000. LEAVE OF ABSENCE APPROVALS: TOVEY, CRAIG A.: PROFESSOR, LEAVE FROM AUGUST 16, 2000 THROUGH MAY 16, 2001, WITH PAY. GEORGIA STATE UNIVERSITY EMERITUS APPOINTMENTS: CLARK, THOMAS B.: PROFESSOR EMERITUS OF MANAGEMENT, COLLEGE OF BUSINESS, DEPARTMENT OF MANAGEMENT, EFFECTIVE JUNE 14, 2000. CRAVEY, PAMELA A.: LIBRARIAN/ASSISTANT PROFESSOR EMERITUS, PULLEN LIBRARY, EFFECTIVE JUNE 15, 2000. DILLON, RAY D.: PROFESSOR EMERITUS OF ACCOUNTANCY, COLLEGE OF BUSINESS, SCHOOL OF ACCOUNTANCY, EFFECTIVE JUNE 14, 2000. ELLIOTT, MERWYN K.: PROFESSOR EMERITUS OF DECISION SCIENCES, COLLEGE OF BUSINESS, DEPARTMENT OF DECISION SCIENCES, EFFECTIVE JUNE 14, 2000. ELROD, ROBERT H.: ASSOCIATE PROFESSOR EMERITUS OF DECISION SCIENCES, COLLEGE OF BUSINESS, DEPARTMENT OF DECISION SCIENCES, EFFECTIVE JUNE 14, 2000 EL-SHESHAI, KAMAL M.: PROFESSOR EMERITUS OF DECISION SCIENCES, COLLEGE OF BUSINESSES, DEPARTMENT OF DECISION SCIENCES, EFFECTIVE JUNE 14, 2000. GARCHA, BIKRAMJIT S.: PROFESSOR EMERITUS OF DECISION SCIENCES, COLLEGE OF BUSINESS, DEPARTMENT OF DECISION SCIENCES, EFFECTIVE JUNE 14, 2000. HSU, FRANK: PROFESSOR EMERITUS OF PHYSICS AND ASTRONOMY, COLLEGE OF ARTS AND SCIECNES, EFFECTIVE JUNE 1, 2000. JONES, JEAN: PROFESSOR EMERITA OF ART AND DESIGN, COLLEGE OF ARTS AND SCIENCES, EFFECTIVE JULY 1, 2000. MADDEX, JAMES L.: PROFESSOR EMERITUS OF CRIMINAL JUSTICE, DEPARTMENT OF CRIMINAL JUSTICE, EFFECTIVE JUNE 1, 2000. NEVINS, ARTHUR J.: PROFESSOR EMERITUS OF COMPUTER INFORMATION SYSTEMS, COLLEGE OF BUSINESS, COMPUTER INFORMATION SYSTEMS, EFFECTIVE JUNE 14, 2000. PIEPER, WALTER: PROFESSOR EMERITUS OF PSYCHOLOGY, COLLEGE OF ARTS AND SCIENCES, EFFECTIVE JUNE 1, 2000. RATAJCZAK, DONALD: REGENTS' PROFESSOR EMERITUS, DEPARTMENT OF ECONOMICS, EFFECTIVE JULY 1, 2000. RICHARDSON, W. KIRK: PROFESSOR EMERITUS OF PSYCHOLOGY, COLLEGE OF ARTS AND SCIENCES, EFFECTIVE JUNE 1, 2000. SEARS, CURTIS: PROFESSOR EMERITUS OF CHEMISTRY, COLLEGE OF ARTS AND SCIENCES, EFFECTIVE SEPTEMBER 1, 2000. SKOGSTAD, SAMUEL: PROFESSOR EMERITUS, DEPARTMENT OF ECONOMICS, EFFECTIVE JULY 1, 2000. WILLIAMS, CHARLES: PROFESSOR EMERITUS OF COMPUTER INFORMATION SYSTEMS, COLLEGE OF BUSINESS, COMPUTER INFORMATION SYSTEMS, EFFECTIVE JUNE 14, 2000. LEAVE OF ABSENCE APPROVALS: DARSEY, JAMES F.: ASSOCIATE PROFESSOR, LEAVE FROM AUGUST 12, 2000 THROUGH MAY 10, 2001, WITH PAY WITTA, PAUL J.: PROFESSOR, LEAVE FROM AUGUST 14, 2000 THROUGH MAY 10, 2001, WITH PAY. MEDICAL COLLEGE OF GEORGIA EMERITUS APPOINTMENTS: ABRAHAM, EDATHARA C: PROFESSOR EMERITUS OF BIOCHEMISTRY AND MOLECULAR BIOLOGY, PROFESSOR EMERITUS OF GRADUATE STUDIES, SCHOOL OF MEDICINE, EFFECTIVE JULY 1, 2000. BAILEY, JOSEPH P., JR.: CHARBONNIER PROFESSOR EMERITUS OF MEDICINE, ASSOCIATE DEAN EMERITUS OF CLINICAL SCIENCES, SCHOOL OF MEDICINE, EFFECTIVE JULY 1, 2000. BOCKMAN, DALE E.: CHAIR EMERITUS OF CELLULAR BIOLOGY AND ANATOMY, PROFESSOR EMERITUS OF CELLULAR BIOLOGY AND ANATOMY, PROFESSOR EMERITUS OF GRADUATE STUDIES, SCHOOL OF MEDICINE, EFFECTIVE JUNE 15, 2000. BOND, GARY C.: ASSOCIATE DEAN EMERITUS OF ADMISSIONS, SCHOOL OF MEDICINE, ASSOCIATE DEAN EMERITUS, SCHOOL OF GRADUATE STUDIES, ASSOCIATE PROFESSOR EMERITUS OF PHYSIOLOGY, ASSOCIATE PROFESSOR EMERITUS OF GRADUATE STUDIES, SCHOOL OF MEDICINE, EFFECTIVE JULY 1, 2000. CORMIER, RENE E.: ASSOCIATE PROFESSOR EMERITUS OF MEDICINE, SCHOOL OF MEDICINE, EFFECTIVE JULY 1, 2000. EDWARDS, BARBARA H.: ASSOCIATE PROFESSOR EMERITA OF MEDICAL TECHNOLOGY, SCHOOL OF ALLIED HEALTH SCIENCES, EFFECTIVE JULY 1, 2000. EDWARDS, WALLACE S.: ASSOCIATE DEAN EMERITUS OF STUDENT AND ALUMNI AFFAIRS, SCHOOL OF DENTISTRY, EFFECTIVE JULY 1, 2000. EUBIG, CASIMIR: ASSOCIATE PROFESSOR EMERITUS OF RADIOLOGY, ASSISTANT PROFESSOR EMERITUS OF RADIOLOGIC TECHNOLOGIES, ASSISTANT PROFESSOR EMERITUS OF GRADUATE STUDIES, SCHOOL OF MEDICINE, EFFECTIVE JULY 1, 2000. GREEN, KEITH: REGENTS' PROFESSOR EMERITUS OF OPHTHALMOLOGY, SCHOOL OF MEDICINE, EFFECTIVE JULY 1, 2000. HUFF, THOMAS A.: PROFESSOR EMERITUS OF MEDICINE, SCHOOL OF MEDICINE, EFFECTIVE JULY 1, 2000. KARP, WARREN B.: PROFESSOR EMERITUS OF PEDIATRICS, BIOLOGY AND MOLECULAR BIOLOGY, PROFESSOR EMERITUS OF ORAL BIOLOGY AND MAX PATHOLOGY, ORAL DIAGNOSIS AND PATIENT SERVICES, PROFESSOR EMERITUS OF GRADUATE STUDIES, EFFECTIVE JULY 1, 2000. KILEEN, MAUREEN R.: PROFESSOR EMERITA OF MENTAL HEALTH PSYCHIATRIC NURSING, PROFESSOR EMERITA OF GRADUATE STUDIES, SCHOOL OF NURSING, EFFECTIVE JUNE 15, 2000. LEE, CAROL E.: ASSOCIATE PROFESSOR EMERITUS OF OCCUPATIONAL THERAPY, SCHOOL OF ALLIED HEALTH SCIENCES, JULY 1, 2