Meeting Minutes - June 2005
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 7 and 8, 2005
CALL TO ORDER
The Board of Regents of the University System of Georgia met on Tuesday, June 7, and Wednesday, June 8, 2005, in the Board Room, room 7007, 270 Washington St., S.W., seventh floor. The Chair of the Board, Regent Joel O. Wooten, Jr., called the meeting to order at 1:00 p.m. on Tuesday, June 7, 2005. Present on Tuesday, in addition to Chair Wooten, were Regents Hugh A. Carter, Jr., Connie Cater, William H. Cleveland, Michael J. Coles, Joe Frank Harris, Julie Hunt, James R. Jolly, Donald M. Leebern, Jr., Martin W. NeSmith, Patrick S. Pittard, Doreen Stiles Poitevint, Wanda Yancey Rodwell, Richard L. Tucker, and Allan Vigil.
ATTENDANCE REPORT
The attendance report was read on Tuesday, June 7, 2005, by Chair Joel O. Wooten, Jr., who announced that Regents W. Mansfield Jennings, Jr. and Elridge W. McMillan had asked for and been given permission to be absent on that day. Vice Chair J. Timothy Shelnut attended the meeting via teleconference.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
Motion properly made and duly seconded, the minutes of the Board of Regents meeting held on May 17 and 18, 2005, were unanimously approved as distributed.
COMMITTEE ON REAL ESTATE AND FACILITIES, "COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE"
Chair Wooten next convened the Committee on Real Estate and Facilities as a Committee of the Whole and turned the Chairmanship of the meeting over to Regent NeSmith, the Chair of the Committee.
Chair NeSmith said that the purpose of this meeting was to create an ordered list of major capital projects for the System institutions. The good news, he said, is that projects that are added to the list will eventually be funded. The bad news, however, is that it takes five or more years from the time a project is put on the list until it is funded. During that time, the cost of a given project rises considerably, and thus, the cost of the list is increased by approximately 6% per year. He said that there should be a better way to handle these types of projects. One means to do so would be to get more funding from the Governor and the General Assembly. The University System of Georgia is very far behind in its capital projects, and that does not even take into account the increasing enrollments throughout the System. In addition, major repair and rehabilitation ("MRR") funds continue to decrease, and the System does not have the funds to maintain its existing facilities. At this meeting, 14 System presidents would present proposals for major capital outlay projects at their campuses. The Vice Chancellor for Facilities, Linda M. Daniels, would first provide a recap of the monies received since 1996 for major capital projects by each institution. With that, Chair NeSmith turned the floor over to the Chancellor.
Chancellor Meredith thanked the Regents for being a part of this very important process. He said that a lot of hard work went into this process. The institutions worked from January through March defining and refining their requests. The University System Office staff then reviewed these requests and continued working with the institutions to make final adjustments. Projects were tested against overall Systemwide needs and how they measured up against the Board's principles for capital resources allocation and strategic plan. At this meeting, the Board would be dealing with the major capital projects only. At this time, the Board had a prioritized list of 22 projects valued at over $500 million. The Chancellor reminded the Regents that major capital projects are projects with state funding over $5 million, while minor projects involve $5 million or less in state funding. There were a total of 57 new major projects valued at over $1.7 billion submitted for consideration this year. The Chancellor noted that these figures did not include additional projects submitted as part of the five-year outlook planning process. The Georgia Institute of Technology's five-year plan alone projects a need for $500 million. In addition, there were over 100 minor projects that were submitted with a value of almost $400 million. To put all of this into a broader perspective, Chancellor Meredith reminded the Regents that the System had identified a need for $7 billion worth of facilities over the next 10 to 15 years to meet anticipated enrollment growth. That figure is based upon the addition of about 100,000 students. Whether those students arrive 10, 15, or even 20 years from now, the System would need $700 million per year, $467 million per year, or $350 million per year, respectively, to meet its facilities needs for that growth. Even if the System could sustain a $200 million or $300 million annual public-private venture program over this time period, the System would need to average at least $150 million annually in state General Obligation ("G.O.") bonds for major and minor projects to meet its facilities needs.
Construction projects are not completed overnight, the Chancellor said. To have just enough classroom space for today's students is not enough. This Board has always been a Board of vision, he said. The Regents must work to communicate the System's facilities funding needs to the System's funding partners. It is not enough to know that the University System of Georgia has a $500 million priority list. The Regents need to paint a picture of a longer-term perspective to be prepared for the future.
The Chancellor reiterated that much "behind the scenes" work has taken place to get to this point. Although the process was difficult because there were many meritorious projects, the University System Office staff were bringing forward a slate of 14 projects valued at over $600 million for the Board's consideration. The process at this meeting would be similar to what the Regents had experienced in the past. Each president would have a brief period to present the merits of his/her project, followed by a period for questions and discussion with the Regents. Following all presentations, the Regents will rank-order the projects. Thereafter, the rankings would be calculated and the resulting top projects would be added to the bottom of the Regents' major capital outlay projects priority list. The Vice Chancellor for Facilities, Linda M. Daniels, and her staff had recommended that the Regents add approximately $200 million to the bottom of the list this year. Ms. Daniels would talk a little more about the logic for proposing that specific amount to the list momentarily.
Chancellor Meredith remarked that the Board and System presidents have advocated for an aggressive approach to meeting the System's facilities needs. Thanks to this Board's principles for capital planning allocation and their emphasis on academic space, the System has had the classrooms to accommodate most of its needs to date. However, this has required more and more rigorous scheduling, the evolving use of technology to complement physical space for instructional delivery, and completion of construction projects, many of which were funded through creative mechanisms. However, the System will soon exceed its classroom capacity. Just as importantly, crucial student support space is already at a deficit on many of System campuses. Now is not the time for a timid approach in meeting System needs, said the Chancellor, and the difficult task of prioritizing these needs ultimately falls to the Regents. He then turned the floor over to Ms. Daniels to discuss the existing major capital outlay priority list.
Ms. Daniels said that she had a few issues to cover related to the current priority list, which had 22 major capital projects with an outstanding state funding need of approximately $527 million. Over the years, the Board of Regents has kept the priority list at approximately $500 million, requesting state funding from the legislature off the top of the list and adding new projects to the bottom of the list. It has been called a "five-year" list because it anticipates an average of $100 million of state G.O. bond funding per year. In light of the lack of construction funding from the state last year, there was theoretically no room on the list. The System did, however, receive design funding for eight projects on the list in priority order and the staff believe that the provision of those design funds is an indicator of a desire to fund the associated construction, in the amount of $201 million, next year. So, the staff were proposing adding another $200 million worth of projects to the list this year. The staff were bringing forward for consideration a slate of 14 projects valued at over $500 million, and they were asking the Regents to prioritize a list of approximately $200 million to add to the list.
Ms. Daniels next showed the Regents the existing major capital outlay list. She stated that each year in the recent past, the staff have discussed incorporating an inflation factor into the current funding requests for projects currently on the priority list. Again this year, the staff worked with consultants on this issue and were therefore recommending a 6% increase in the cost of projects this year. The recommendation to approve the capital list on Wednesday would include this increase. Ms. Daniels noted that the major repair and rehabilitation ("MRR") funding recommendations had been sent to the Regents' in advance of this meeting and were also up for approval at this meeting. She reminded the Regents that they would again this year be using a computer-based voting and tabulation process. She would go over this in more detail just prior to voting.
In closing, Ms. Daniels said that she hoped the Regents had had a chance to review the major capital projects proposals that had been sent to them the previous week. She noted that they included background information on the process as well as detailed information on all 14 proposed projects. Each proposal included several charts to show enrollment and other funding trends at the particular institution. She asked the Regents to let her know if these data were useful to them and if, in the future, they would like to see other data. With that, Ms. Daniels called upon President Beheruz N. Sethna to begin the first presentation.
The following presidents, representing their respective institutions, presented their proposed major capital projects to the Board:
| President | Institution | Project (Cost) |
|---|---|---|
| Beheruz N. Sethna | University of West Georgia ("UWG") | Classroom Building ($28.5 million) |
| Michael F. Adams | University of Georgia ("UGA") | Veterinary Teaching Hospital ($68.5 million) |
| Carlton E. Brown | Savannah State University ("SSU") | Science and Engineering Technology Building ($28 million) |
| Daniel W. Rahn | Medical College of Georgia ("MCG") | School of Dentistry ($78 million in state funds, plus $30 million in private funds) |
| Betty L. Siegel | Kennesaw State University ("KSU") | Health Sciences Building ($43.9 million in state funds, plus $10 million in private funds) |
| Lawrence V. Weill | Gordon College ("GOC") | Nursing and Allied Health Building ($22.7 million) |
| Carl V. Patton | Georgia State University ("GSU") | Humanities Building($57.5 million in state funds, plus $20 million in private funds) |
| G. Wayne Clough | Georgia Institute of Technology ("GIT") | Biomolecular Science and Engineering Building ($60 million in state funds, plus $20 million in private funds) |
| Dorothy Leland | Georgia College & State University ("GCSU") | Renovation of Historic Structures ($27.5 million) |
| Martha T. Nesbitt | Gainesville College ("GVC") | Classroom Building ($25.7 million) |
| Peter J. Sireno | Darton College ("DC") | Academic Classroom Building ($29 million) |
| James A. Burran | Dalton State College ("DSC") | Academic Building ($22 million) |
| Thomas K. Harden | Clayton State University ("CLSU") | Science Building ($30 million) |
| Thomas Z. Jones | Armstrong Atlantic State University ("AASU") | Health Professions Building ($27.5 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:
University of West Georgia
There were no comments or questions on this proposal. However, Board Chair Wooten noted that there was a special guest in attendance at this meeting and asked the Senior Vice Chancellor for External Activities and Facilities, Thomas E. Daniel, to introduce him. Mr. Daniel introduced Representative Chuck Martin of Alpharetta. He said that Mr. Martin has been a good supporter of the University System of Georgia and that he is Vice Chair of the House Higher Education Appropriations Subcommittee.
University of Georgia
Regent Jolly noted that the College of Veterinary Medicine is turning away two-thirds of qualified applicants and that the proposed facility would allow UGA to increase enrollment in the college by approximately 40%. He asked when enrollments would top out again.
President Adams responded that the Interim Dean of the College of Veterinary Medicine, Sheila W. Allen, would address this question.
Dr. Allen said that by expanding the veterinary hospital, the college will have the flexibility to expand enrollment even further.
Regent Coles asked whether there were any private monies available for this project.
President Adams replied that there could be. He said that UGA raises approximately $10 million annually to benefit the College of Veterinary Medicine. He explained that in the last five years, UGA has more than doubled its private funding. In order to maintain its competitive edge, UGA has put most of these funds into endowed professorships and scholarships. However, if the Regents instruct UGA to apply private funds to this project, he would certainly oblige. He said that this is one of the core teaching responsibilities that he believes has historically been the responsibility of the state. Given the fact that UGA has done almost $1 billion in construction during his tenure at UGA and well over half of that has come from private sources, the one area where the state has continued to support UGA is in the area of instructional space. So, there is a philosophical issue to be considered in this request. He stated that thus far, the state has been better served by UGA's using private funding to build endowments for professorships and scholarships, rather than applying those monies to academic classroom space.
Regent Leebern asked President Adams about the ability of a new facility to attract grants and other research funding.
President Adams again called upon Dr. Allen to answer this question.
Dr. Allen explained that to be state-of-the-art, particularly with regard to equine medicine, requires such equipment as treadmills, pools, and other large items that the current facility is too small to accommodate. A facility that has such amenities would be necessary to recruit top-quality researchers in equine exercise physiology, for example, which is common at other veterinary schools. So, the proposed facility would indeed have the flexibility and design to attract such researchers.
President Adams noted that the growth in the horse industry in the State of Georgia has been dramatic and that the demand for large animal medicine is quite great.
Regent Cleveland asked Dr. Allen to comment on the revenue enhancement that could take place with this proposed facility.
Dr. Allen responded that currently, the College of Veterinary Medicine must limit its caseload because of facility size constraints. So, it certainly will be able to accommodate more cases, which will in turn generate more revenue. All revenues for the teaching hospital are put back into the facility to maintain the facility and purchase new equipment. So, the increased revenues will also help the college remain on the cutting-edge by purchasing state-of-the-art equipment as veterinary technology advances.
Savannah State University
Regent Coles asked President Brown if he understood correctly that there is asbestos in the existing building.
President Brown replied that there is.
Regent Coles asked whether there is asbestos in the other buildings on campus.
President Brown responded that asbestos had been removed from most of the other historic facilities. He said there is no reason to retain the existing facility and every reason to replace it.
Chair NeSmith noted that SSU has a beautiful campus.
Medical College of Georgia
Chair NeSmith asked President Rahn to clarify whether the School of Dentistry accepts students from out of state.
President Rahn responded that the School of Dentistry does not accept applications from anyone other than Georgia residents.
Chair NeSmith asked whether the reason the number of dentists per capita has decreased is because there is a lack of teaching facilities or whether students are not going into that field.
President Rahn replied that there are only 56 dental schools in the nation. There is also a shortage of about 300 faculty nationwide. So, one of the limitations is simply the capacity of the dental education system nationally. He asked the Dean of the School of Dentistry, Connie L. Drisko, to elaborate on this issue.
Dr. Drisko stated that when Emory University closed its dental program, the State of Georgia lost approximately 120 dental graduates per year. As a result, over the years, Georgia has accumulated a deficit of dentists. The proposed facility would help MCG address this deficit. Moreover, the proposed facility would have the potential for expansion in the future.
President Rahn stated that MCG's dental students routinely exceed all national averages in their accreditation qualifying exams. He noted that the School of Dentistry was just reaccredited and received a number of accolades in the process of reaccreditation.
Regent Coles asked why Emory University closed its school of dentistry.
Dr. Drisko replied that she understood it to be a financial decision.
President Rahn added that the majority of dental schools in the nation are public institutions. He said that dentistry graduates are prepared to go into practice in four years, whereas it is at least seven years before medical students can go into practice. So, preparing dentistry students is extremely faculty and facilities intensive and is a very expensive endeavor.
Regent Shelnut asked whether there is a potential accreditation problem related to the existing facility.
President Rahn responded that the School of Dentistry does not have an accreditation problem; however, it does have a capacity problem and aging equipment. Approximately 75% of the school's operatories are beyond the end of their useful lives. They will have to be replaced with units that have fiber optics, high-speed drills, and computer monitors, which cannot fit in the existing facility.
President Rahn stated that MCG will have to address this facility problem at some point in the near future. The choice is to either renovate the existing building and abate hazardous materials, which would adversely affect capacity for a period of time, or it will have to construct a new facility.
After this discussion, Chair NeSmith called for a brief recess at approximately 11:30 a.m. The Committee reconvened at approximately 11:45 a.m.
Kennesaw State University
Chair NeSmith asked President Siegel to clarify the $10 million contribution that would be made by WellStar Health Systems ("WellStar").
President Siegel said that the Executive Director of the Kennesaw State University Foundation, Inc. (the "Foundation"), Wesley K. Wicker, was in attendance at this meeting and could answer this question.
Mr. Wicker stated that WellStar has committed to help the Foundation raise and contribute $10 million to this project. He noted that the Foundation had just completed a $10 million fund-raising campaign and is about to launch a $20 million campaign, of which this effort would be part.
Chair NeSmith asked whether this would be a $10 million monetary contribution, and Mr. Wicker stated that it would.
Ms. Daniels noted that the staff would provide information to the Regents on all of the projects in which nonstate funds are intended to be provided.
Gordon College
There were no comments or questions.
Georgia State University
There were no comments or questions.
Georgia Institute of Technology
There were no comments or questions. After this presentation, Chair NeSmith called for a lunch recess at approximately 12:40 a.m. The Committee reconvened at approximately 1:45 p.m.
Georgia College & State University
Regent Coles asked how in the past the System has handled renovations of historic buildings.
Ms. Daniels responded that the System has a good track record of renovating historic structures and has done a number of minor capital projects working with consultants who understand the intricacies of these types of projects. She noted that the System owns over half of the state's historic buildings and has been a good steward of these facilities.
Gainesville College
There were no comments or questions.
Darton College
Chair NeSmith asked President Sireno from where the majority of DC's students come.
President Sireno replied that DC has a 14-county service region. The majority of the college's students come from Daugherty, Lee, and Worth Counties, although many students are now coming from the metropolitan Atlanta area.
Dalton State College
There were no comments or questions.
Clayton College & State University
There were no comments or questions.
Armstrong Atlantic State University
There were no comments or questions.
* * * * * * * * * * * *
After all of the presentations and discussions of the presentations were concluded, at approximately 2:50 p.m., Chair NeSmith called for a brief recess while the staff prepared for the voting process.
At approximately 3:15 p.m., the Committee reconvened and the Regents voted.
At approximately 3:25 p.m., Chair NeSmith presented to the Regents the results of their votes, which were as follows:
| Institution | Project | State Funds | Cumulative Cost |
|---|---|---|---|
| Georgia State University | Humanities Building | $57.5 million | $616,779,108 |
| Dalton State College | Academic Building | $22 million | $638,779,108 |
| Savannah State University | Science and Engineering Technology Building | $28 million | $666,779,108 |
| University of Georgia | Veterinary Teaching Hospital | $68.5 million | $735,279,108 |
| Medical College of Georgia | School of Dentistry | $78 million. | $813,279,108 |
At approximately 3:30 p.m., Board Chair Wooten adjourned the meeting. The next morning, the Regents resumed with Committee meetings, beginning with the meeting of the Audit Committee at 9:00 a.m.
CALL TO ORDER
The Board of Regents of the University System of Georgia met again on Wednesday, June 8, 2005, in the Board Room, room 7007, 270 Washington St., S.W., seventh floor. The Chair of the Board, Regent Joel O. Wooten, Jr., called the meeting to order at approximately 10:10 a.m. Present on Wednesday, in addition to Chair Wooten, were Regents Hugh A. Carter, Jr., Connie Cater, William H. Cleveland, Michael J. Coles, Joe Frank Harris, Julie Hunt, W. Mansfield Jennings, Jr., James R. Jolly, Donald M. Leebern, Jr., Martin W. NeSmith, Patrick S. Pittard, Doreen Stiles Poitevint, Wanda Yancey Rodwell, Richard L. Tucker, and Allan Vigil.
INVOCATION
The invocation was given on Wednesday, June 8, 2005, by Regent Joe Frank Harris.
ATTENDANCE REPORT
The attendance report was read on Wednesday, June 8, 2005, by Secretary Gail S. Weber, who announced that Regent Elridge W. McMillan had asked for and been given permission to be absent on that day. Vice Chair J. Timothy Shelnut attended the meeting via teleconference.
FAREWELL TO MARK MUSICK, RETIRING PRESIDENT OF THE SOUTHERN REGIONAL EDUCATION BOARD
Chair Wooten next called upon the Chancellor to make some special remarks regarding the Retiring President of the Southern Regional Education Board ("SREB"), Mark Musick.
On behalf of the Board of Regents and the University System of Georgia, Chancellor Meredith recognized Mr. Musick, who has served as President of the SREB for 16 years. The SREB covers 16 Southern states from Delaware to Texas. The Chancellor has known Mr. Musick since he first came to the SREB approximately 30 years ago, and they have worked together on many issues over the years. The Chancellor remarked that there has not been a Governor in the South who has not known and respected Mr. Musick. Legislators, state superintendents, higher education leaders, and others across the nation know him and appreciate his fine leadership. Mr. Musick has been a leader in the Southern Regional Electronic Campus ("SREC"), in which the University System also participates. The Chancellor said that Mr. Musick's work has been exemplary and he has left a great record of accomplishments and service to the South as well as to the nation. He presented to Mr. Musick a resolution of appreciation from the Board of Regents.
Mr. Musick thanked the Chancellor and the Board of Regents for the unique relationship between the SREB and the University System of Georgia. The University System has been represented on the SREB every year since its inception in 1949. The first year, then Governor Melvin E. Thompson appointed four Regents, the state superintendent of schools, the president of the University of Georgia, Chancellor Harmon W. Caldwell, and the executive director of the Rich's Foundation to serve on the SREB. Since 1949, the Board of Regents has been represented on the SREB. When the SREC was established, the SREB paid to use the Georgia Library Learning Online ("GALILEO"). There are now 10,000 courses offered by more than 300 colleges and universities through the SREC. Mr. Musick said that there is an unbroken and unprecedented relationship between the Board of Regents and the SREB. Chancellor Meredith is on the executive committee of SREB. The new president of SREB will be Dr. David S. Spence, who was once the Executive Vice Chancellor with the Board of Regents. In closing, Mr. Musick thanked the Regents for working with the SREB for many years and for their resolution.
FAREWELL TO UNIVERSITY SYSTEM OF GEORGIA PRESIDENTS
Chancellor Meredith said that the University System of Georgia is also seeing change as some presidents are moving on to new challenges. President Jacqueline M. Belcher is wrapping up a decade of service to Georgia Perimeter College ("GPC") at the same time as the institution celebrates its fortieth anniversary. The Chancellor noted that President Belcher's husband, Lewis, accompanied her to this meeting. Under President Belcher's leadership, college operations were decentralized to allow individual campuses to more effectively address their educational needs and community partnerships were significantly expanded. There have been many changes in the campuses and facilities of GPC over the past decade, and President Belcher has also strengthened the curriculum while simultaneously broadening access. She has encouraged innovation and embraced international students. Chancellor Meredith said that President Belcher has been a tremendous asset to the University System of Georgia, and he asked her to approach the Board.
President Belcher thanked the Chancellor for introducing her husband, who has supported her throughout her career. She thanked the Regents for their recognition with "gratitude and humility." She explained that she was humbled because it had been a great honor to have the opportunity to lead an institution as fine as GPC. She said that she is grateful to have had the opportunity to participate in the metamorphosis of the college, which has undergone a culture change that will carry it into the future and will continue to provide access to higher education in the State of Georgia. As with any organization that undergoes significant change, GPC has experienced the struggles of diverse interests as it sought to find balance and make progress. Along the way, GPC learned many lessons. The college has emerged strong with a kind of loyalty, dedication, and commitment necessary to ensure the unequivocal guardianship of its mission. President Belcher thanked those who stood tall and believed in the dream of empowerment for all so that GPC could put students first as it served them in their individual roles. President Belcher said that she stood before the Board with the bittersweet feeling that comes with placing a period behind the last sentence in the chapter of a book with many pages left yet to fill. It is bitter because of the people she would miss who helped her write this chapter so eloquently, and it is sweet because of the heights to which GPC will continue to soar under the leadership of her successor.
President Belcher stated that she wanted to give credit where it was due. She thanked everyone at GPC who supported her in her presidency. She also thanked the staff of the University System Office for their exemplary counsel. In closing, she quoted Oliver Wendell Holmes to emphasize the status of GPC today: "The great thing in this world is not so much where you stand, as in what direction you are moving." President Belcher assured the Regents that GPC is moving in the right direction and stepped down.
Next, Chancellor Meredith said that the System will also miss the services of President Portia Holmes Shields of Albany State University ("ALSU"), who has served as President for eight years. She was named ALSU's first female president. She has led the institution through some very challenging times and provided outstanding leadership during her tenure. Upon her arrival at ALSU, President Shields assumed the helm of an institution that had been ravaged by flood waters from the Flint River. She led the highly successful $153 million flood recovery program at ALSU, which has since revitalized and rebuilt the entire physical plant. During the past eight years, the institution has grown from approximately 3,100 to its present enrollment of 3,700. Under the leadership of President Shields, the academic quality of those students has continued to show significant improvement. The average SAT scores of incoming freshmen have risen more than 120 points since fall 1996. President Shields was instrumental in securing an unprecedented $3 million donation from the late Ray Charles and has helped procure more than $26 million in external grants during the past academic year. She has been active nationally and presently serves on the board of the Association of American Colleges and Universities ("AASCU"). Chancellor Meredith thanked President Shields for her leadership at ALSU and her service to the University System of Georgia.
President Shields said that since July 1, 1996, her life had been filled with miracles, magic, and joy. The miracle was in her ability to see a campus on some flat land with a bulldozer on top. She noted that Regents Leebern and McMillan had been on the search committee that selected her and that it had been a joy to work with them and the Regents. She said the miracle is that, along with the rest of the System, ALSU raised its admissions standards and saw the students meet those standards. Moreover, ALSU has consistently had the third highest retention rate and has also raised its Regents' Test scores significantly. ALSU has also raised its graduation rates from 18% to over 40%, though President Shields noted this rate could still improve. She said that faculty, staff, and students can make miracles happen if they believe, and so, ALSU has had the highest expectations of them. Moreover, ALSU established programs for those aspiring college students who needed help to raise their SAT scores to get into the institution. Some of those students are now honor students, and many others are still hanging in there. The few students who did not get into ALSU went to Darton College or Atlanta Metropolitan College in special admissions programs so that they could get the extra learning support they needed. President Shields said that ALSU is a place where miracles happen and a place of joy. There are a few challenges, she said, but there are students achieving remarkable feats. She noted that ALSU has its first graduate in medical school at Harvard University, and there is another at Johns Hopkins University. This year, ALSU decided that students cannot drop more than 12 hours of courses during their four years of matriculation. That means students will make better course selections and will get the help they need to finish the courses they begin. President Shields thanked the Regents and stepped down.
Chancellor Meredith noted that President Edward D. Jackson, Jr. of South Georgia College ("SGC") could not attend this meeting but that he is the longest serving president in the System. He has served as President of SGC since 1983 but was recently appointed President of East Central College in Union, Missouri. During his tenure at SGC, President Jackson raised the foundation's endowment greatly, along with enrollments and quality. The Chancellor remarked that President Jackson is a good man who has done a great job at SGC. The Chancellor reported that President Kofi Lomotey of Fort Valley State University ("FVSU") was also stepping down. During his three-year tenure, President Lomotey developed a solid administrative team and turned the institution around fiscally. He has grown the academic program offerings, enhanced customer service, and strengthened external support of the institution. His impact has been strong, and he leaves behind a strong legacy.
INTRODUCTION OF NEW PRESIDENT OF BAINBRIDGE COLLEGE
Chancellor Meredith said that just as institutions have cycles, so do the people who bring them to life – the faculty, staff, and students. As presidents leave, new presidents arrive, and the transition between presidencies is critically important. That is why it is very important to bring in the right people to serve as interim presidents. The Chancellor recognized Dr. Sherman R. Day, who recently served as Interim President of Bainbridge College ("BC") and did an excellent job in that capacity. Dr. Day has previously served as Interim President of Georgia State University, Gordon College, and North Georgia College & State University. The Chancellor remarked that Dr. Day is the consummate professional. He understands the academy, and he understands people. Chancellor Meredith thanked Dr. Day for his service to the System and asked him to step forward.
Dr. Day thanked the Chancellor and the Regents. He said that it had been a wonderful experience to meet the people of Bainbridge and take an institution that had some problems and try to get it back on the right track. He thanked the faculty, staff, and students of BC. The institution serves one of the most economically depressed parts of the State of Georgia and the nation. BC serves a great purpose because it takes many people who have very little hope and lifts them up. BC also serves the best and brightest students, who then transfer on to four-year institutions. He thanked Regent Poitevint, who lives in Bainbridge and has been very supportive of the institution. He also thanked the University System Office staff and the Board of Regents for their support. In closing, he said that he looks forward to going back into retirement again.
Chancellor Meredith asked Dr. David Byrd, Assistant Professor of Mathematics, to stand and be recognized. Dr. Byrd chaired the campus presidential search and advisory committee. He is a longtime member of the BC faculty, and the Chancellor thanked him for doing an extraordinary job on the campus side of the search. The Chancellor noted that the Special Assistant to the Chancellor, Usha Ramachandran, coordinated the presidential search from the Board of Regents side. Regent Poitevint chaired the Special Regents' Committee for the Bainbridge College Presidential Search was, and Regents Hunt and Jennings were also on the Committee. Chancellor Meredith introduced new President Thomas A. Wilkerson. President Wilkerson previously served as Vice President for Academic Affairs and Professor of Speech at Spartanburg Methodist College in South Carolina. However, he is also a longtime former University System of Georgia administrator with 29 years in the System at institutions such as Augusta State University, Dalton State College, Georgia Southern University, Middle Georgia College, and South Georgia College. President Wilkerson holds a Master of Fine Arts in Speech and Drama and a Doctorate of Education in Speech Education, both from the University of Georgia. He and his wife, Angela, have two adult children. The Chancellor asked Mrs. Wilkerson to stand and be recognized. He said that he looks forward to the Wilkersons' return to Georgia and that he is certain Dr. Wilkerson will provide the kind of leadership that BC needs and deserves. With that, he called upon Dr. Wilkerson to address the Board.
President Wilkerson said that he was delighted to be home and sincerely appreciated the trust and confidence place in him by the good people at BC, by the Bainbridge community, by the Chancellor, and by the Board of Regents. He said that Dr. Day is correct in stressing the importance of BC to the southwestern corner of the State of Georgia. The college serves a great purpose and has a bright future. President Wilkerson said that he is very pleased and very humbled to have a role in that future.
Chancellor Meredith noted that Dr. Julius Scott has been asked to serve again as Interim President at Albany State University, effective June 15, 2005. Dr. Scott also previously served as Interim President at the Medical College of Georgia.
The Chancellor next recognized his Senior Policy Advisor, Robert E. Watts, who has been serving as the Interim Director of the Gwinnett University Center. He noted that Mr. Watts will now also serve as Interim President of Georgia Perimeter College.
Finally, Chancellor Meredith thanked Chair Wooten for his year of service and Mrs. Sabrina Wooten for her support during a very challenging year. The Chancellor said that Chair Wooten is a man of integrity and ethics who always put the State of Georgia and the University System first. He said that he appreciated the leadership Chair Wooten provided to the Board as well as his personal friendship.
STRATEGIC PLANNING COMMITTEE
Chair Wooten convened the Strategic Planning Committee and turned the Chairmanship of the meeting over to Regent Leebern, the Chair of the Committee. Committee members in attendance, in addition to Chair Leebern, were Vice Chair Doreen Stiles Poitevint and Regents Michael J. Coles, Patrick S. Pittard, Wanda Yancey Rodwell, and Allan Vigil. Board Chair Wooten, Chancellor Meredith, and Regents Hugh A. Carter, Jr., Connie Cater, William H. Cleveland, Joe Frank Harris, Julie Hunt, W. Mansfield Jennings, Jr., James R. Jolly, Martin W. NeSmith, and Richard L. Tucker were also in attendance. Regent J. Timothy Shelnut attended the meeting via teleconference.
Chair Leebern stated that at this meeting, the Regents would consider two items. First, the Chancellor would propose an implementation plan for the transition to a new state college in Gwinnett County. Then, the Associate Vice Chancellor for Media and Publications, Arlethia Perry-Johnson, would update the Regents on the very important African-American Male Initiative ("AAMI"). Chair Leebern then turned the floor over to the Chancellor.
Chancellor Meredith stated that the first item on the agenda is a legacy item, one of the important legacies that this Board will leave to the next generation of University System students. Few boards get the opportunity to create a new institution, and the last time the Board of Regents did this was in 1970. Seventy-five Regents have served on this Board since that time. This latest chapter in the University System's involvement in Gwinnett County is an outgrowth and affirmation of the excellent work done by Georgia Perimeter College ("GPC") and the University of Georgia ("UGA") at the Gwinnett University Center ("GUC"). These institutions set the stage and deserve the Regents' appreciation, he said.
Following the almost unanimous approval by the General Assembly last session and the signature of the Governor in May, it now falls to the Regents to start turning that vision into reality. The Regents will have many chances over the next few years to shape this institution, starting with selecting its founding president. The Chancellor noted that the Special Regents' Committee for the Gwinnett State College Presidential Search and the search consultants have already begun work on the selection of presidential candidates. Regent Tucker is chairing the Committee, which also includes Regents Carter and Pittard. A consulting firm is also beginning work leading to a recommendation for a name of this new institution, which will be brought to the Board of Regents for approval at a later time. At this meeting, the Regents were being asked to begin the implementation process by setting some targets and timelines that will guide the new administration and the institutions involved.
The Chancellor remarked that he wished former Regent Glenn S. White could attend this meeting; however, he was traveling overseas. Chancellor Meredith asked that Regent Tucker express the Regents' appreciation to Regent White for his work over the years. With that, the Chancellor called upon the Senior Vice Chancellor for Academics and Fiscal Affairs, Daniel S. Papp, to present the implementation plan to the Regents.
Dr. Papp agreed that this is indeed a historic time in the University System of Georgia. He reiterated that this is the first time since 1970 that the Board of Regents has created a new institution in the University System of Georgia, though a few institutions have joined the System in that time, such as GPC and Southern Polytechnic State University. Dr. Papp then gave an overview of the history of the GUC. In 1986: GPC, UGA, and Georgia State University ("GSU") began to offer courses in Gwinnett in leased space. In response to overwhelming demand, in 1997, Gwinnett County donated land, improvements, and money for the proposed GUC. Also in 1997, as part of its standard facilities process, the Board of Regents authorized the creation of the GUC and approved the construction of its signature building. In January 2002, the new GUC campus opened with classes in a privatized classroom building, and in August 2002, the signature building opened.
As a result of the continuing incredible growth in demand at the GUC, the Board's 2003-2004 statewide assessment recommended that GUC should become its own state college in Gwinnett County. In October 2004, the Board of Regents asked the state legislature to approve a new state college in Gwinnett County. In March 2005, the General Assembly passed Senate Resolution 33 ("SR 33") approving the college. In May 2005, Governor Purdue signed SR 33. At this meeting, the staff were coming forward with an implementation plan for the new state college transition.
Dr. Papp explained that the proposed college would be a state college. The state college sector in the University System of Georgia currently consists of Dalton State College ("DSC") and Macon State College ("MSC"). The state college sector has two primary responsibilities: 1) access at the freshman and sophomore levels and 2) a limited number of baccalaureate degree programs targeted toward the economic development needs of the specific region in which the institution is located. At the state college in Gwinnett County, the emphasis will be on creating hybrid courses that combine both traditional and electronic teaching methods as well as other innovative educational methodologies, such as internships and experiential learning. The state college will also have a distinctive role in instructional technology for the University System of Georgia. This was one of the reasons why the Advanced Learning Technologies division of the University System Office was moved from its previous Athens location to the GUC. During the course its development, the state college will outsource or privatize appropriate administrative and support services.
The goals of the new state college in Gwinnett County are as follows:
- To concentrate on core instruction and access for Gwinnett area students;
- To meet a substantial portion of selected Gwinnett area workforce needs;
- To blend best of classroom and distance education in all programs at all levels;
- To become a national leader in innovative, high-quality educational strategies;
- To develop cutting-edge methodologies to aid and assess student learning; and
- To privatize and outsource select support services.
Dr. Papp next discussed the presidential search timeline. He said that the search firm was hired in May 2005, and the firm was in the process of accepting nominations and applications and identifying candidates by the end of June 2005. In July 2005, senior University System Office staff will screen initial candidates, and in early August 2005: the Special Regents' Committee and the Chancellor will interview finalists for the presidency. In September 2005, the Special Regents' Committee will bring forward its recommended candidate for appointment by the Board of Regents, and in October 2005, the new president will take office. Dr. Papp also discussed the college naming timeline. He said that this summer, GUC staff will identify names for consideration and approval by the Board of Regents at its September 2005 meeting.
Then, Dr. Papp discussed the academic transition timeline. Although it seems relatively straightforward, he explained that it is actually quite complex. In fiscal year 2006, representatives from the two primary operating institutions, GPC and UGA, will begin planning the transition to a new state college while they continue current operations. In fiscal year 2007, the new state college will admit its first students, while GPC and UGA will continue teaching their currently enrolled students. In fiscal year 2008, the state college will admit more new students, while GPC and UGA graduate their existing students. In fiscal year 2009, the state college will become responsible for all undergraduate education at the campus and UGA will continue to offer its graduate and continuing education programs.
Dr. Papp next discussed the accreditation timeline for the new state college, emphasizing that accreditation is critical for all institutions. He said that the state college will apply for accreditation when its first students admitted, per the operational procedures of the Southern Association for Colleges and Schools ("SACS"). The state college will apply for candidacy status at the first opportunity, again according to SACS policies and procedures. The state college will anticipate achieving accreditation, per SACS rules, in the year its first class graduates.
Initially, the new state college will offer approximately four to six baccalaureate programs in areas that reflect the economic development needs of the area such as teacher education, health sciences, business and information technology, and applied sciences, an area in which the University System of Georgia will collaborate closely with Gwinnett Technical College, a college of the Department of Technical and Adult Education ("DTAE"). The administration of the new state college will submit program proposals to the Board of Regents via the usual approval processes for academic programs. Dr. Papp explained that faculty and staff will be hired via open searches and must meet criteria appropriate to the mission and goals of the new state college. In fiscal year 2006, the college will hire its leaders, planning team, and initial faculty and staff. Over the course of the next several fiscal years, the college will continue its faculty and staff hiring.
Dr. Papp next discussed the budget plan for the new state college. He reported that $1.3 million had been allocated to the development of the institution for fiscal year 2006. Staff have developed a five-year budget transition to cushion the impact of the creation of this new college on the System and on GPC. Dr. Papp commended the Vice Chancellor for Fiscal Affairs, William R. Bowes, who developed a very complex and practical methodology for assessing how this budget transition will affect the System and GPC. Staff will have to determine the dollars per full-time equivalent ("FTE") student target for the college. Beginning in fiscal year 2007, the Board of Regents will apportion new enrollment growth funds to bring new college closer to that dollar per FTE target. Finally, the Board of Regents will close any funding gap that exists through a transition appropriation budget request and/or strategic allocation.
Dr. Papp also provided a facilities master plan update for the new state college. He reported that the current facilities master plan was developed in 1998 and presented to Regents in 1999. Since 1999, a privatized classroom building was constructed, the signature building was constructed, two minor capital projects were approved, and the Board of Regents placed a major capital project placed on its major capital outlay list. During the upcoming transition, the facilities master plan will be reviewed and updated as necessary. The new president of the college will provide quarterly reports on the status of implementation to the Chancellor, who will inform the Board of Regents of the implementation status and progress of the new state college.
Finally, Dr. Papp stated the proposed actions at this meeting. He explained that the Board of Regents was being asked to approve the following: 1) creation of a new state college in Gwinnett County as of July 1, 2005; and 2) the implementation plan as presented with the understanding some items will return to Board of Regents after additional detailed planning. In closing, he said that he would be happy to answer any questions.
Chair Leebern thanked Dr. Papp for his presentation. Seeing that there were no questions, he asked for a motion to approve Item 1 on the agenda of the Strategic Planning Committee. Motion made and variously seconded, the Board of Regents approved the item. (See pages 56 to 61.)
Chair Leebern next called upon Ms. Perry-Johnson to update the Board on the African-American Male Initiative.
Dr. Papp interjected that he wanted to provide a bit of introduction for this presentation. He said that when the Regents established the AAMI program a few years ago, they recognized that the effort they were initiating was the beginning stage of what would be a long-term and multi-year process. Ms. Perry-Johnson has headed up the AAMI for the System and would report at this meeting on the progress of the initiative to date. In addition, the Regents would hear from two System presidents whose institutions have implemented programs designed to increase the numbers of black men who attend and graduate from their colleges.
Ms. Perry-Johnson greeted the Regents and thanked them for the opportunity to update them on the status and progress of the System's African-American Male Initiative. In this presentation, she would first give the Regents a brief history and synopsis of the project since its inception in fall 2002. Then, President Dorothy Lord of Coastal Georgia Community College ("CGCC") and President Jacqueline M. Belcher of Georgia Perimeter College ("GPC") would discuss the innovative and successful projects that they implemented to address the needs of African-American men on their campuses. Ms. Perry-Johnson noted that President Lord had recently received the Eve Award from the Florida Times Union for her leadership in education. At a future Board meeting, Dr. Papp and Ms. Perry-Johnson would return to update the Regents on the future direction of AAMI.
Ms. Perry-Johnson outlined the three goals of the AAMI. Its first priority was to conduct research to identify the barriers to college participation by African-American men. Second, the AAMI then identified strategies to overcome those barriers. Third, the AAMI would recommend opportunities to increase the participation rates of black men in the University System of Georgia, specifically increasing recruitment, retention, and graduation of black men in System institutions. In order to tackle these goals, the work was divided into four components. First, an independent firm was hired to conduct a qualitative and quantitative external research study. Then, a 52-person task force was established to enhance access for African-American men. With the Board's approval, staff also directed funding toward several strategic AAMI pilot programs. Finally, the staff committed themselves to the development and implementation of a strategic integrated marketing campaign aimed at Black men in conjunction with broader System efforts aimed at encouraging more Georgians to graduate from high school and attend college. Now that the research and the work of the task force are behind them, staff are focusing all of their current efforts on the pilot programs and marketing strategies.
Ms. Perry-Johnson reported that to date, the Board of Regents has funded 12 AAMI pilot programs at nine System institutions. The first pilot programs were funded during the 2003-2004 academic year, right on the heels of the Board's adoption of the AAMI report. Six programs were funded at $10,000 each at six System institutions for a total of $60,000 in funding. These programs focused on single initiatives, both existing and new efforts, on six System campuses. The six institutions that received funds that first year are as follows: Albany State University ("ALSU"), Atlanta Metropolitan College ("AMC"), Coastal Georgia Community College ("CGCC"), Fort Valley State University ("FVSU"), Savannah State University ("SSU"), and the University of Georgia ("UGA"). In the second year of the pilot programs, which were being conducted during the 2004-2005 academic year, the Board of Regents funded six institutions that were asked to partner in three different parts of the state: Atlanta, Albany, and Savannah. Each institution received $27,000 in funding, or $54,000 for each of the three partnerships, for a total of $162,000. These pilots required partnering with a sister System institution and a local civic partner already conducting successful work with black men. Armstrong Atlantic State University ("AASU"), Darton College ("DC"), and Georgia State University ("GSU") became new participants in the AAMI pilot project. AASU is partnering with SSU, DC with ALSU, and GSU with AMC. For the upcoming academic year (2005- 2006), the AAMI will conduct a competitive request for proposals ("RFP") process, allowing all 34 System institutions to compete for AAMI pilot funding. However, there will be a tough requirement – a commitment to equally match award funds with institutional funds. In addition, there will still be the requirement to partner with a civic entity already conducting work with black men. In addition to the System-funded pilots, some programs have secured federal and private funding. For example, GPC secured funding from the private sector for its program, and ALSU and DC shared a $900,000 federal grant to support their institutional efforts.
Ms. Perry-Johnson noted that all of the programs the Board has funded are aimed at one of the following key goals: increasing the high-school graduation of black men, expanding black male participation in college preparation, or improving black male enrollment and retention in System colleges and universities. All of the AAMI pilot programs are being evaluated to assess the following measures: how many black men were impacted by the funding, evaluation and measurement strategies used to assess the effectiveness of the programmatic initiatives, how the program's successes are being shared with other institutions within the University System, and how and at what cost the programs might be expanded to have additional impact. Ms. Perry-Johnson assured the Regents that every institution that has received AAMI funding has improved or maintained its black male enrollment.
Next, Ms. Perry-Johnson discussed marketing. She said that the next major goal of the AAMI is to complete a comprehensive, integrated marketing plan to address the key communications goals of the initiative. All University System of Georgia institutions will be asked to support this campaign, and it also will require coordination with many external partners. AAMI funds have been set aside to produce and implement the initial round of marketing activities, but the goal is to garner support for extended long-term, statewide marketing activities. Communications products are being shaped to target African-American males, their parents, educators, and others who influence their academic performance and options. An integrated marketing plan is being designed to complement broader public awareness campaigns aimed at enhancing college participation rates in Georgia, such as the Education GO Get It initiative and georgiacollege411.org. Georgia's Public Broadcasting ("GPB"), a state-funded agency, has been a key partner in the production of the AAMI television and radio commercials.
Ms. Perry-Johnson noted that she had distributed AAMI materials to the Regents, including the executive summary of the AAMI report, which includes the15 recommendations that emanated from that report. She stressed that the issues the AAMI is tackling are systemic – or pipeline oriented – and many of them must be addressed at the K-12 level. In spite of the Board's commitment and the best System-level and institutional efforts, these problems are not going to be solved overnight. Nevertheless, the Associate Vice Chancellor for P-16 Initiatives, Jan Kettlewell, has been engaged in very successful work in this arena, and she has taken a leadership role in addressing many of AAMI's K-12 related recommendations. Ms. Perry-Johnson asked Dr. Kettlewell to stand and be recognized. She noted that the Regents' materials included an excellent status report on
Dr. Kettlewell's efforts. She reiterated that enhanced communications with parents and the targeted students regarding the college-preparation process is absolutely critical. The University System of Georgia must enhance communications to track black males toward the college preparatory curriculum ("CPC") at a much earlier stage; that is, no later than sixth grade.
As for closing the gaps in black male enrollment, retention, and graduation rates in the System, Ms. Perry-Johnson stressed that campus commitment is essential in addressing these challenges. From fall 2002 to fall 2004, System black male enrollment increased from 17,068 to 18,714, or 9.6%. However, significant gender and racial gaps continue to exist in enrollment, retention (progression), and graduation. Fall 2004 enrollment numbers show 18,714 black men versus 40,043 black women, or 7.5% of System enrollment versus 16%, a ratio that is still more than 2:1. Since the fall 2002 launch of the AAMI study, the System has seen an increase of 1,646 more black males and 4,170 more black females. Ms. Perry-Johnson noted that a similar disparity exists between white males and females but the problem of very low black male enrollments is significant. A similar gap exists with regard to retention. Black men are retained at a rate of 73.5% in the University System, while white women are retained at a rate of 83%. The gap worsens in terms of graduation data: 33% of black men who entered the System as first-time freshmen in fall 1998 graduated, compared to 53% of their white male peers. So, the System still has much room to improve in enrollment, retention, and graduation of black males.
Ms. Perry-Johnson stated that the Board's AAMI is nationally recognized and remarked that it is the quality of the research that has distinguished the AAMI project. It also is well publicized by the press, as demonstrated by the collection of articles included in the Regents' materials. The AAMI serves as a resource for researchers and the media. Many access the Web site portal and also call for detailed conversations and more specific information. Staff have participated in and conducted conferences on access issues, including the American Council on Education's Diversity Conference. In November 2004, Ms. Perry-Johnson joined with local area Congressional staffers to convene the Congressional Black Caucus Foundations' State of the African-American Male Conference at GSU. Ms. Perry-Johnson thanked President Carl V. Patton and his staff for lending GSU facilities so that the University System could host the conference, which was also well publicized. The System also partners with other higher education systems doing similar work, including the Institute on Race Relations in Virginia and the African-American Men Project in Minnesota. She stressed that this is a national issue and not just indigenous to the State of Georgia.
Ms. Perry-Johnson stated that the next steps include monitoring and assessing the 12 AAMI pilot programs previously funded in the University System; funding additional programs in the upcoming fiscal year; launching a marketing campaign targeted at black males, parents, educators, and civic groups; continuing the dialogue with potential funding partners to secure external funding for long-term strategic efforts; continuing to serve as a national information resource and to partner with others doing similar work; and continuing to encourage the excellent work taking place in the University System. With regard to the latter, Ms. Perry-Johnson said that it was a perfect segue to the two reports the Regents were about to hear, the first from President Lord, who has more than a decade of experiencing working with black men at CGCC through her Minority Outreach Program and most recently through her Torchbearers Program. President Lord began tackling the work in the early years of her presidency there and has many successes. To encourage her work, the Board of Regents provided her with one of its first pilot grant awards of $10,000 for the 2003-2004 academic year. Then, the Regents would hear from Dr. Jacquelyn Belcher, whose leadership led her to develop The Leadership Academy at GPC, an example of a very successful private sector partnership that is helping the System to achieve its goals in this area. Ms. Perry-Johnson then turned the floor over to President Lord.
President Lord explained that her interest in this issue has to do with her personal commitment to equity for all people in higher education institutions regardless of race. As a new college president, part of her responsibility was to get acquainted with the area she was responsible for serving, including a review of diversity regarding both gender and race. She had a strong desire to seek racial parity within the CGCC service area, especially for African-American men, and that interest promoted the exploration of all of the issues and it also led to a way to make positive social change in the community. In the process, CGCC made lasting partnerships with the African-American community, especially with a group called the Fourteen Black Men of Glynn, Inc. (the "Fourteen Black Men"), which parallels the 100 Black Men of Atlanta, Inc. This led to the development of a drop-out intervention program for seventh grade African-American boys. It also led to involvement in the Board's AAMI. In the context of the AAMI, CGCC has had two types of initiatives. The CGCC Minority Outreach Program focuses on enlarging the pipeline; that is, getting more students ready and able to attend college. This program aims to intervene in the cycle of failure that leads to students' dropping out of K-12 schools. The second program is a retention program called the Torchbearers Club. This program focuses on retaining students by making them feel comfortable and helping them be successful. It is operates as a student chapter of the Fourteen Black Men, whose members mentor African-American male students at CGCC.
The Minority Outreach Program targets rising seventh grade boys who are already performing two grade levels below where they should be for their age. The program provides intense instruction in mathematics and language arts, the two critical areas of competence that will lead to the students' ultimate success or failure. Since 1993, CGCC has served 440 in this five-week intensive instructional program. The college partners with three county school systems to identify the students, transports them to the campus, and partners with the community to raise funds to support the program. The Minority Outreach Program has an active advisory committee composed of African-American persons from across the region. These are people who critically have one characteristic: They must care about youth.
President Lord next discussed how CGCC has built community and corporate support. The Minority Outreach Program costs approximately $30,000 per year. From the beginning, the Coastal Georgia Community College Foundation, Inc. (the "CGCC Foundation") has supported the program. The CGCC Foundation hosted its first fund-raiser in 1992. Several local companies also support the program. President Lord said it is her personal commitment as president to raise the funds to make the program work. The only regular state funding that has supported the program was the $10,000 received from the AAMI in academic year 2003-2004. The program has received some grant monies from The College Board, the Department of Juvenile Justice, and a family foundation.
President Lord reiterated that the second initiative at CGCC is a student chapter of the Fourteen Black Men. She remarked that this was not an original idea, but rather, it came directly from the work of the AAMI committee. Mr. Thomas W. Dortch, Jr. of the 100 Black Men of Atlanta, Inc., charged CGCC to organize a student group affiliated with the local chapter of the Fourteen Black Men. Since CGCC already had a strong partnership with the Fourteen Black Men, the idea was immediately accepted. In partnership, the college and the organization developed the Torchbearers Club, a recognized student group whose members are mentored by the Fourteen Black Men. This student group is committed to helping its members develop the life skills they need to be successful in the college environment. There are three CGCC staff members who are members of the Fourteen Black Men, and they serve as advisors to the Torchbearers Club. Retention and graduation are the long-term goals of CGCC in encouraging this group. Just as the Fourteen Black Men mentor the members of the Torchbearers Club, CGCC asks that the members of the club in turn mentor the rising seventh grade boys in the Minority Outreach Program.
President Lord said it is her belief that the AAMI should be incorporated into the regular way that System institutions do business. She urged the Board of Regents to encourage the institutions to own this issue and to make it a part of their overall commitment to equal opportunity. In closing, she said that CGCC's commitment to the Minority Outreach Program and the communities served by the college has made a very positive difference for faculty, staff, and students, as well as the communities. CGCC's commitment to diversity and equity is highly visible. From the beginning of the Minority Outreach Program, CGCC was trying to achieve racial parity on campus by attracting more African-American students to the college. A number of former Minority Outreach Program students have returned to CGCC as college students with scholarships provided by the Fourteen Black Men. President Lord remarked that the college's commitment to equity by partnering with the African-American community has provided concrete actions and not just "lip service." Approximately 50% of students who complete the Minority Outreach Program go on to graduate from high school, and 55% of those graduates have graduated from college, are still enrolled, are employed, or are serving in the military. As a result of these two AAMI programs, CGCC is perceived as a more welcoming place for African-American students. In part, this is because the numbers of black students have so visibly improved. African-American student enrollment at CGCC has risen to 28%. The Minority Outreach Program has been in place for 12 years. It is not just a "flash in the pan," said President Lord. Rather, it is the way the college does business.
Next, President Belcher approached the podium. She introduced Sandee House, Associate Professor of Mathematics and Director of the Leadership Academy at GPC, and Mr. Jason Gladman, the Academic Counselor of the Leadership Academy. President Belcher said that there are many people who are responsible for the success of the Leadership Academy at GPC. In response to the AAMI, GPC developed the Leadership Academy and chose to pilot the program with a class of African-American men. This innovative leadership program was designed to provide opportunities for students who are underserved in higher education. It is designed to develop leadership skills, as well. Students selected for the program had participated in a fall 2004 orientation course called Navigating the Academic Waters or had enrolled in Math 097 in summer 2004. To qualify for participation in the program, each student had to agree to attend weekly study halls, to attend a counseling and mentoring group every other week, and to attend other required workshops and activities outside of class. In return for that participation, each student received a math book that was required for the class and donated by the publication, a graphic calculator donated by the GPC student government foundation, a $200 textbook stipend funded by the John and Mary Franklin Foundation, Inc., and the possibility of a full scholarship beginning spring 2005 for up to six semesters.
The students in the first year pilot of the program were from a variety of academic backgrounds, explained President Belcher, and not everyone was required to take learning support classes. The students had diverse interests and majors spanning from business to art to sociology to engineering to journalism. Many of the students in the Leadership Academy admit, however, that they did not apply themselves in high school and their real interest in academic pursuits began after they joined the program. The students accepted into the Leadership Academy were grouped into classes that comprised learning communities. Data show that learning communities are successful in terms of helping students succeed in college. Outside of class, students are required to participate in site visits to four-year University System institutions. They also were expected to attend a Guide to College Success seminar series, including sessions in understanding college expectations, motivation for college success, strategic planning and critical thinking, resume writing and interview strategies, and how to dress for success. A major focus of Leadership Academy is helping students reach their full potential as citizens. The program offers activities focusing on the characteristics of initiative, integrity, and enthusiasm to help young men become future leaders. Students in the Leadership Academy learn to set goals, develop a vision for their future, and understand the importance of giving back to their communities. They have the opportunity to participate in many college activities and workshops, community service, and civic awareness activities. An integral component of the Leadership Academy is personal support through mentoring and peer group discussions. All participants are required to attend biweekly counseling sessions led by a qualified facilitator to discuss issues to the struggles they face as college students and, more specifically, the issues pertaining to being a young black man in today's society.
President Belcher stated that all students who participate in the Leadership Academy receive assistance in the financial aid application process to ensure they receive the maximum financial aid available. In addition, the Leadership Academy and the Georgia Perimeter College Foundation, Inc. (the "GPC Foundation") work together to raise scholarship dollars to fill the gap between cost of attendance and available financial aid. Depending upon the availability of funds, students who have successfully completed the fall semester program have the opportunity to apply for a scholarship to cover full tuition, fees, and textbook costs for their second semester with the possibility of renewal for as many as six semesters. To date, the GPC Foundation has raised over $120,000 for this program.
The Leadership Academy is successful, said President Belcher. Sixteen students were selected to serve in the program with an average high school grade point average of 2.16 and a composite SAT score of 820. The overall grade point average for these students for this academic year was 2.46. Ten of the 16 students remain in good standing with the institution, and 6 have registered to take classes this summer. Additionally, these students have the opportunity to apply the academic and decision-making skills they have learned. This past spring, program participants began a magazine project sponsored by Ace III Communications, Inc., publisher of The Champion Newspaper of DeKalb County and Atlanta goodlife magazine. Catherine Turk of the DeKalb County School Board and Gail Horton-Gay, editor of the two publications, met with the students on several occasions to help guide them through the process of developing a magazine. The students decided to call their magazine "Real Talk." It will target 16- to 24-year-olds, and some of the articles will focus on procrastination, influence on college students, and breaking the color barrier in sports management.
President Belcher read several testimonials from students about the Leadership Academy. She reported that GPC plans to admit an additional 16 students to the program in fall 2005 and to continue to monitor and closely support the first-year students. Ultimately, the college will extend the program to include other underserved populations of students. This year has been an inspiration to everyone at the college, said President Belcher, because it is a testament to what can happen when students are given the support they need and are held to high expectations.
Ms. Perry-Johnson thanked Dr. Papp for his academic leadership with AAMI over the past several years and the Associate Vice Chancellor for Strategic Research and Analysis, Cathie Mayes Hudson, for tracking data associated with black male participation in the System and for her commitment to help assess the effectiveness of the pilot programs.
Chair Leebern asked whether the Regents had any questions or comments, and seeing that there were none, he adjourned the Committee meeting.
At approximately 11:42, Chair Wooten called for the Committee reports.
EXECUTIVE AND COMPENSATION COMMITTEE
The Executive and Compensation Committee met on Wednesday, June 8, 2005, at 8:00 a.m. in room 7019, the Chancellor's Conference Room. Committee members in attendance were Chair Joel O. Wooten, Jr. and Regents Joe Frank Harris, Donald M. Leebern, Jr., Patrick S. Pittard, and Doreen Stiles Poitevint. Vice Chair Timothy J. Shelnut and Committee member Elridge W. McMillan attended the meeting via conference call. Regent Hugh A. Carter, Jr. also attended the meeting. Chair Wooten reported to the Board on Wednesday that the Committee had reviewed one item, which did not require action. That item was as follows:
-
Executive Session: Personnel and Compensation Issues
At approximately 8:00 a.m. on Wednesday, June 8, 2005, Chair Joel O. Wooten, Jr. called for an Executive Session for the purpose of discussing personnel and compensation issues. With motion properly made and variously seconded, the Regents who were present voted unanimously to go into Executive Session. Those Regents were as follows: Chair Joel O. Wooten, Jr., Vice Chair J. Timothy Shelnut, and Regents Joe Frank Harris, Donald M. Leebern, Jr., Elridge W. McMillan, Patrick S. Pittard, and Doreen Stiles Poitevint. Regent Hugh A. Carter, Jr. was also in attendance. In accordance with H.B. 278, Section 3 (amending O.C.G.A. § 50-14-4), an affidavit regarding this Executive Session is on file with the Chancellor's Office.
At approximately 11:00 a.m., Chair Wooten reconvened the Committee meeting in its regular session and announced that the Committee had reviewed the following personnel and compensation issues: the Chancellor's recommendations for presidential salaries, presidential supplements, foundation supplements to presidential salaries, and the Chancellor's salary increase for fiscal year 2006. These items were discussed in Executive Session, but no actions were taken. The matters discussed were taken to the full Board in Executive Session on Wednesday, June 8, 2005. (See page 71.)
AUDIT COMMITTEE
The Audit Committee met on Wednesday, June 8, 2005, at 9:00 a.m. in the Board Room. Committee members in attendance were Chair Connie Cater, Vice Chair W. Mansfield Jennings, Jr., and Regents William H. Cleveland, Julie Hunt, James R. Jolly, Martin W. NeSmith, Richard L. Tucker, and Allan Vigil. Regents Hugh A. Carter, Jr., Joe Frank Harris, Patrick S. Pittard, and Wanda Yancey Rodwell were also in attendance. Chair Cater reported to the full Board on Wednesday that the Committee had reviewed one item, which did not require action. That item was as follows:
-
Information Item: Audit Plan for Fiscal Year 2006
Each year, the Associate Vice Chancellor for Internal Audits, Ronald B. Stark, prepares an audit plan for the University System of Georgia. This plan is developed by requesting input from the Regents, University System Office audit managers, and the institutions. A matrix of the responses from all parties is prepared, risk factors are determined, and institutions are selected to be audited. The scope of the audit coverage is determined using a risk-evaluation process. Audit resources are then allocated based upon of the coverage provided by the Georgia Department of Audits and Accounts and the audit plans of the 13 institutions with internal audit departments. The campus-based auditors prepare their audit plans based upon an institutional risk-assessment process. Mr. Stark and the respective institution's president approve each campus audit plan. At this meeting, Mr. Stark presented the full audit plan for the University System of Georgia for fiscal year 2006, including coverage provided by the Board of Regents audit staff, senior administration, and the campus-based auditors.
Mr. Stark explained that the System audit plan is based upon a risk model. He reported that the following institutions will be audited in fiscal year 2006: Abraham Baldwin Agricultural College, Atlanta Metropolitan College, Clayton State University, Fort Valley State University ("FVSU"), the Georgia College & State University ("GCSU"), Georgia Perimeter College ("GPC"), Georgia Southern University ("GSOU"), Kennesaw State University ("KSU"), the Medical College of Georgia, Middle Georgia College, Southern Polytechnic State University ("SPSU"), the University of Georgia, and Valdosta State University ("VSU"). He noted that research institutions often have higher risk associated with the complexities of such institutions. Mr. Stark discussed the audit process and noted that GCSU, GSOU, SPSU, and major Systemwide technology functions (e.g., PeopleSoft and Banner) would be subject to information technology audits.
Chair Cater asked why some institutions have no audit plans.
Mr. Stark responded that FVSU, GPC, KSU, VSU, and Savannah State University do not have auditors at this time.
Chair Cater encouraged Mr. Stark and the presidents of these five institutions to expedite the resolution of this problem.
COMMITTEE ON FINANCE AND BUSINESS OPERATIONS
The Committee on Finance and Business Operations met on Wednesday, June 8, 2005, at approximately 9:10 a.m. in the Board Room. Committee members in attendance were Chair Patrick S. Pittard, Vice Chair Hugh A. Carter, Jr., and Regents William H. Cleveland, Michael J. Coles, James R. Jolly, Donald M. Leebern, Jr., and Doreen Stiles Poitevint. Chancellor Thomas C. Meredith, Board Chair Joel O. Wooten, Jr., and Regents Connie Cater, Joe Frank Harris, Julie Hunt, W. Mansfield Jennings, Jr., Martin W. NeSmith, Wanda Yancey Rodwell, Richard L. Tucker, and Allan Vigil were also in attendance. Chair Pittard reported to the Board on Wednesday that the Committee had reviewed eight items, all of which required action. With motion properly made, seconded, and unanimously adopted, the Board approved and authorized the following:
-
Institutional Operating and Capital Budgets for Fiscal Year 2006
Approved: The Board approved the institutional operating and capital budgets for the University System of Georgia institutions and agencies. These budgets have been reviewed by fiscal affairs staff for compliance with Board of Regents policies and directives. They are on file with the University System Office.
-
Renewal and Amendments of Agreements Between the Board of Regents and MCG Health, Inc. Regarding Medical College of Georgia Hospitals and Clinics
Approved: The Board approved renewal of the Master Affiliation Agreement and all Associated Agreements for fiscal year 2006 (July 1, 2005, through June 30, 2006) between the Medical College of Georgia ("MCG") and MCG Health, Inc. ("MCGHI") regarding the operation of MCG hospitals and clinics, with amendments.
Background: In January 2000, the Board of Regents approved the Master Affiliation Agreement between the Board of Regents and MCGHI for the operation and management of the MCG hospitals and clinics. The Master Affiliation Agreement was the first of a series of agreements that cover facilities, assets, employees, and other elements involved in the transfer of operation and management effective July 1, 2000. It embodies the fundamental understanding of the parties regarding the proposed affiliation and expresses the interests of the parties in negotiating the terms of the Associated Agreements.
The Board of Regents approved the Associated Agreements in April 2000. The Associated Agreements spell out in detail the terms of the transfer and the ongoing relationships between MCG and MCGHI and between MCGHI and the MCG Physicians Practice Group ("PPG"). The Master Affiliation Agreement was amended in April 2000 to conform its provisions to the terms of the Associated Agreements.
The Associated Agreements include the Master Lease; the Clinical, Educational and Research Services Agreement ("CERSA"); the Operations and Services Agreement ("OSA"); the Personnel Agreement; the Asset Transfer Agreement detailing the assets and liabilities to be transferred; and the MCGHI/PPG Agreement. All of these agreements, with the exception of the Master Lease, whose term is ten years, are renewable at the end of each fiscal year, with approval of the Board of Regents and the board of directors of MCGHI. The Affiliation Agreement provides for both parties to propose amendments to the agreements that may be negotiated with the renewal.
MCG and MCGHI have negotiated several amendments to the OSA, the CERSA, and the Personnel Agreement. These amendments update and clarify the terms of the agreements and the cost of personal and nonpersonal services purchased from one party by the other. The essential relationship between the parties remains unchanged.
The amendments to these various agreements can be summarized as follows:
- In Section 9 (2) of the Amended Master Affiliation Agreement, language was added to clarify what liabilities are assumed by MCGHI. In a recent case, the court held that the existing language in the agreements could make MCGHI liable for the negligence of MCG's physicians. The purpose of the new language is to clarify the change, rather than change the meaning of the existing language.
- In Exhibit E of the OSA, a change was added concerning the responsibility each entity has for its information systems. Essentially, the changes ensure that MCGHI will directly be responsible for servers and operating systems within its MCGHI campus, while MCG retains responsibility for providing the overall network and handling the servers and applications for its campus.
- The other amendments are not substantive. Some sections have minor adjustments to the scope of services or personnel, but none of them change the nature of the relationship in those areas or materially affect the cost.
Two additional agreements define the relationship between MCG and PPG, a cooperative organization of MCG, and the relationship between PPG and MCGHI. These agreements do not require renewal each fiscal year, and the parties have submitted no amendments to either.
- Revision of The Policy Manual, Section 704.014, Professional Program
Tuition
Approved: The Board approved revision of The Policy Manual, Section 704.014, Professional Program Tuition, to clarify the provisions in which an institution may grant a tuition waiver to a student enrolled in a professional or graduate program under this policy and how such a waiver can be exercised, effective June 8, 2005.
Background: The previous policy concerning professional program tuition did not specify the conditions for granting a tuition waiver to a student participating in a professional or graduate program under this policy and the manner in which this waiver can be implemented. The lack of guidance in the previous policy caused institutions offering professional or graduate degree programs under the policy to defer to section 704.013 of The Policy Manual pertaining to graduate tuition when extending a tuition waiver to a professional program student. In applying the graduation tuition policy toward professional program tuition waivers, not only is the base graduate tuition waived, but also the differential tuition levied for that particular professional program must also be waived. That practice resulted in a loss of differential tuition revenue that is critical in covering costs unique to that professional program. Addition of a provision to the professional program tuition policy that clearly defines the circumstances in which a tuition waiver for a professional program student was granted, and the ways in which this waiver can be executed significantly rectify the situation institutions once faced relating to the unintended forgoing of program specific revenue through these types of tuition waivers. To accomplish this goal, the Board approved the following addition to section 704.014 of The Policy Manual. Please note that the addition to the existing policy is highlighted and in bold.
New Policy
704.014 PROFESSIONAL PROGRAM TUITIONBoard approval shall be required for differential tuition rates for nationally competitive graduate and professional programs, as deemed appropriate by the institution based on the academic marketplace and the tuition charged by peer institutions with similar missions. An institution seeking such approval from the Board shall provide the Board with an impact analysis and a plan for enhancing the quality of the program.
The professional program tuition rates normally shall be charged to all program students; however, where a graduate student is:
- Classified as a graduate assistant under section 704.013, or
- Eligible for an out-of-state tuition waiver under section 704.041, the institution on a degree program basis may waive the graduate tuition in accordance with such policies noted or limit the waiver to the amount associated with the regular graduate tuition.
-
Addition to The Policy Manual, Section 802.0809, Acceptance of Leave From a State of Georgia Agency by the University System of Georgia
Approved: The Board added Section 802.0809, Acceptance of Leave from a State Agency by the University System of Georgia, to The Policy Manual, effective June 8, 2005.
Background: The Board of Regents previously had no formal policy regarding the maximum number of hours of leave, or the types of leave, that it would accept when a benefited employee moved to the University System of Georgia from another State of Georgia agency. In attempting to limit the financial liability that would be borne by the University System of Georgia in accepting accrued leave and in attempting to retain a level of competitive advantage in the recruitment and retention of skilled employees from other State of Georgia agencies, the Human Resources Policy Advisory Committee recommended that Section 802.0809 be adopted by the Board of Regents.
The Human Resources Policy Advisory Committee recommended that a maximum of 96 hours of sick leave be accepted by the University System of Georgia for a benefited employee who moves to the University System of Georgia from another State of Georgia agency with less than a 30-calendar-day break in service. Full-time benefits-eligible employees of the University System of Georgia accrue eight hours of sick leave per month. A maximum of 96 hours would be equivalent to one year of sick leave that could be accrued by any current System employee.
The Human Resources Policy Advisory Committee further recommended that the University System of Georgia accept no annual leave from any benefits-eligible employee who moves to the University System of Georgia from another State of Georgia agency. The proposal to accept no annual leave for any benefits-eligible employee who moves to the University System of Georgia from another State of Georgia agency mirrored the existing policy of the Georgia Merit System. Rule no. 18, Section 478–1–.18 Leave and Holidays, Paragraph 18.101.2 of the State of Georgia Personnel Board Rules states that all agencies of the executive branch, exclusive of the Board of Regents of the University System of Georgia, shall provide for the accrual and usage of leave and holidays for non-temporary employees in the unclassified service in the same manner and amount provided for employees in the classified service. (Reference O.C.G.A. § 45–20–16) (§ 06–22–00/§ 07–14–00.) In addition, Paragraph 18.114.3 states, when an employee moves without a break in service, from an agency to an authority or to a unit of the University System of Georgia, the employee shall be paid for any annual leave that cannot be transferred with the employee provided, however, such payment shall not be made except upon evidence satisfactory to the appointing authority that the employee cannot receive credit for the leave.
The financial liability for annual leave that was accrued by an employee during his/her tenure with another State of Georgia agency should be borne by that state agency, not by the University System of Georgia.
New Policy
802.0809 ACCEPTANCE OF LEAVE FROM A STATE OF GEORGIA AGENCY BY THE UNIVERSITY SYSTEM OF GEORGIA
The University System of Georgia shall accept up to a maximum of 96 hours of sick leave from a benefited employee who moves from a State of Georgia agency to the University System of Georgia. For a unit of the University System of Georgia to accept sick leave, the employee must have no more than a 30-calendar-day break in service. Written verification of the employee's sick leave balance must be provided to the University System of Georgia by the terminating State of Georgia agency.
Annual leave will not be accepted for a benefited employee who moves from a State of Georgia agency to the University System of Georgia.
-
Corrections to Professional Program Tuition Rates
Approved: The Board approved corrections to the professional program tuition rates approved at the April 2005 meeting. The amounts approved and the recommended corrections appear below.
Background: The following professional program tuition rates were incorrectly represented in the materials approved by the Board of Regents at its April 2005 meeting:
As Approved April 2005 Corrected Amount Medical College of Georgia Medical School Out-of-state Tuition $17,036 $15,488 Nursing School Out-of-state Tuition $ 8,732 $ 9,232 -
Increase in Professional Program Tuition for the University of Georgia Executive M.B.A. Program
Approved: The Board approved an increase in the professional program tuition for the University of Georgia ("UGA") Executive M.B.A. program from $54,000 to $57,000, or approximately 5.6%, effective with the Fall 2005 Semester. The tuition for this program is the comprehensive rate charged for this 18-month program.
Background: Beginning in fiscal year 2006, the Executive M.B.A. program will be charged rent for use of the classroom/meeting facility located in the Buckhead area of Atlanta. The build-out cost for this space ($400,000) was included in the program's previous budgets and will be converted to rent expense in fiscal year 2006; however, the annual rent amount for this facility ($494,000) exceeds the build-out expense that is contained in the program's base budget. The income generated ($54,000) from this tuition increase combined with other program revenues are projected to alleviate this budget shortfall. Without the tuition increase, funds would have to be diverted from other areas of the program compromising the program's quality and limiting enrollment. For comparison, the program tuition rates for other similar Executive M.B.A. programs are listed below:
Institution Program Tuition Rate Georgia State University $ 52,500 Georgia Institute of Technology $ 59,000 Ohio State University $ 59,000 University of North Carolina $ 64,000 Michigan State University $ 68,000 University of Minnesota $ 69,500 Emory University $ 73,848 Penn State University $ 84,000 University of Michigan $100,000 -
Fiscal Year 2006 Tuition for Collaborative Online Programs
Approved: The Board approved a 5% increase in tuition rates for collaborative online programs to become effective fall semester 2005.
Background: This approved increase matches increases to baseline tuition rates already established for fiscal year 2006. The increase in each program's tuition rate will not generate additional revenue for the programs but will simply maintain the differential tuition needed to administer the collaborative programs. The consequences of collaborative online programs' tuition not rising in proportion to overall tuition increases would be the loss of operating funds. This loss, over time, could restrict program growth and potentially lead to an inability to sustain collaborative programs.
Program Participating Institutions Current Tuition Per Credit Hour Tuition With 5% Increase Request eCore®
http://www.gactr.uga.edu/ecore/
Prgm. Start Date: Fall 2000
Headcount Sp05: 1134
Enrollments Sp05: 1539Columbus State University
Georgia Southwestern State University
Georgia Highlands College
Southern Polytechnic State University
University of West Georgia
Valdosta State University$131 $138 WebMBA®
http://www.webmbaonline.org/
Prog. Start Date: Spring 2001
Headcount Sp05: 56 (2 cohorts)
Enrollments Sp05: 112Georgia College & State University
Georgia Southern University
Kennesaw State University
University of West Georgia
Valdosta State University$500 $525 WebBSIT
http://www.webbsit.org/
Prgm. Start Date: Fall 2004
Headcount Sp05: 18
Enrollments Sp05: 24Armstrong Atlantic State University
Clayton State University
Georgia Southern University
Macon State College
Southern Polytechnic State University$265 $279 WebBAS
http://www.webbas.net/
Prgm. Start Date: Fall 2004
Headcount Sp05: 8
Enrollments Sp05: 11Albany State University
Dalton State College
Georgia Southwestern State University$200 $210
Program Participating Institutions Current Tuition Per Credit Hour* Tuition With 5% Increase Request Tuition Rates at Comparable Programs eCore http://www.gactr.uga.edu/ecore/ Columbus State University
Georgia Southwestern State University
Georgia Highlands College
Southern Polytechnic State
University
University of West Georgia
Valdosta State University$131 $138 Penn State World Campus $199
University of Phoenix $400
University of Tennessee $171WebMBA http://www.webmbaonline.org/ Georgia State University
Georgia Southern University
Kennesaw State University
University of West Georgia
Valdosta State University$500 $525 University of Michigan-Flint $700
University of Florida-Warrington $770
University of Phoenix $545WebBSIT
http://www.webbsit.org/Armstrong Atlantic State University
Clayton College & State University
Georgia Southern University
Macon State College
Southern Polytechnic State University$265 $279 DeVry Institute $395
University of Phoenix $400
Kaplan University $280WebBAS
http://www.webbas.net/Albany State University
Dalton State College
Georgia Southwestern State University$200 $210 Southwest Missouri State University $258
Kentucky Virtual University $214
Tennessee Board of Regents $209* Each collaborative program offers an e-rate, so they have a single rate of tuition for in-state and out-of-state students. This allows the collaboratives to participate in the Southern Regional Education Board's ("SREB") Electronic Campus.
-
Acceptance of Gifts for the Georgia Institute of Technology
Approved: The Board accepted on behalf of the Georgia Institute of Technology ("GIT") gifts-in-kind from the following corporations:
Company Value Items Department Cisco Systems, Inc. $125,425 Various computer equipment College of Computing IBM Corporation $206,325 Various electrical and computer equipment School of Electrical and Computer Engineering Lab at Technology Square Orasi Software, Inc. $182,400 Mercury software licenses College of Computing Background: Board policy requires that any gift to a University System of Georgia institution with an initial value greater than $100,000 must be accepted by the Board of Regents. GIT has advised that there are no material costs implications associated with the acceptance of these gifts.
COMMITTEE ON REAL ESTATE AND FACILITIES
The Committee on Real Estate and Facilities met on Wednesday, June 8, 2005, at approximately 9:20 a.m. in the Board Room. Committee members in attendance were Chair Martin W. NeSmith, Vice Chair Allan Vigil, and Regents Connie Cater, Michael J. Coles, Julie Hunt, W. Mansfield Jennings, Jr., Donald M. Leebern, Jr., and Richard L. Tucker. Chancellor Thomas C. Meredith, Board Chair Joel O. Wooten, Jr., and Regents Hugh A. Carter, Jr., William H. Cleveland, Joe Frank Harris, James R. Jolly, Patrick S. Pittard, Doreen Stiles Poitevint, and Wanda Yancey Rodwell were also in attendance. Vice Chair Vigil reported to the Board on Wednesday that the Committee had reviewed nine items, all of which required action. With motion properly made, seconded, and unanimously adopted, the Board approved and authorized the following:
-
Naming of the "John D. Kehoe Cortona Center," Cortona, Italy, University of Georgia
Approved: The Board approved the naming of the University of Georgia's ("UGA") study abroad center in Cortona, Italy, the " John D. Kehoe Cortona Center."
Understandings: The Cortona facility, previously known as the Sernini Complex, was acquired by the UGAREF Cortona, Italy Foundation, a subsidiary of the UGA Real Estate Foundation, Inc. ("UGAREF") in 2002. The Board of Regents leases the facility from UGAREF and will own the building after all options have been exercised.
Emeritus Professor John D. "Jack" Kehoe founded the Cortona program 35 years ago, when he took a small group of UGA students there for summer art courses. Since that time, more than 4,500 students have studied in Cortona, and the program has evolved to a full curriculum of art courses and electives in the fall, spring, and summer semesters. Today, more than 200 students go to Cortona to study art, landscape architecture, Italian culture and language, as well as a variety of courses in the humanities. Without Professor Kehoe's vision, this thriving, year‑round program never would have begun.
The naming of the John D. Kehoe Cortona Center honors Professor Kehoe's many outstanding contributions to the university and the Lamar Dodd School of Art, where he served for more than 30 years as a faculty member and 20 years as director of the Cortona program. In addition, Professor Kehoe and his wife, Marilyn, have given generously of their time and gifts to build endowments and scholarships to support the program. They are personal contributors to the John D. Kehoe Cortona Scholarship, the Friends of Cortona Discretionary Fund, and the Cortona Fund for facilities. Professor Kehoe also serves as a member of the Lamar Dodd School of Art Board of Visitors (the "Board of Visitors").
The Board of Visitors raised approximately $400,000, an amount which was matched by funds held by the University of Georgia Foundation, Inc. to help make the purchase and renovations possible. The proposal to rename the facility in honor of the Cortona program's founder has the enthusiastic endorsement of the faculty of the Lamar Dodd School of Art, the Board of Visitors, and the dean of the Franklin College of Arts and Sciences.
-
Naming of "Robert Adair Burnett Hall," Armstrong Atlantic State University
Approved: The Board approved the naming of the administration building at Armstrong Atlantic State University ("AASU") "Robert Adair Burnett Hall" in honor of Dr. Robert Adair Burnett.
Understandings: Dr. Burnett joined Armstrong State College in 1978 as a professor of history and progressed through the ranks of dean of the School of Arts and Sciences, vice president and dean of faculty, and acting president. In 1984, he was appointed the fifth president of the institution, a position he held until his retirement in 1999.
During Dr. Burnett's presidency, AASU's enrollment more than doubled from 2,500 to nearly 5,700 students, with significant growth in the number of students from outside of Chatham County and from historically underrepresented groups. President Burnett enjoyed frequent contact with students and kept himself keenly aware of their needs and concerns. Under his leadership, AASU student services were dramatically expanded. AASU grants and contract awards also increased substantially under his presidency to $2.1 million in 1998.
In addition to guiding AASU, Dr. Burnett held leadership positions in numerous professional organizations, including the President's Commission of the National Collegiate Athletic Association ("NCAA"), the Savannah Economic Development Authority, the Rotary Club of Savannah, and the Business Education and Technology Alliance. He also participated in educational exchanges in Australia and Germany.
-
Gift of Real Property, 141 Piedmont Avenue, Atlanta, Georgia State University
Approved: The Board accepted a gift of approximately 4.153 acres of real property located at 141 Piedmont Avenue, Atlanta, Georgia, from Piedmont/Ellis, LLC (the "LLC") for the use and benefit of Georgia State University ("GSU").
The acceptance of this gift of real property is subject to completion of environmental remediation such that the property is deemed in compliance with the Type 1 risk reduction standards for residential properties promulgated under the Georgia Hazardous Site Response Act (O.C.G.A. § 12-8-90 et seq. 1992) for soil and groundwater contaminants identified during previous site investigations or during remediation activities, and qualifies for a limitation of liability under the Georgia Hazardous Site Reuse and Redevelopment Act (O.C.G.A. § 12-8-200 et seq.) for the identified contaminants.
The legal details involved with accepting this gift of real property will be handled by the Office of the Attorney General.
Understandings: The LLC purchased this real property for $7,931,000 in 2002.
A facility condition analysis of the improvements indicates they are in generally poor condition.
The subject property was formerly occupied by a variety of residential structures and commercial businesses including, but not limited to, a gas station, a dry cleaner, and an automotive sales and repair operation.
Environmental testing was conducted during preliminary site investigation and indicated that the soil and ground water had been adversely impacted by petroleum-related products and dry-cleaning solvent.
The LLC will conduct environmental remediation and obtain necessary documentation from the Georgia Environmental Protection Division certifying that the property qualifies for a limitation of liability under Georgia's Brownfields legislation, the Hazardous Site Reuse and Redevelopment Act, for the constituents of concern prior to the acceptance of the gift of real property by the Board of Regents.
There are no restrictions on the gift, no known reversions on the real property, and only necessary easements and restrictions, which do not adversely affect the intended use.
-
Ground Lease and Rental Agreement, Piedmont Ellis Student Housing, Georgia State University
Approved: The Board declared approximately 4.153 acres of real property located on the campus of Georgia State University ("GSU") no longer advantageously useful to GSU or other units of the University System of Georgia but only to the extent and for the purpose of allowing this real property to be leased to Piedmont/Ellis, LLC (the "LLC") for the purpose of constructing and owning student housing and parking for GSU.
The Board authorized the execution of a ground lease between the Board of Regents, Lessor, and the LLC, Lessee, for the above-referenced approximately 4.153 acres of real property on the campus of GSU for a period not to exceed 33 years preceded by an additional construction period of not more than 2 years with the option to renew for up to an additional 5 years, should there be debt outstanding at the end of the original ground lease term, for the purpose of providing student housing containing 1,992 student housing beds and 988 parking spaces.
The Board authorized the execution of the rental agreement between the LLC, Landlord, and the Board of Regents, Tenant, for 1,992 student housing beds and 988 parking spaces commencing on the first day of the first month after the LLC obtains a certificate of occupancy for the improvements but no earlier than August 1, 2007, and ending the following June 30 at a rent not to exceed $872,000 per month ($10,464,000 per year annualized) with options to renew on a