ExploreUK home

0-9 | A | B | C | D | E | F | G | H | I | J | K | L | M | N | O | P | Q | R | S | T | U | V | W | X | Y | Z

[6] > Image [6] of Minutes of the University of Kentucky Board of Trustees, 1967-04-apr4.

Part of Minutes of the University of Kentucky Board of Trustees

6 changes in the budget as may from time to time be deemed necessary upon recom- mendation of the President. Mr. Ezelle's motion was seconded by Dr. Denham and approved unanimously. G. Addition to Engineering Complex Named Anderson Hall (PR 5) Dr. Albright presented PR 5, Recommendation from the Building and Campus Development Committee, which recommended that the new seven-story addition to the complex of buildings serving the College of Engineering be named Anderson Hall in honor of the first dean of the College, Professor F. Paul Anderson. On motion duly made, seconded and carried the recommendation as set forth in PR 5 was approved unanimously. (See PR 5 at the end of the Minutes.) H. Action on Student Code Deferred (PR 6) Dr. Albright read the following recommendation presented as a part of PR 6, Non-Academic Relationships Between Students and the University of Kentucky: "that the Report of the Senate Advisory Committee for Student Affairs, as endorsed by the University Senate and the Student Government, and the attached statement en- titled 'Financial Delinquency' be accepted as a policy statement of the Board of Trustees from which subsequent Governing Regulations will be formulated. " Mr. Ezelle said that in his opinion the proposed student code was an im- portant and far-reaching document that deserved closer scrutiny by the Board than it had received to date. He was sure that the faculty and students had spent con- siderable time in discussion of the report prior to endorsing it and he felt that it merited the same careful consideration by the Board of Trustees. He felt that there were certain sections of the report which needed clarification through. discussion with faculty and students. The Board should not procrastinate but neither should it act too hastily. Mr. Broadbent agreed with Mr. Ezelle and added that he and other members of the Board of Trustees had received inquiries and expressions of concern from parents and taxpayers which they did not feel qualified to answer without further study and discussion. He suggested that a meeting with faculty and students be ar- ranged. Mr. Milner expressed the feeling that the report had been in the hands of the Board for too short a time to warrant action at this time. The Board had not even had the opportunity to discuss it among themselves. Mr. Ezelle made a motion that the Board of Trustees authorize the Chairman to appoint a committee charged with the responsibility to review the report on behalf