xt70zp3vtb7v https://exploreuk.uky.edu/dips/xt70zp3vtb7v/data/mets.xml Lexington, Kentucky University of Kentucky 20050329 minutes English University of Kentucky Contact the Special Collections Research Center for information regarding rights and use of this collection. Minutes of the University of Kentucky Board of Trustees Minutes of the University of Kentucky Board of Trustees, 2005-03-mar29. text Minutes of the University of Kentucky Board of Trustees, 2005-03-mar29. 2005 2011 true xt70zp3vtb7v section xt70zp3vtb7v 








                                     MINUTES

                          Meeting of the Board of Trustees
                               University of Kentucky
                                     10:00 A.M.
                                   March 29, 2005
                          18 th Floor Patterson Office Tower




Minutes

Accompanying Materials:

Aademic Affairs Committee Report

AACR 1    Candidates for Degrees (Consent)

Finance Committee Report

FCR 1     Proposed 2005-2006 Tuition and Mandatory Registration Fee Schedules

PowerPoint presentation on tuition




 







      Minutes of the Special Meeting of the Board of Trustees of the University of
Kentucky, Tuesday, March 29, 2005.

      The Board of Trustees of the University of Kentucky met at 10:00 a.m.
(Lexington time) on Tuesday, March 29, 2005, in the Board Room on the 18th Floor of
Patterson Office Tower.

      A.    Meeting Opened

      Mr. James Hardymon, Chair, called the meeting to order at 10:00 a.m. and asked
the secretary of the Board, Ms. Elaine Wilson, to call the roll.

      B.    Roll Call

      The following members of the Board of Trustees answered the call of the roll:
Mira Ball, Steve Branscum, Marianne Smith Edge, Ann Haney, James Hardymon
(Chair), Michael Kennedy, Billy Joe Miles, Roy Moore, Steven Reed, Myra Leigh Tobin,
Rachel Watts, Russ Williams, Elaine Wilson, and Barbara Young. Mr. Frank Shoop
arrived shortly after the call of the roll. Absent from the meeting were Pamela May,
Phillip Patton, Alice Stevens Sparks, JoEtta Y. Wickliffe, and Billy Wilcoxson. The
university administration was represented by President Lee T. Todd, Jr., Provost Michael
Nietzel, Acting Executive Vice President for Finance and Administration Frank Butler,
Executive Vice President for Health Affairs Michael Karpf, Executive Vice President for
Research Wendy Baldwin, and General Counsel Barbara W. Jones.

        Members of the various news media were also in attendance. A quorum being
present, the Chair declared the meeting officially open for the conduct of business at
10:03 a.m.

      C.    Consent Items

      Mr. Hardymon thanked all of the members for attending the committee meetings
earlier that morning and the board meeting. He acknowledged that all of them had to
change their schedules to be able to attend this special meeting. He asked first to deal
with the following consent items on the agenda:

      Minutes - March 9, 2005
      AACR1 - Candidates for Degrees

      Mr. Hardymon asked Roy Moore, acting chair of the Academic Affairs
Committee, if the morning's session evoked any comment from the committee that the
board should hear. Mr. Moore replied that the only comment that should be made is that
AACR 1 was approved by the Senate Council the previous day and by the committee that
morning.




 




2 -



      Mr. Hardymon asked for a motion to approve the consent items. Ms. Ball made
the motion, which was seconded by Ms. Edge. The motion was approved without
dissent. (See AACR 1 at the end of these Minutes.)

      Mr. Hardymon asked President Todd for an update on the condition of Mary
Margaret Colliver.

      E.    President's Comments on Ms. Colliver

      President Todd informed the board that Mary Margaret Colliver, long-time Public
Relations director for the Hospital and later for the campus as a whole, sustained serious
injuries in a traffic/pedestrian accident on Limestone Street after leaving her office at 7
p.m. on March 22, 2005. To the relief of everyone, Ms. Colliver is doing well and
recovering in the Medical Center. President Todd said that prayers and thoughts continue
to be with her, and he looks forward to when she rejoins the board at one of the seats in
the board room.

      Ms. Young commented that there have been two bad pedestrian accidents on
Limestone recently, and she wants to be sure that the university looks hard at traffic
patterns, pedestrian patterns, and jaywalking to see what can be done to prevent future
accidents.

      President Todd said that the issue of safety on Limestone and other university
streets has been referred to the campus safety committee. He pointed out that at one time,
the university discussed trying to plant hedges along Limestone to force people to cross
only at crosswalks. He shares the fear of accidentally hitting a pedestrian when he drives
on campus and is very concerned. He has asked for recommendations from the safety
committee. He said that Ms. Young's point was well taken.

      F.    Proposed 2005-2006 Tuition and Mandatory Registration Fee Schedules
(FCR 1)

      Mr. Hardymon said that the reason for the special meeting today came out of the
finance committee, chaired by Ms. Tobin that morning. He asked Ms. Tobin to lead the
discussion.

      Ms. Tobin pointed out that she was sitting in for Ms. Wickliffe and that the tuition
increase is such an important topic that the finance committee referred it to the total
board for discussion and presentation. She asked Dr. Todd to make his presentation.

      President Todd started a PowerPoint presentation, which began by reviewing data
from 2000 to the present. (See the PowerPoint presentation at the end of the Minutes.)
The university has been making progress though some difficult times. In comparison
with our benchmarks, UK is in 1 5th position with respect to the level of tuition and fees.
President Todd mentioned that he would like to see the board talk about benchmarking
because it is under reconsideration now by the Council on Postsecondary Education




 




3 -



(CPE). Most of our benchmarks are already in the Top 20, and although we are not, we
compare favorably.

       Per capita income, being rather low in Kentucky, is sometimes used to justify our
ranking below some other institutions. But we should not allow ourselves to say we can't
do the things that other states do because of our lower per capita income. Higher
education is really the secret to raising per capita income. Kiplinger's rates us as a good
value with respect to room, board, and tuition - the cost of education. Among our
benchmarks, UK is the least expensive, and UK is fourth among the 100 institutions that
Kiplinger's tracks.

       Among schools in Kentucky, UK has the highest tuition but is above the
University of Louisville and Western by only a small amount. We do not appear to be
pricing ourselves out of the market. Our application rate since 2000 has gone up by
about 2,300 applications per year, breaking 10,000 again this year. We do not get as
many applications as we might otherwise because it is known that UK has a selective
admissions policy.

       As our admissions have increased, so has the quality of the students we have
admitted. The number of Governors Scholars and Governor's School for the Arts
students has risen. The number of high school valedictorians we have been able to attract
has increased. GPAs of the admissions class have improved. The number of entering
students who have taken advanced placement courses has almost doubled. Senate
Chairperson Ernie Yanarella has said that he could sense that the quality of the students
he is teaching has improved. Alan DeSantis, a top faculty member who often receives
awards for his teaching, feels that the caliber of his engineering students has risen. ACT
scores have gone up, as has the average fist-year GPA. UK has increased not only the
volume of students, but also the quality.

       UK is the only public institution in the state that has increased the percentage of
Kentuckians among its undergraduate population since 2000, from 84 percent to 85.8
percent.

       President Todd continued by discussing the decision-making criteria used to
determine the level of tuition proposed for next year. First, there is the change in the
state appropriation, which overall has decreased by about $14 million. UK is operating
with about $41 less per student than in 2000-01. At the same time, the higher education
price index has gone up 17.6 percent.

       The administration is trying to manage the institution and watch expenses
conscientiously. UK employment is down 52 positions that are paid by state and tuition
dollars, and down 28 positions in self-supporting units. UK has added people in areas
where federal research grants and contracts and hospital growth have been able to support
them. Overall, the change is 352 positions, with a reduction in those that are paid by
general fund dollars. This reduction has been accomplished by redirection of about $35




 




4 -



million of savings that have been realized through making other management changes, as
detailed in the recent four-page white paper sent to board members.

       To illustrate the decision-making process, we will start in December, before the
Legislature met. Then we will look at where we were after the governor proposed his
budget and where we are today after the budget has been passed.

       Initially, the university assumed it would receive earmarked funds for
maintenance and operation of new buildings that were coming online - the BBSRB, the
women's health center, etc., - but the assumption was further that no additional
operating dollars would be offered. In the past three years, funding for maintenance and
operations has been cut, so our assumption of having funding for the new facilities was
rather daring. In February, when the governor's budget came through, the earmarked
funds were included and approximately $2.7 million for operating funds had been added
as a payback of about half of the previous recurring expense cuts. After the legislative
session was completed, additional earmarked funds were included, making operating
funding $13 million, a large boost.

       Over the period from December until now, we initially thought the needed
undergraduate tuition increase would be 16.4 percent for in-state and 7.9 percent for out-
of-state students. In February, with help from the governor's budget, we were going to
recommend a 14.6 percent tuition increase. But today our proposal is a 12.5 percent
increase for in-state undergraduates and 7.9 percent for nonresident undergraduates.

       We are putting a high priority on salary increases this year, and that strongly
influenced all of the figures suggested. UK's average salary increase for the past three
years has been 1.3 percent. It is challenging to retain and recruit faculty with raises of
that amount. Health benefits are expected to increase 10 percent, at a cost of $3.6
million. Scholarship funding must likewise increase to accommodate our own raise of
tuition costs. All of these cost increases are expenditures for people; and this is where we
plan to put our money - into increases for people.

       Our current plans include the addition of a "fighting fund" that will enable UK to
make counter-offers to current faculty being recruited by outside institutions. We have
chosen to offer salary increases of up to 4 percent, which is critically important. We also
have added a staff equity pool for the first time in a number of years. Health benefits
increases have been tightened to 9.4 percent, a figure to be proud of when compared with
increases for other states, entities, and institutions. Some changes have been made to
fund scholarship increases and put them on a more solid footing than before.

       Moving specifically to salaries: It is stated in the strategic plan that our goal is to
achieve 90 percent of the median salary of our benchmarks. If we do that, our average
salary will still be behind that of the other schools (except for Purdue). We had to
assume that the benchmarks are going to grant salary increases this year also, and we
assumed that figure would average 3.8 percent. Thus, to catch up, we increased our
effort to get 4 percent for our own faculty. It is against these benchmarks that we recruit,




 







trying to attract faculty that would be likely to go to these schools. We have been
successful in attracting a number of such faculty.

       The area of scholarships is another in which President Todd has always felt that
UK was not competitive. Having talked to high school counselors, parents, and others,
he concluded that other state universities were offering a much larger volume of
scholarships than UK. This inadequacy has been alleviated by strengthening the
Governor's Scholars and the Governor's Scholars for the Arts offerings. But UK is still
offering the lowest percentage of any school in the state of Kentucky despite the
percentage of recipients almost doubling from 2.6 percent to 4.6 percent. We need to
increase this figure further to compete with Kentucky schools as well as with our
benchmarks.

       Other changes in the budget include putting an additional $1.5 million for debt
service into the IRIS project so that it is properly budgeted and there is no large balloon
payment at the end.

       Insurance presents another interesting situation: UK has been insuring its
buildings at their original cost, not at their replacement cost. We are changing now to
cover the replacement value of our buildings. Automotive insurance has gone up because
we have not increased that contribution since 1996. This budget will begin to remedy
that situation financially also.

       UK must purchase at least $150,000 of library books and databases to maintain
the library's current position.

       The budget will take another financial hit with respect to receiving lower service
assessments from Lexington Community College while at the same time retaining the
people for whom UK used to receive the service assessments. Other adjustments of
service assessment amounts have been made, specifically, Medical Center assessments
will decrease by about $1 million this year because better tracking of the actual value of
such services revealed that the previous year's assessment was a slight overcharge.

       President Todd said that overall, we have expenses of approximately $35 million
for salaries, health benefits, and scholarships. From various sources of income, we
expect to receive income of approximately $31 million, leaving a shortage of $3.2
million. This amount must be found somewhere, but it is encouraging that previously we
thought the shortage would be $10 million.

       President Todd wanted the board to be aware that even during the past three
years, investment has been made in some program improvements, at the rate of
approximately $.5 million a year, and this budget will allow an increase in that figure.
The provost will receive an additional $400,000 to deal directly with the various requests
he receives.




 




6 -



       When President Todd speaks to prospective students and parents, he tells them
that one of the best things UK can do to keep costs down is go graduate students in four
years. To encourage this, UK offers such options as the winter term, which was very
successful in its first year, and the four-year-graduation contract. An increase of $600 in
tuition for one year pales in comparison to having the pay another $ 10,000 to keep the
student in school for an additional year.

       President Todd was pleased that UK received $ 100 million of authorization for
bonding for hospital plans plus permission to spend $100 million of UK's own funds, for
a total of $200 million. This will enable UK to begin the construction of its much needed
bed tower. The university also received $40 million of state bonding, meaning that the
state will pay $40 million over time to begin the first phase of the UK pharmacy-biology
complex, our top priority. Also received was $24 million of authority to bond a student
health center and $7 million of authority toward a basketball practice facility. The
university received operating money, project money, and a $.0 1-per-pack increase of the
tobacco tax for UK and U of L to share as research funding. Although some of this must
be matched, the funding gives us additional resources with which to attack cancer issues
in the state of Kentucky. In sum, the budget is very good this year, and we have tried to
reflect that by moving the tuition increase down from 16.5 percent to 12.5 percent while
making the key needs - of employees, students, scholarships, and benefits - the
destination of most of the funding.

       President Todd next asked Provost Nietzel to speak about the professional
programs detailed in FCR 1.

       Provost Nietzel concentrated on pages 3 and 4 of FCR 1, explaining the
percentages and rationale associated with the professional programs. He stressed that in
most of the professional programs, the board would see an introduction of a different
increase for continuing students versus for incoming students. The Pharm. D. program is
the exception. For Law, Medicine, and Dentistry, the recommended increase for
incoming students is 12.4 percent, the same percentage as for the undergraduate resident
tuition discussed earlier by the President. Upon recommendation of the deans of these
three areas, the increase in tuition for returning students is 9.4 percent. For the past two
years, there have been differential increases levied for these professional programs.
There is a feeling that such steep increases represent a very large burden for professional
students in these areas, and thus it would be wise to provide a bit of cushioning this year.
Similar changes were made to the other professional programs listed as masters programs
at the top of the third page - 12.4 percent increases.

       The Pharm. D. program changes were to increase returning-student tuition by 24.8
percent. The amount above 9.4 percent (i.e., 15.4 percent) will be returned to Pharmacy
for the college's use. The resulting $12,000 annual tuition for Pharmacy's Ph.D. program
will still be only slightly higher than tuition at their benchmarks for similar programs next
year, and UK's tuition will remain well below the median. For new Pharm. D. students,
there is an even greater tuition increase, 51 percent, the bulk of which will also be
returned to Pharmacy for the enrichment and expansion of their program. The new




 




7



students are part of a group of 900 students who this year applied for 130 slots in
Pharmacy. The expected return to Pharmacy is around $1.2 million, and Pharmacy's
plans for that amount would be to add from six to eight faculty and supporting staff
positions.

      Provost Nietzel next moved to the MBA degree, which is undergoing change both
from the academic as well as from the financial point of view for students. The cost of
the MBA program for resident students will be $12,628. This cost includes a program
fee of $3,000 per semester assessed to students. The $12,628 figure will be the entire
cost of an MBA degree because the program has been changed to a 12-month program.
The median cost of an MBA program is $29,000. So UK is offering, by virtue of
compacting this program into one year, a considerable savings for an MBA education.
For students currently in the program, their tuition will increase by 11.7 percent, the same
rate as the graduate tuition went up at the university.

      Mr. Hardymon opened the floor for discussion, questions, and comments. Rachel
Watts spoke first. After thanking the presenters for their presentations, Ms. Watts made
the point that she is among the lucky students who could and would, if necessary, pay
much more for her education at the University of Kentucky. But there are many students
who struggle with each increase in cost to complete their education. Offering more
scholarships would be a great help. Double-digit increases are a fact of life not only at
UK but also at our benchmarks and everywhere in the nation. Ms. Watts encouraged the
university to continue to look at long-term planning under the worst-case scenario with
regard to state funding. Under this scenario, the university can continue even though
funding is inadequate, and UK's trend of academic and research improvement will
continue as well.

      Finally, Ms. Watts wanted to be sure that "ordinary" students, not the
valedictorians or the highest scorers on the ACT, have a chance to come here. Some
students respond to our admonition to dream, and they do - they dream of going to UK.
Such students must be given a chance to succeed at the University of Kentucky.

      President Todd responded that there is something he did not mention - that with
this budget there will be an additional $500,000 of need-based scholarships, for a total of
$1.5 million allocated for such scholarships. He has heard that 82 percent of students
who request aid receive it at UK. He stressed that we need to make sure that people do
not get scared away from trying to attend the university. Higher education is still the best
investment they will ever make.

      Mr. Hardymon asked Ms. Watts to return to her point that the Board of Trustees
should look at the future and plan its strategies under the worst possible revenue scenario.

      Ms. Watts responded that every year, the board does not know what is going to
happen with respect to budgeting. Even in February or March there is uncertainty. She
would like for the board to find some way to have consistency in the midst of that
uncertainty, so that even if the worst possible scenario becomes reality, there will be a




 




8 -



way that the board does not have to continue every year to raise tuition with double-digit
increases.

      This might mean not having a huge increase in enrollment so that quality can be
maintained. Also, there should be a balance of achievement (getting good students with
high GPAs) with accessibility for all people who might want to attend the university
(those who are not at the top of their class, but those who "pull themselves up and come
to the university and make it work").

      Mr. Hardymon said that he felt the board needed more planning, more idea of
where it was, and what it was facing. Tuition and operating expenses should be an
ongoing subject for the board so that it can make better decisions. Mr. Hardymon has
talked to President Todd and the governor about making more planning a reality so that
the university avoids reaction to whatever it receives. He praised Ms. Watts and said he
asked her to repeat her remarks because he wanted her point reemphasized and he knew
she could go back and make the point again "even though [she] didn't use a note."

      Mr. Hardymon next called on Ms. Tobin, who asked about students who worked
during school. She wanted to know if there was any type of statistic on how many
students work and how important their jobs are.

      Dr. Todd passed the question to Provost Nietzel.

      Provost Nietzel stated that the only number available would be the number of
students in work study, a program run by the university to allow students to receive pay
for work in jobs at the university. The university could survey students and ask whether
they were working at UK or for an outside employer, and some survey data might have
already been compiled on whether students are working. But there is no ongoing
systematic assessment that polls the entire student body on this subject. Work study
participants would be only a small percentage of the overall student body. He asked
Angie Martin if she had any such data, and she said that she did not.

      Ms. Tobin stated that making jobs available to students might help to bridge the
gap for the students to which Ms. Watts referred.

      Dr. Todd responded that we do have some positive things in the works -
specifically, the Sikorsky Corporation's recruitment to Lexington, which would offer 300
engineering students employment in the company during their careers at UK. Sue Strup
at the career center also has internships for qualified students, and UK hopes to have an
increase in that number. Tracking techniques to enable following students who want
part-time work is improving, and the improvements should be implemented soon at UK.

      Mr. Hardymon called on Mr. Shoop next. Mr. Shoop thanked the president for
virtually doubling scholarships as a percentage of expenditures. He also thanked the
governor and legislature for additional funding. In addition, Mr. Shoop expressed his
gratitude to the president and his staff for their efforts in making sure that the university




 




9 -



operates as efficiently as possible so that increases in tuition can be as low as possible.
He praised and echoed Ms. Watts's sentiment that today's students need every break they
can get.

       Mr. Hardymon recognized Mr. Williams next, who added a note about student
employment. Within Human Resources there is a student employment service that offers
jobs to students both on and off campus and helps screen jobs and applicants so that both
will be suitable for each others' needs.

       Ms. Smith Edge spoke next after being recognized by Mr. Hardymon. Ms. Smith
Edge agreed with Ms. Watts and the chairman that the need is to continue to look at the
future and not simply to react to it. Increases in student tuition are never pleasing to
anyone, but she is happy that the board was able to offer some relief from the original
amount quoted and in so doing to reduce the burden to students. She also praised the
look at the scholarship issue and the intended increase for the faculty. The administration
has done well in informing the board to enable them to know where UK has been and
where it needs to go.

       Mr. Hardymon recognized Ms. Tobin, who offered the view that the proposed
increases were really an increase in investment. That investment is in our faculty. She
advocated "I for one would much rather see us take a bold step and make some increases
to retain faculty and to be a place where faculty want to come." In addition, it is
necessary to consider the needs of continuing faculty, those who have been here for years
and have received 1 percent increases. "We need to be thinking about higher increases in
the future if we are planning for the future, for increases more in the area of 6 percent to
10 percent for our faculty." Higher education is an individual's investment in the future.
We must consider where our future funding is coming from. She expressed her
appreciation for the faculty who had stayed at the university despite the 1 percent raises.

       Professor Kennedy was called on next by Mr. Hardymon; he briefly seconded Ms.
Tobin's sentiments.

       Professor Moore was recognized next. He began by stating that Ms. Tobin took a
lot of the words out of his mouth. He expanded on her ideas by saying that the board
should be looking out long term for the interests of both the faculty and the staff. The
university should do everything it can to bring salaries for all employees up to the
benchmark level. He added to Ms. Watts's thoughts by saying that he has noticed the
students are of a higher quality than before. And many of these students are students of
need, not always from a middle-class background. Remembering to fund their needs also
is important, and a very positive part of this budget is that it does that.

       Mr. Hardymon called on Mr. Miles next. He pointed out that there are really
tough decisions to be made in the coming years. Every state is experiencing the same
financial problems as Kentucky. To do what should be done will take a long time, but
state-supported schools are the only hope of the type of young men and women Ms.
Watts alluded to. One of the things such schools have to do is obtain the necessary




 




10 -



funding. Many people whose children attend the University of Kentucky could afford to
pay more in tuition. And if UK is to be the economic driver of this state, the board is
going to have to raise tuition. He has talked to the president about this, and he recognizes
how politically unpopular such an increase would be. Why should we do this? Because
the state has needs - for more doctors, nurses, and pharmacists, who are simply not
available in many locations in the state. Money drives the talent in the professions as
well as in sports. UK should become accustomed to buying the very best talent, and it is
able to do that.

       It is very embarrassing to be at the bottom of the faculty salary list. Mr. Miles
used Dr. Moore's experience of 20 years at UK as an example of a person who could go
elsewhere and double his salary, but he stays here because he cares. The board has in the
past not been the economic driver it should have been. He recommended that the need is
to work smarter and have the effort start with the board.

       Ms. Ball thanked the chair and the administration for calling the special meeting
and giving the presentations. She said that she appreciated the discussion, especially of
health benefits issues, and is happy that the presentation included details on where the
extra money will be allocated.

       Ms. Ball said that she has hired four university students in her accounting
department part-time, and they are some of the best people that she has working for her.
The university is doing some things right.

       President Todd thanked the speaker and elaborated a bit on health benefits. When
he started his administration, UK was paying only 32 percent of the family plan for
faculty and staff and now the figure has gone to over 56 percent. Increases in health
premiums have been low. It can be said that the competition is paying 90 percent to 95
percent of their family plans, but this overlooks the fact that many institutions have not
been able to control the cost of their health plans and thus their employees are paying
more than our employees, even with that 90 percent payment. We have tried hard and
succeeded in controlling costs and have also budgeted money to do so because this is an
area for competition - the benefits segment.

       Mr. Hardymon asked if there were additional comments. Mr. Miles moved that
the board approve the budget. Many voices seconded the motion. The voice vote had the
majority approving and two opposing, Mr. Reed and Ms. Watts. Mr. Hardymon thanked
everyone for their time and the quality presentations that enabled the board to be so well
informed on the issues. He speculated that the process should be extended throughout the
year because the subjects will always be a concern of the board. He reflected on a recent
trip to China and a meeting at a Governor's Conference on Education that made it clear
that other countries of the world are rapidly moving to improve their education process
and our state must do likewise even though added burdens can be expected on all groups
involved.




 




- I1 -



      G.    Other Business

      At Mr. Hardymon's inquiry about additional business, President Todd stated that
he had one other matter, and that is to announce to the board that Dean Scott Smith had
accepted an appointment to be the interim provost. He also read the names of persons
serving on the search committee for Provost Nietzel's replacement. Jeannine Blackwell
of the Graduate School will co-chair with Fred DeBeer from the Department of Internal
Medicine. Others include Ernest Bailey from the Department of Veterinary Science,
Karen Combs from the Provost Budget Office, Louise Graham from the College of Law,
Victor Hazard from Student Affairs, David Mohney from the College of Design, Johne
Parker from the Department of Mechanical Engineering, Bob Quick from Commerce
Lexington, Karl Raitz from the Department of Geography, Mike Reed from the
Department of Physiology, Ellen Rosenman from the Department of English, Chuck
Staben from the Office for Research, Sharon Turner from the College of Dentistry, Bob
Wiseman from Facilities Management, and the next President of the Student Government
Association (to be elected).

      President Todd will be charging this committee soon, first to write an RFP and
choose a search firm to be used for a national or international search. He will furnish a
timetable once the committee commences operations.

      Mr. Hardymon announced two resolutions. Ms. Tobin presented the first
resolution, honoring the UK Wom