xt7jm61bkp2m https://exploreuk.uky.edu/dips/xt7jm61bkp2m/data/mets.xml Lexington, Kentucky University of Kentucky 20030726 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, 2003-07-aug26-r. text Minutes of the University of Kentucky Board of Trustees, 2003-07-aug26-r. 2003 2011 true xt7jm61bkp2m section xt7jm61bkp2m 

      Minutes of the retreat of the Board of Trustees of the University of Kentucky, Tuesday,
August 26, 2003.

      The Board of Trustees of the University of Kentucky began its retreat at 8:30 a.m.
(Lexington time) on Tuesday, August 26, 2003 in the Library of the Hilary J. Boone Center.

      Mr. Steven Reed, Chair, welcomed the members and thanked them for attending the
retreat. He said the purpose of the retreat was to have time together and have a dialogue.

      The following members were in attendance: James F. Hardymon, Davy Jones, Michael
Kennedy, Pamela R. May, Billy Joe Miles, Steven S. Reed, C. Frank Shoop, Marian Moore
Sims, Alice Stevens Sparks, Myra Leigh Tobin, Rachel Watts, JoEtta Wickliffe, Russ Williams,
Elaine Wilson, and Barbara Young.

      Absent from the retreat were Marianne Smith Edge, Robert P. Meriwether, Phillip Patton,
Elissa Plattner, and Billy Wilcoxson.

      Mr. Reed began the meeting by expressing appreciation to President Lee Todd and First
Lady Patsy Todd for their hard work the past two years. He talked about the total package and
noted that the Board should not take the President for granted. He called on Frank Shoop, Chair
of the Ad Hoc Committee on Compensation, to make a report.

      Mr. Shoop informed the Board that the Ad Hoc Committee had several meetings, and it
plans to submit a proposal at the September meeting. He reviewed the various options that the
Committee had discussed and talked about other presidential packages at benchmark institutions.
There was also a discussion about the state law controlling the salary of the state presidents
based on the salary of the President of the Council on Postsecondary Education.

      Mr. Shoop said the Committee was cognizant of the budget and other issues. The
Committee wants to keep President Todd until he is age 65, and retention will be addressed in
the contract. The Committee does not want the University to lose focus and momentum.

      Board members commented about the President and First Lady's desires. They feel it is
important to have a clear understanding of their desires and what is important to them. They feel
the President's evaluation should not be tied to money because it muddles the process. The
Board has struggled with compensation more than any other issue, and it is better to face it going
into the beginning of the academic year. It is an emotional subject and very individual.

      Mr. Shoop said he wanted the issues to be put to rest. It is important to have full input
from Board's on the President's compensation package. He wants the Board to be united on the
package and the President to be happy.

      Professor Kennedy, Dr. Jones, and Mr. Williams expressed their views and opinions from
the standpoint of faculty and staff.

      It was noted that the Ad Hoc Committee suggested that the Board have an evaluation.
Mr. Williams was instructed to get books from the American Governing Board regarding the
Board's evaluation process.


2 -

      The pros and cons were discussed regarding an outside facilitator coming to campus to
walk the Board through the process. Mr. Hardymon commented that it is better to walk before
they try to run and possibly get a facilitator at some time in the future.

      Through a series of slides, President Todd gave a presentation about the last two years.
He talked about the accomplishments at the University, the transition to the Provost system,
changes in the Governing and Administrative Regulations, leadership changes, reorganization of
the Medical Center, and budget needs.

      There was a discussion regarding the Lexington Community College accreditation issue
and its future.

      President Todd asked the various administrators to give some brief reports.

      Dr. Phyllis Nash gave a presentation on the Code of Conduct. She distributed a draft to
the Board, challenged them to take a hard look at the Code, and have comments back to her by
October 15th

      Dr. Nash also distributed three copies (current status copy, marked copy, and clean copy
of proposed changes) of the Governing and Administrative Regulations to the Board. She
encouraged the Board to take a serious look at the proposed changes because they involve a lot
of issues and real changes. Comments from the Board are due by October 1Is.

      Dr. Al Cohen talked about the appointment of the Executive Vice President for Health
Affairs and the search for the Dean of the College of Medicine. He stated that the restructure
would make a huge difference.

      Provost Nietzel explained that he was reorganizing a variety of support units. He noted
that the two budget offices had been combined into one. He talked about putting the Deans'
Council back together and reported that the reorganization was moving ahead smoothly.

      A discussion followed regarding the benefits of the Provost system and the savings from
being converted. They talked about the interdisciplinary issue and having trust, understanding
and more collaboration on both sides of campus. With the disciplines coming together, it will
make things much easier to get accomplished.

      Mr. Terry Mobley gave a presentation on development for the University. He informed
the Board that he anticipates the capital campaign far exceeding the $600 million goal. He
talked about the impact of the capital campaign on the institution, and the scholarship needs. He
also discussed the endowed accounts and the Research Challenge Trust Fund (RCTF). Without
the RCTF, the University probably would not have met the $600 million goal.

      Mr. Mobley informed the Board that the University is getting good returns on its
investments. The University of Louisville endowment is probably still ahead of UK, but UK is
catching up because of the RCTF.

      He talked about the fundraising project for the Administration Building and reviewed
solicitation statistics. He told the Board that he would like to say the Board of Trustees are
supportive of this fundraising effort and have 100% of their support. Some thoughts and ideas


3 -

were exchanged among Mr. Mobley and the Trustees about the Building and the various
fundraising efforts, including scholarships.

      The Board discussed employee benefits and whether there is a need to expand on the
benefits. It was noted that the University now has an insurance policy for pets.

      The next item on the agenda was a Board of Trustee scholarship. Ms. Tobin mentioned a
scholarship that would reach out to the world, possibly in the Patterson School of Diplomacy.
She talked about the scholarship she received as a student and how it opened her eyes to the
world. If the University's vision is beyond the state, perhaps there should be international
exposure. Summer study abroad would add dimension and level to the University. This kind of
a scholarship could also be a great recruiting tool.

      It was decided that a proposal should be put together before a decision is made about a
Board of Trustee scholarship and whether it should be a Trustee scholarship or a Trustee
initiative with others contributing to it. The scholarship should benefit the students and the

      The Board then discussed the Board committees and ways to improve the value of the

      The Board talked about the schedule of meetings for the calendar year and the need to
have more or less meetings. A schedule of meetings for 2004 will be presented at the September
Board meeting.

      Board participation in campus events was also discussed. President Todd suggested that
a calendar be developed with highlights of events that the Board members should attend, if

      The Board talked about a retreat in 2004. Various members expressed their preference
for an off campus vs. an on campus retreat. Some thought that this retreat was more of a
work/information session. While it has been a valuable session, a retreat off campus might be
more relaxed and give the Board an opportunity to know each other better.

      The retreat ended at 4:00 p.m.

                                                Respectfully submitted,

                                                Russ Williams
                                                Secretary, Board of Trustees