Minutes, Jan. 13-14, 2004

MINUTES OF THE MEETING OF THE BOARD OF REGENTS OF THE UNIVERSITY SYSTEM OF GEORGIA
HELD AT 270 Washington St., S.W.
Atlanta, Georgia January 13 and 14, 2004
CALL TO ORDER
The Board of Regents of the University System of Georgia met on Tuesday, January 13 and Wednesday, January 14, 2004, in the Board Room, room 7007, 270 Washington St., S.W., seventh floor. The Chair of the Board, Regent Joe Frank Harris, called the meeting to order at approximately 2:10 p.m. on Tuesday, January 13. Present on Tuesday, in addition to Chair Harris, were Vice Chair Joel O. Wooten, Jr. and RegentsHugh A. Carter, Jr., Connie Cater, William H. Cleveland,Julie Hunt, W. Mansfield Jennings, Jr., Donald M. Leebern, Jr., Elridge W. McMillan, Martin W. NeSmith, Patrick S. Pittard, Doreen Stiles Poitevint, Wanda Yancey Rodwell, Allan Vigil, and Glenn S. White.
Chair Harris greeted new Regent Doreen Stiles Poitevint and congratulated Regent Julie Hunt on her reappointment to the Board.
ATTENDANCE REPORT
The attendance report was read on Tuesday, January 13, 2004, by Secretary Gail S. Weber, who announced that Regents Michael J. Coles and J. Timothy Shelnut had asked for and been given permission to be absent on that day.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
Motion properly made and duly seconded, the minutes of the Board of Regents meeting held on November 18 and 19, 2003, were unanimously approved as distributed.
REMARKS ON TUITION IN THE UNIVERSITY SYSTEM OF GEORGIA
Chair Harris called upon the Chancellor to make a few remarks in response to Lieutenant Governor Mark Taylor's proposal to freeze tuition and fees in the University System of Georgia for three years in an effort to preserve the HOPE Scholarship ("HOPE").
Chancellor Meredith explained that in response to the Lieutenant Governor's proposal that day, he wanted to present a few facts and figures regarding the University System of Georgia's tuition and fees. He said that Georgia has a documented and undisputed record of some of the lowest tuition rates in the nation. That record is due to the Board's long-term commitment to maintaining access
1

to the System's 34 institutions through low tuition and fees. The Regents' efforts in this regard have paid off for Georgians. In the current academic year one that was plagued by some of the highest tuition increases in the past decade in some cases as high as 37% Georgia ranked among the lowest increases in the nation. Tuition at the System's most prestigious universities the Georgia Institute of Technology and the University of Georgia ranks thirty-fifth nationally, meaning 34 states charged higher tuition than Georgia and only 15 states charged less.
The Lieutenant Governor had asserted that since 1980, tuition at the System's research universities has increased an average of 16% each year. The Chancellor presented to the Board a chart that outlined this assumption, year by year, along with the actual tuition increases, including both the percentage and dollar amount. He illustrated that if the average increase had been 16%, the current tuition at the System's research universities would be $10,307 per semester. However, that is clearly not the case. The research universities' per semester tuition is currently $1,604 since 1980, an average increase over the previous year of 7.3%. Tuition increase percentages are always calculated over the previous year, just as one calculates salary increases over the previous year and the inflation rate over the previous year. Chancellor Meredith stated that public higher education in Georgia is a bargain, demonstrated by the fact that over the past two years, the System has been bursting at the seams with record numbers of students, which now total close to 250,000 enrolled in its colleges and universities. In Georgia, at the System's research universities, tuition for four years costs just over $12,800. Moreover, in a graduate's first year of work after earning that college degree, he or she will make that investment back, as the average salary is $14,000 more than someone without that diploma. And for the poorest of students, the Pell Grant more than covers tuition at the System's research universities, making public higher education truly affordable. There is no question that HOPE expands the educational access that the University System provides, and the Board does everything possible to preserve the academic quality that makes that access worthwhile. The Chancellor noted that out of the total tuition increase, only one-third is paid by HOPE, because only one-third of the System's students are on HOPE.
Chancellor Meredith said that with the legislative session opening this week, he felt it was important to get the record straightfrom the very beginning.To give the Regents more of the facts that illustrate the System's record and its commitment to both low cost and quality, the Chancellor asked the Vice Chancellor for Fiscal Affairs, WilliamR. Bowes, to give the Regents a brief primer on the University System's tuition and fees.
Mr. Bowes reiterated that the average tuition increaseover the past 23 years is approximately 6.5%. Since HOPE was initiated 11 years ago, the average increase at the research universities has only been 5.4%. At the two-year institutions, the average increase has only been 3.9%. With respect to mandatory student fees, the average annual increase in the University System of Georgia per year has only been 7% in that same 11-year period. In fact, in the past five years, the only major increase in student fees was when the System instituted new technology fees. Mr. Bowes said it is also important to consider these figures in terms of dollars. Over the past 11 years, the total dollar
2

increase in tuition at the research universities was $1,417, an average annual increase of only $128 per year. During that same 11-year period, tuition at the two-year institutions went up only $369, an average annual increase of $34 per year. Among the states included in the Southern Regional Education Board ("SREB"), the University of Georgia ("UGA") ranks tenth among 16 in terms of tuition costs. The four-year and two-year colleges meanwhile rank thirteenth among the 16 states. Although the System was seventh among the SREB states last year in terms of total percentage tuition increase, Georgia's average total tuition and mandatory student fees for fiscal year 2004 was $4,078, which is $2,700 less per student than Maryland, $1,900 less than Virginia, and $1,700 less than South Carolina. So, Georgia public higher education is still a good bargain. The Washington Higher Education Coordinating Board does an annual national survey looking at tuition and fees. UGA ranks thirty-fifth among the 50 states, and the two- and four-year colleges in Georgia rank thirty-ninth. In closing, Mr. Bowes asked whether the Regents had any questions or comments.
Seeing that there were no questions or comments, Chancellor Meredith said that the University System does not want to appear to be defensive about this matter, but the Board of Regents has done a very good job over the years of keeping tuition affordable and the Regents cannot stand idly by and let the reputation of the University System of Georgia be denigrated in any way.
SPECIAL PRESENTATION TO REGENT EMERITUS JAMES D. YANCEY
Chair Harris next invited Regent Emeritus James D. Yancey and his wife, Ruth, to the podium for a special presentation. Regent Emeritus Yancey was appointed to the Board of Regents in 1999 to fill an incomplete term and was reappointed for a full term in 2000. However, during fiscal year 2003, the state was redistricted and both Chair Harris and then Vice Chair Yancey ended up in the same congressional district. The Governor had to make a choice between them, and although Chair Harris was honored to be chosen, he was also saddened to lose his Vice Chair and the next Chair of the Board of Regents. Regent Emeritus Yancey was a very effective member of the Board and Vice Chair. He was a friend not only to the Regents, but also to the State of Georgia. Chair Harris said that Regent Emeritus Yancey is a man of integrity and of heart. When he spoke on University System issues, people listened. He approached everything with honesty, common sense, and fairness. His resume is filled with credentials and honors commensurate with someone of his stature, and he was recently named to succeed James H. Blanchard as chairman of the board of Synovus Financial Corp. He is a treasure to Columbus and Muscogee County, as well as to the State of Georgia. Chair Harris thanked Mrs. Yancey for joining her husband at this meeting for this tribute to her husband. On behalf of the Regents and the Chancellor, he then presented a Brumby rocking chair to Regent Emeritus Yancey in appreciation for his service to the Board.
Regent Emeritus Yancey stated that he and his wife were delighted that the Regents were honoring them in this way. His service to the Board gave him the opportunity to do many things, two of which he especially appreciated. First, it gave him and Mrs. Yancey a chance to make new friends. Also, it gave him a chance to learn and grow as an individual. He came to have a higher respect and
3

admiration for the Board and its dedication to the betterment of education in this state. He wished the Regents continued wisdom, good health, and happiness, and he hoped they would continue to lead the University System of Georgia toward its true objective: creating a more educated Georgia. He said that the rocking chair would have a prominent place in his new home where he can use it, and he thanked the Regents for the kind gesture and wished them the very best.
INTRODUCTIONOF NEW PRESIDENTOF GEORGIACOLLEGE& STATE UNIVERSITY
Chair Harris next asked the Chancellor to introduce the new President of Georgia College & State University ("GCSU").
Chancellor Meredith said that the search for a new president at GCSU began on May 2, 2003, when he appointed Dr. David Evans, Professor of and Chair of the Department of English, Speech, and Journalism, to chair the campus search committee. Dr. Evans has a master of arts and a doctorate in English from the University of Virginia and has been at GCSU since July 2000. The Chancellor thanked him and the campus search committee for their hard work in the presidential search process. Next, Chancellor Meredith thanked the members of the Special Regents' Committee for the Georgia College & State University Presidential Search, which was chaired by former Regent Hilton H. Howell, Jr. and also included RegentsCleveland and Hunt. The Chancellor invitedPresident Dorothy Leland to approach the Board. He said that President Leland comes to GCSU from Florida Atlantic University ("FAU"), where she was Vice President and Professor of Philosophy since 2001. She has nearly 20 years of experience in a variety of college and university positions. She has served as FAU's Associate Provost from 2000 to 2001, Executive Director of University Strategic Planning from 1998 to 2001, Special Assistant to the Provost from 1998 to 2000, and Director of the Women's Studies Center and Executive Director of the President's Commission on the Status of Women from 1995 to 1998. Chancellor Meredith said that he was delighted to have President Leland in the System, and GCSU is also delighted to have her. He then invited her to speak.
President Leland thanked Chancellor Meredith for his generous introduction and greeted the Board on behalf of the students, faculty, and staff at GCSU. She said that minutes after she was named as GCSU's next president, she received a call from Dr. David Brown, who (as you know) served as president during the interim period with such grace and distinction. Dr. Brown told that she had landed one of the best jobs in the nation, and he was right. GCSU is emerging as a jewel in Georgia's higher education landscape thanks to the extraordinary leadership of former President Rosemary DePaolo and the support received from the Board of Regents for the university's public liberal arts mission. President Leland said that she is unafraid to stand on the shoulders of giants and deeply honored to have been selected to follow in the footsteps of such distinguished leaders. She expressed her heartfelt appreciation to Regents Howell, Cleveland, and Hunt, who served on the Regents' Special Committee, and to Dr. Evans and other members of the campus presidential search committee for honoring her with their confidence. One hallmark of public higher education in Georgia is its commitment to providing access to the range of educational opportunities required to meet the
4

diverse educational needs of its citizens, said President Leland. GCSU plays a vital role in the realization of this commitment. As Georgia's designated public liberal arts university, its distinctive mission is to provide affordable access to the student-focused and academically challenging liberal arts environment more typically found in the nation's elite private colleges. What this means is that GCSU provides students with the opportunity to earn degrees needed for professional preparation while also focusing on the broad base of knowledge and dispositions and competencies required for effective leadership in the twenty-first century.
President Leland said that she likes to think of this as the value that gets added to a GCSU degree. At GCSU, students acquire the skills of inquiry and analysis needed to become self-motivated learners. Its learning environment seeks to cultivate the moral imagination and fosters individual responsibility and civic commitment. GCSU students acquire skills of reflectivedeliberation,respect for civil discourse,a capacity for empathy, and an ability to navigatecomplex situations and multiple perspectives. Such skills and dispositions have a profound impact on the individual lives of students and on the fabric of our state and nation.
President Leland said that GCSU is well positioned to earn recognitionas one of the nation's premier public liberal arts universities. This recognition will be achieved as GCSU chronicles the accomplishments of its students and the excellence of its academic programs. It will be achieved as GCSU becomes known as a laboratory for instructional innovation and student engagement. It will be achieved as GCSU creates a culturally, racially, and ethnically diverse learning environment that frees its students from parochialism and makes them conversant with the world's pluralism. It will be achieved as GCSU strengthens its connections with its community and models civic responsibility.
In closing, President Leland said that these are just some of the reasons why she is so very excited about joining GCSU as its new President. She thanked the Regents for inviting her to be a part of the University System of Georgia and for entrusting her with the leadership of its incredible public liberal arts university.
On behalf of the Board of Regents, Chair Harris welcomed President Leland to Georgia and to GCSU. He said that the Regents are very proud of the foundation that has been built over the years at GCSU and they know that with her inspired leadership, it will move to an even higher level. He wished her the very best and thanked her attending this meeting.
UPDATES TO THE BOARD
Chair Harris said that the Regents would next hear three brief updates. He first called upon the Senior Vice Chancellor for External Activities and Facilities, Thomas E. Daniel, to update the Board on the legislative session.
5

Mr. Daniel greeted the Regents and noted that this was the second day of the 2004 session of the Georgia General Assembly. However, he said, the next 38 meeting days will be more eventful than the first 2. At this meeting, he would address three items: leadership changes since 2003, key issues on the horizon, and how the University System Office is organized. In the Senate, Lieutenant Governor Mark Taylor is, of course, serving as President of the Senate. Senator Eric Johnson is entering his second year as President Pro Tempore. Senator Bill Stephens of Canton is the new majority leader. He succeeds Senator Tom Price, who is still serving in the Senate but vacated the majority leader position after announcing his desire to run for Congress. Senator Stephens' election means a change in the Governor's floor leaders. Senator Dan Lee of LaGrange is the Governor's floor leader, and he is assisted by Senator Preston Smith of Rome and Senator David Shafer of Duluth. Senator Michael Meyer von Bremen remains as minority leader, and of course, the very effective Senator Bill Hamrick will once again serve as Chair of the Senate Higher Education Committee.
With regard to the House of Representatives, Mr. Daniel reported that Speaker Terry Coleman remains as Speaker and Representative DuBose Porter is returning as Speaker Pro Tempore. Representative Jimmy Shipper continues to serve as majority leader, and the new minority leader is RepresentativeGlenn Richardsonof Dallas.He succeedsRepresentativeLynn Westmoreland,who remains in the House but left the minority leader position upon announcing his run for Congress. Representative Richardson's election impacted the Governor's floor leaders. Representative Larry O'Neal of Warner Robins is the Governor's floor leader, and he is assisted by Representative Mark Burkhalter of Alpharetta and Representative Rick Golick of Smyrna. Thankfully, Representative Louise McBee continues in her key leadership role as Chair of the Higher Education Committee
Mr. Daniel said that it is difficult to mention legislative leaders without mentioning the budget. In this vein, Senator Jack Hill and Representative Tom Buck continue to serve as Chairs of the respective appropriations committees. Mr. Daniel reminded the Regents how fortunate the University System is in that the following influential state leaders have served as chair of the higher education committees: Tom Buck, Calvin Smyre, and Dubose Porter in the House; and Governor Sonny Perdue and Jack Hill in the Senate.
Mentioning money is a smooth transition to Session issues, said Mr. Daniel. Besides the budget, the Chancellor and others in the System will see a great deal of action regarding the HOPE Scholarship program and they will not be surprised to learn that the University System Office will be ready to act on issues related to this and others including open records, open meetings, ethics legislation, health insurance, retirement, library filtering, electronic textbooks, public-private partnerships, and relationships with foundations. The staff will also follow all legislation introduced by the administration, including any recommendations from the Commission for a New Georgia. This list represents only a fraction of the total bills and resolutions usually introduced each and every legislative session. In 2003, over 1,800 bills and resolutions were introduced, and the Associate Vice Chancellor for Legal Affairs, Elizabeth E. Neely read every one. Fortunately for the Regents and the System, Ms. Neely will repeat this feat for 2004. Once Ms. Neely acts, she forwards relevant bills
6

and resolutions to our various experts here and in the System. This is our secret weapon, and thanks to all of those involved, the System manages to keep up with the steady flow of information.
In closing, Mr. Daniel mentioned three other items of interest. For 2004, the University System of Georgia will be a member of the newly formed Governor's Legislative Information System. This initiative will enable the Governor's Office, the Governor's Office of Planning and Budget, and all state agencies to share helpful details. So will the publication of Mission Possible The Chancellor stresses communication,and we are always in full alert mode. A new tool is Mission Possible,which will be published weekly during the legislative session by the Associate Vice Chancellor for Media and Publications, Arlethia Perry-Johnson, and her wonderful staff, and will be shared with all legislators and their selected staff. The System's best complement to written communication is the Chancellor's personal presence. Chancellor Meredith is in the Capitol on a regular basis, and his morning and afternoon strolls have proven to be the key to an open and useful exchange of information. Mr. Daniel requested that the Regents keep their cell phones on and stand by their fax machines. Just as college basketball games are usually decided in the last two minutes, the legislative session always closes with a flurry of action. He assured them that the University System Office staff would be in touch.
Chancellor Meredith said that he has never worked with anyone in legislative relations who has the credibility that Mr. Daniel possesses. He is always amazed that everyone at the Capitol has only positive things to say about Mr. Daniel, and he wanted the Regents to know how much he appreciates Mr. Daniel's hard work on behalf of the University System of Georgia.
Chair Harris concurred with the Chancellor and thanked Mr. Daniel for his hard work and the friendship they have shared over the years. He then called upon the State Librarian for the Georgia Public Library Service ("GPLS"), Dr. Lamar Veatch, to update the Regents on GPLS.
Dr. Veatch greeted the Regents and said that the relationship between GPLS and the University System began in July 2000 when the General Assembly transitioned responsibility for the state libraries to the System. With the help of such good supporters as the Chancellor, Mr. Daniel, and really all of the University System Office staff, GPLS has made good progress in these past three years in integrating our public library operations into those of the System, which has resulted in increased visibility for public libraries within state government.
Funding for public libraries is an intricate blend of local, state, and federal moneys, said Dr. Veatch. Georgia's statewide library programs and services are wonderful examples of cooperation and economies of scale that have become national models. An acknowledgment of this is the Governor's recommendation for $1.25 million ongoing funding of the Georgia Library Public Information Network for Electronic Services ("PINES"), the public library's statewide computer system that is providing vital library computer services to 44 of the 58 library systems. Just as the Chancellor is responsible for and to the presidents of the 34 University System institutions, Dr. Veatch is
7

similarly responsible for and to the 58 public library systems. The big difference is that unlike the presidents who always follow the Chancellor's lead and directives without question, the public library directors are independent of Dr. Veatch's direct authority. They are much more like clients than direct reports. Dr. Veatch said that he was quite happy to introduce two representatives of Georgia's public library directors at this meeting: JoEllen Ostendorf, Director of the Troup-HarrisCoweta Regional Library, and Steve Schaefer, Director of the Uncle Remus Regional Library System. Dr. Veatch had invited these two directors to share with the Regents their concerns and their perspectives.
Ms. Ostendorf greeted the Regents and thanked Dr. Veatch for his introduction. She said that she is the Chair of the Georgia Council of Public Libraries (the "Council"), which is made up of 47 of Georgia's 58 public library systems. Within the 58 library systems, there are 372 public library facilities. The Council's mission is to improve public library services for all Georgians. She said that she greatly appreciated this opportunity to speak before the Regents to present some brief information about Georgia's public libraries. Chair Harris is a library supporter, and there was tremendous growth of public library construction under his terms as Governor! GPLS is also most appreciative of Governor Perdue's addition of $1.25 million in the supplemental budget to fund PINES, the statewide circulation system.
GPLS has been moved around quite a bit over the past eight years, said Ms. Ostendorf. It was moved out of the Department of Education in 1996 and transferred to the Department of Technical and Adult Education ("DTAE"). Then, it was transferred from DTAE to the University System in 2000. She said that GPLS is delighted to be a part of the University System of Georgia since they have many goals in common, especially their shared commitment to lifelong learning. It has become a hackneyed phrase among librarians, but the public libraries literally serve people from cradle to grave, from infants and tots programs to book deliveries and programs at nursing homes. Distance education is tightening these ties as public libraries are seeing increasing numbers of university students, many of them nontraditional students or older adults using the public libraries as their "classrooms" or, in effect, a satellite campus. GPLS is very proud of the library service that has developed in Georgia. The state's public libraries are considered national leaders in technology, mainly as a result of the partnership that was developed with the University System before we were even a part of it that enabled us to install T1 lines in each of our public library facilities and offer access to Georgia Library Learning Online ("GALILEO"). GPLS began doing this nearly ten years ago, and even, today many states have still not caught up with Georgia. The ties GPLS has developed with the University System of Georgia are a natural progression of their common goal of providing educational opportunities for all Georgians.
Ms. Ostendorf said that GPLS hopes the Board of Regents will support it in updating its funding formulas that are sadly out of date and inadequate for its current needs and services and the services its users expect it to provide tomorrow. She noted that while public libraries are just a tiny part of the University System budget, one in three Georgians, or over 3 million residents, has a library card;
8

over 29 million visits are made to Georgia's public libraries each year; and over 156,500 patrons use the Internet and GPLS's electronic resources every week. Business is booming, and public library circulation in Georgia is at an all-time high. However, GPLS is serving Georgians with funding formulas that have not increased in over 20 years, and this, coupled with budget reductions, is crippling the services the libraries offer. Public libraries do not receive lottery funds; they do not have the option of raising tuition and technology fees to offset loss of revenue; and, unless it is conjunction with a constructionproject, they do not receiveSpecial Purpose Local Option Sales Tax ("SPLOST") funds. In other words, GPLS has no new sources of funding. At the same time, the price of an adult fiction book has increased 177% over the last 25 years and over 83% in the last 15 years alone. It takes 49 people under the present per capita grant formula to purchase one novel even at discounted prices. In addition, public library users have come to expect Internet access and the provision of a variety of computer programs,such as Word, Excel, and PowerPoint, as a given. They want access to the library's card catalog and GALILEO from home and the ability to access any wireless network the library might have when they bring their notebooks into our buildings. They further expect the library staff to provide one-on-one instruction and navigational assistance for a variety of programs and databases. Most of public libraries do not have technology positions because they simply cannot afford them. The Internet has required the wiring of library buildings; the purchase of additional ports, servers, and hubs; and most importantly, a significant redistribution of staff duties to provide these services. The majority of the heavily used public Internet terminals are over five years old, and the libraries cannot afford to replace them or, in many cases, even repair them. The libraries have provided these services with no additional funding while trying to maintain their traditional programs, and their use as distance education sites has made it important they provide up-to-date technology.
While prices have gone up and up and the libraries have taken on the burden of providing significantlyexpensive and labor-intensivenew services,they are doing so with funding formulasthat have not changed in 20 years. The libraries are at the point where they are cutting their core services. Each of the 58 public library systems is each choosing which services will be eliminated according to its situation, but Ms. Ostendorf used her own library system, the Troup-Harris-CowetaRegional Library, as a fairly typical example. This library has already reduced its book and serial purchases by 50%, and it has little materials money in the first place. The next budget reductions will mean discontinuing the library's award-winningbookmobile service, eliminating three part-time positions, and reducing night and weekend hours. At a time when education is more important than ever and when technology is opening doors to learning, more Georgians depend upon their public libraries as a primary source of information and technology. Budget reductions are closing the doors on the learning opportunities provided by the public libraries. Ms. Ostendorf said that GPLS needs the Regents' help to reverse this trend.
In closing, Ms. Ostendorf introduced Mr. Schaefer, who would discuss GPLS's situation with regard to its funding formulas. She thanked the Regents for giving them this opportunity to briefly outline the challenges faced by Georgia's public libraries and then stepped down.
9

Mr. Schaefer said that his job at this meeting was to put the GPLS situation into a financial perspective. He explained that Georgia's library constituency includes every single person in every single county in the state. GPLS serves everybody. Georgia'spublic libraries,with over 372 facilities constructed in large part with state funds and supplemented by 278 state-paid certified,professional librarians, is clearly a model and envied by the rest of the nation. Public libraries have developed or helped develop programs such as PINES, GALILEO, a statewide Internet infrastructure, and statewide filtering, for which Georgia has received national and international recognition as models of cooperation and efficiency. Governor Purdue's proposed budget, which includes vitally needed funds to continue the PINES program, demonstrates a conviction in investing in public library services. GPLS also appreciates Chancellor Meredith's strong support for this project. The people served by Mr. Schaefer's library have gone from having access to 50,000 unique titles to having more than 1.6 million. He said that this is nothing short of miraculousin the library profession. The PINES card is accepted at 250 locations in 133 counties, which is very good business. GALILEO has been a perfect compliment to PINES, enabling the public libraries to make books, periodicals, and a wide range of references available to all Georgians. This was made possible because the Board of Regents had the foresight to include public libraries from GALILEO's inception, something for which all Georgians should be grateful. Nonetheless, public library programs are being threatened with funding cutbacks. Since their constituency includes every single person in Georgia, cuts to these public library programs adversely affect every single Georgian.Cuts to their basic grants started a long time ago, way before the economy turned sour. When economic times were good and money was available, GPLS did not get budget increases, but when times got tough, it still got budget cuts. That is the history through no fault of the Board of Regents. In the past, when other state programs expanded and increased, GPLS's base programs regressed or vanished.
Mr. Schaefer said that all public libraries currently receive cash grants for four areas of service. The first area is professional salaries for 278 accredited librarians statewide. The second area is materials, including library books and other formats of media. This averages $0.41 per capita not counting next year's proposed cuts. This reflects a 31% drop from its highest level, or about $1.5 million dollars lost. This means about 85,000 fewer books purchased every year. The third area is maintenance and operations, includingvarious costs such as utilities,building repairs, insurance, and outreach services. This averages about $0.47 per capita, not counting next year's proposed cuts. This reflects a 21% drop from its highest level, or about S1 million lost. The fourth and final area is professional travel for certified, professional librarians, which is used for continuing education programs and traveling from library facility to facility. This averages $263 per certified librarian, down from a one-time level of $885, or about $165,000 lost.
Next, Mr. Schaefer showed the Regents a few charts. The first chart demonstrated what Ms. Ostendorf had said about increases in circulation. He had excluded from the chart the salaries grant because librarian's salaries are attached to the teacher's pay scale and therefore are adjusted independent of the public library budget. He directed the Regents' attention to the third page of the
10

graph labeled"Maintenance and Operations and Materials Grant" that illustrates the history of these grants. He pointed out how poorly the funding fared against the inflation rate. Since public libraries serve a far larger percentageof the population than a generationago, this "deflation"of fundinglevels is particularly painful. The difference between what funding should have been (had it kept up with inflation at the 1980 level) and what it is now is about $7 million. As Ms. Ostendorf had said, onethird of Georgia's population has a library card. In actuality, national studies indicate that the figure is closer to two-thirds of the population uses a public library when one considers that an entire household may use a parent's library card. This does not take into consideration those persons without a library card who come in every day to read the paper or magazines or use the computer to engage in their own life-long learning pursuits. Last year in Georgia, public libraries were visited more than 29 million times. Mr. Schaefer noted that five times more people visit U.S. public libraries than attend professional and college football, basketball, baseball, and hockey games combined. The community uses public libraries,particularly in difficult economic times, for inexpensiverecreational reading and for personal development tools and services like resume guides and conducting job searches.
At one time, public libraries had a very progressive program to use state monies to build libraries, said Mr. Schaefer. This was separate from the basic grants. Many libraries, particularly those serving rural areas, were built under this plan. Regrettably, this innovative capital improvement plan no longer exists. He directed the Regents' attention to another graph titled "State of Georgia State Construction Funds for Public Libraries 1980-2004." This graph demonstrated that what once was is no more. Although Georgia is one of the five fastest growing states in the nation, it has had very little library construction since this growth began. Meanwhile, the GPLS is serving a third more residents, or almost 3 million more constituents. Next Mr. Schaefer directed the Regents' attention to a graph titled "Percentage of State Budget for Public Library Grants." This graph demonstrates that the percentage of the state's budget allotted for public library grants has dropped dramatically. Twenty years ago, public library grants amounted to about one-third of a penny for every dollar in the state's budget. Today, that one-third of a penny has become only one-sixth of a penny. Local communities particularly poor, rural communities are slashing library budgets. Without having taxing authority, as is the case with public schools, public libraries are essentially helpless. The present method for local library fundingis simply "begging from local funding agencies."Many cities abandoned library funding using House Bill 489, which passed into law and inadvertently gave cities and some boards of education an opportunity to withdraw from funding public libraries claiming duplication of service. Many local boards of education have stopped funding libraries; and many wish to now withdraw from funding, claimingthe public libraryis not their primary mission.County commissions are desperate to lower taxes even if public libraries are threatened with elimination of services and closure.
Mr. Schaefer said it is ironic that public library circulation is at a record high while materials dollars are at an all time low. In the past, the legislature would provide life-saving special grants, but those days are gone and the public libraries find themselves being marginalized. If so many Georgians use
11

the libraries, if so many people come through their doors, and yet funding continues to decrease, there must be a disconnect, he said. GPLS's hope is that the Board of Regents will help make those essential connections to develop a strong fiscal growth plan to place public libraries on a firm footing now and in the future so it can meet the educational needs of all who live in Georgia.
The final item in the Regents' GPLS information was the list of public library priorities that GPLS would like to see enacted in the very near future. Mr. Schaefer said that these are essential to maintain public library viability in Georgia. GPLS can only do this with the Board of Regent's advocacy, he said, and it is relying on the Board to help it meet its future. In closing, Mr. Schaefer said that GPLS greatly appreciates that the Board of Regents included public library items in the budget requestfor this year. He also thanked the Regents for giving him this opportunity to raise the level of public library awareness within the Board of Regents organization. He said that he would be happy to answer any questions, but there were none.
Chair Harris thankedthe representativesfrom GPLS for their very informativepresentation. He then called upon the Associate Vice Chancellor for Strategic Research and Analysis, Cathie Mayes Hudson, to update the Board on research grants and intellectual property income for the University System of Georgia.(See Items 18 and 19 on the agenda of the Committee on Academic Affairs,pages 43 to 44.)
Dr. Hudson greeted the Regents and said that she would provide the annual update on research contracts and grants receivedin the last fiscal year, and for that, she would focus on researchincome. Then, she would turn for a moment to some national benchmarks on research, which will focus on expenditures rather than income. In fiscal year 2003, University System of Georgia institutions received approximately $861 million in income for research contracts and grants. Over the last ten years, the amount of income from contracts and grants has grown by 137 %. In fiscal year 2003 alone, the income grew by 8%. Income from grants and contracts is divided into three categories: research, instruction, and public service. Dr. Hudson explained that research often occurs in the sciences, but it can occur in any discipline. There are fewer funding opportunities in some disciplines, such as the humanities and social sciences, than in sciences and engineering. Nationally, disciplines with the largest research expenditures are life sciences, particularly medical sciences, biology, agriculture, physics, electrical engineering,and chemistry. Instruction grants are for research on classroom instruction methods or learning styles. Public service contracts are for activities that are primarily non-instructional and generally outside the university. These contracts include those in cooperative extension, community service, and public broadcasting. In fiscal year 2003, instructional grants generated 28% of income and public service grants and contracts generated about 10%. By far the largest share of income from grants and contracts in the University System of Georgia was for research, at 62 %.
For the remainder of her presentation, Dr. Hudson focused on the income for research, which totaled almost $533 million in fiscal year 2003. Last year, the Senior Vice Chancellor for Academics and
12

Fiscal Affairs, Daniel S. Papp, had reported that the University System of Georgia had no appreciable research funding before the 1970s. The amount has almost doubled just in the last ten years. This represents remarkablegrowth for a System and a state fairly new to research; the growth for last year was 9%. Most of the research occurs in research universities, where it is a fundamental part of the mission. In fiscal year 2003, 62% of research occurred at research universities. At regional and state universities, research is a secondary mission to instruction, and in fiscal year 2003, these universities generated 28% of the System's research income. Research is not generally considered to be part of mission of two-year colleges, although some faculty do research. In fiscal year 2003, twoyear colleges generated 10% of research income. Dr. Hudson noted that the Skidaway Institute of Oceanography and the University System Office were included in her report for the first time this year. Together, they represent almost 1% of total research income.Dr. Hudson stated that the largest proportion of funding is from federal sources, and this is consistent with national data as well. Institutional data for the research universitiesshow that the Georgia Institute of Technology("GIT") continues to be the research leader in the state; research funding at GIT grew by 4% last year.
Next, Dr. Hudson discussed how Georgia and the University System compared to the rest of the nation. She noted that this comparison required a shift from looking at income to looking at expenditures. State expenditures for research include all sources, i.e., industry, academic, and the government. While 13 % of research and development ("R&D") nationally occurs in universities, 73% occurs in industry and 14% in federal agencies, such as federally funded R&D centers and nonprofit organizations. There are three types of R&D: basic, applied, and development. R&D expenditures are not spread evenly across the states. The 20 highest-ranking states in R&D expenditures represent 87% of the total; the bottom-ranking 20 states represent 4% of the total. California alone accounts for one-fifth of all expenditures. The State of Georgia ranks twenty-first in total R&D expenditures, with $2.8 billion spent for total R&D. Even though only about oneseventh of national research occurs in universities, universities are critically important to research and development in the United States for two major reasons. First, universities educate the next generations of researchers. U.S. universities are important in educating researchers for U.S. as well as for Europe and other parts of the world. Second, universities perform almost half of all basic research in the United States, which is fundamental to applied research and development. Dr. Hudson explained that basic research is used to increase knowledge of fundamental aspects of phenomena, while applied research is used to meet a need or solve a problem and development is using knowledge from research to produce useful materials or processes. University research is generally focused on basic and applied research, and development is concentrated in industry. Approximately 69% of all academic research is basic research, and 24% is applied research. There is an increasingly larger percentage devoted to development. So, university research is critically important to science and to ultimate development in the United States.
Dr. Hudson said that in fiscal year 2003, 58% of funding nationally came from federal sources, but the federal share has been decreasing since the early 1970s. Meanwhile, the industry share has been generally increasing, although it did not increase last year as a result of the economic downturn.
13

Georgia ranks twelfth in academic R&D expenditures, which represents very good growth in a relatively short period of time. The hope is that over time, the growth in R&D in the universities will lead to economic growth for the state as a whole. Georgia has three universities among the top 50 nationally in research expenditures: GIT is ranked thirty-first; the University of Georgia is thirtysixth, and Emory University is forty-sixth.
Dr. Hudson next discussed technology transfer, which falls into the category of development. There are a variety of ways to measure technology transfer, such as the number of patents or copyrights or the income from inventions, software, and copyrights/trademarks. The University System of Georgia tracks income from inventions, software, and copyrights and trademarks. In fiscal year 2003, the System's income from intellectual property increased by 13%, which is a rather large rate of increase. In closing, Dr. Hudson asked whether there were any questions, and there were none.
Chair Harris thanked Dr. Hudson for this very informative report. At approximately 3:25 p.m., he adjourned the Regents into their regular Committee meetings. He asked new Regent Poitevint to join the Committees on Academic Affairs and Organization and Law.
CALL TO ORDER
The Board of Regents of the University System of Georgia met again on Wednesday, January 14, 2004, in the Board Room, room 7007, 270 Washington St., S.W., seventh floor. The Chair of the Board, Regent Joe Frank Harris, called the meeting to order at 9:00 a.m. Present on Wednesday, in addition to Chair Harris, were Vice Chair Joel O. Wooten, Jr. and Regents Hugh A. Carter, Jr., Connie Cater, William H. Cleveland, Julie Hunt, W. Mansfield Jennings, Jr., Donald M. Leebern, Jr., Elridge W. McMillan, Martin W. NeSmith, Patrick S. Pittard, Doreen Stiles Poitevint, Wanda Yancey Rodwell, J. Timothy Shelnut, Allan Vigil, and Glenn S. White.
INVOCATION
The invocation was given on Wednesday, January 14, 2004, by Chair Joe Frank Harris.
ATTENDANCE REPORT
The attendance report was read on Wednesday, January 14, 2004, by Secretary Gail S. Weber, who announced that Regent MichaelJ. Coles had asked for and been given permissionto be absent on that day.
Next, ChancellorMeredith introducedthe Governor's new Chief of Staff, John Watson. Mr. Watson has been active in politics, government, and business at the local, state, and federal level now for more than 14 years. Prior to coming to the Governor's office, he was President and Managing Principal at Watson, Massey & Bowers LLC, a public affairs firm. During the 2002 election, he
14

served as general consultant to Governor Purdue's campaign and vice chair of Governor's transition team. In 1995, Watson became Finance Director for the Georgia Republican Party, achieving unprecedented fundraising objectives. In 1997, Watson joined Mike Bowers, Georgia's Attorney General for 16 years as Campaign Manager for the Mike Bowers for Governor Campaign. Following the 1998 election cycle, Watson entered the private sector to serve as Vice President of Business Development for Construction Systems, Inc., where he launched a successful commercial construction division. He is a 1991 graduate of Wake Forrest University with a degree in political science, and he and his wife, Kimberly, have two daughters. The Chancellor said that he and the Regents are looking forward to working with Mr. Watson.
Mr. Watson thanked the Chancellor for this opportunity to meet the Regents. He said that the mission of the University System of Georgia is criticalto not only the education process in the state, but also to economic development. The Governor had asked Mr. Watson to send his regards to the Regents and assure them that he is allied with the Regents. Mr. Watson said that his office is always open to anyone from the Board of Regents to do what is right for the state. He said that counts on the Regents' counsel to help the Governor make the important decisions for the State of Georgia.
Chair Harris asked Mr. Watson to relay to the Governor that the Board is grateful to be aligned with him and appreciate his standing up for the University System of Georgia against the Lieutenant Governor's proposition to freeze tuition.
COMMITTEE ON FINANCE AND BUSINESS OPERATIONS
The Committee on Finance and Business Operations met on Tuesday, January 13, 2004, at approximately 3:30 p.m. in the Board Room. Committee members in attendance were Chair Hugh A. Carter, Jr. and Regents Connie Cater, Julie Hunt, Donald M. Leebern, Jr., Martin W. NeSmith, Patrick S. Pittard, and Glenn S. White. Chair Carter reported to the Board on Wednesday that the Committee had reviewed three items, two of which required action. With motion properly made, seconded, and unanimously adopted, the Board approved and authorized the following:
1. Approval of Professional Program Tuition Increase for the Georgia WebMBA Program
Approved: The Board approved an increase of professional program tuition for the Georgia WebMBA program from $350 per credit hour to $500 per credit hour, effective summer semester 2004.
Background: In April 2000, the Board of Regents approved the WebMBA consortium comprised of Georgia College & State University, Georgia Southern University, Kennesaw State University, State University of West Georgia, and Valdosta State University. The additional revenue generated by this tuition increase would be used for faculty development and funding for summer course
15

overloads and would allow the program to increase educational quality and reach a broader Georgia market while remaining below the cost of comparable online programs at Portland State University and the University of Wisconsin.

2. Acceptance of Gifts for the Georgia Institute of Technology
Approved: The Board accepted on behalf of the Georgia Institute of Technology ("GIT") gifts-inkind from the following corporations:

Company Altera Corporation

Value $453,800

Items Various scientific equipment and maintenance subscriptions

Department School of Electrical and Computer Engineering

Intel Corporation

$107,847

Computer workstations, servers, and IXP boards

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 associated with the acceptance of these gifts.

3. Information Item: First Quarter Revenue and Expenditure Report, Fiscal Year 2004

The Vice Chancellor for Fiscal Affairs, William R. Bowes, presented to the Committee the first quarter financial report for the University System of Georgia for the period ending September 30, 2003, which is on file with the Office of Fiscal Affairs. The report includes tables that compare actual and budgeted revenues and expenditures through September 30, 2003 for educational and general funds, auxiliary enterprise funds, and student activity funds.

COMMITTEE ON REAL ESTATE AND FACILITIES

The Committee on Real Estate and Facilities met on Tuesday, January 13, 2004, at approximately 3:45 p.m. in the Board Room. Committeemembersin attendancewere Chair Martin W. NeSmith and Regents Hugh A. Carter, Jr., Connie Cater, Julie Hunt, Donald M. Leebern, Jr., Patrick S. Pittard, and Glenn S. White. Chair NeSmith reported to the Board on Wednesday that the Committee had reviewed seven items, five of which required action. Items 1, 8, and 9 were withdrawn. With motion properly made, seconded, and unanimously adopted, the Board approved and authorized the following:

16

1. Authorization of Site License and Delegation of Design and Construction Process for the Nanotechnology Research Center, Georgia Institute of Technology
Withdrawn: This item was withdrawn from the agenda.
The Vice Chancellor for Facilities, Linda M. Daniels, reported to the Committee that this item was being withdrawn. The Nanotechnology Research Center Building ("NRC"), formerly known as the Advanced Clean Room Building, was presented to the Board by President G. Wayne Clough of the Georgia Institute of Technology ("GIT") in June 2002 and in November 2003 was brought to the Board for project authorization and approval of demolishing existing buildings on the project site. Commitments for funding this project have come from the Governor as well as the private sector, and both the Governorand the Board have offered appreciation for the potential economic value that this project will bring to the State of Georgia in the future. When the Board of Regents authorized the NRC project at its meeting in November 2003, assumptions were made regarding the ability of the State of Georgia and the Board of Regents to privatize the design and construction through delegation of the project (funded in part through State General Obligation Bond funds) to Georgia Tech Facilities, Inc. Subsequent to that meeting, the Attorney General discouraged such delegations and indicated that such a delegation does not relieve the Board from accomplishing the project in accordance with its own policies and other criteria (specifically OCGA 50-5-49 Department of Administrative Services Web advertising) related to publicly funded projects. To that end, GIT and University System Office staff are recommending GIT maintain this as a campus project. In the spirit of efforts to expedite the completion of the NRC project as emphasized by the Governor and the donor, the leadership role in the administration, management, and execution of the project will be delegated to the President of GIT on behalf of the Vice Chancellor for Facilities. The execution of all legal contracts, easements, and procurements will be in accordance with Board of Regents policies and procedures.
2. Authorization of Project, "Renovation of Old College," University of Georgia
Approved: The Board authorized Project No. BR-10-0403, "Old College Renovation," University of Georgia ("UGA"), with a total project budget of approximately $2,750,000 to be funded from internal plant funds and anticipated fiscal year 2005 major repair and renovation ("MRR") funds.
Understandings: Old College was the first building erected on the UGA campus. The building is traditionally thought of as a replica of Connecticut Hall at Yale University. This 21,000-square-foot circa 1806 building requires complete interior renovation, including replacement of the mechanical, electrical, and fire protection systems and addressing accessibility issues. Additionally, exterior renovations will restore the structure's historic appearance. The construction cost is estimated to be approximately $1,900,000.
17

The project is consistent with the UGA physical master plan, which envisions sequential renovation of the historically sensitive North Campus buildings.

Authorization is requested to permit the design phase of the project to begin. If MRR funding becomes available in July 2004, the project will be ready to commit construction funding in the time frame required. Approval of this project is not a commitment to provide MRR funding.

Authorization of this project is subject to completion of a Georgia Environmental Policy Act ("GEPA") evaluation, including submitting plans to the state Historic Preservation Division for review, to ensure that there will be no adverse effects.

The University System Office staff and UGA will proceed with the selection of appropriate professional consultants.

3. Authorization of Project Modification and Appointmentof Construction Management Firm, Project No. I-92, "Parking Decks, Central Campus," University of Georgia

Approved: The Board modified its June 2000 authorization of Project No. I-92 "Parking Decks, Central Campus," University of Georgia, to increase the total project budget from $12,800,000 to $17,200,000.

The Board appointed the first-named construction management firm listed below for the identified parking deck project and authorized the execution of a contract with the identified firm at the stated cost shown. Should it not be possible to execute a contract with the top-ranked firm, staff will then attempt to execute a contract with the other listed firms in rank order.

Following a selection process for a construction management firm, the following recommendation is made:

Project No. I-92, "Parking Decks, Central Campus" for the Northwest Precinct, University of Georgia

Project Description: This project will add 1,100 parking spaces to the campus.

Total Project Cost Construction Cost (Stated Cost Limitation)

$11,700,000 $10,250,000

Number of construction management firms that applied for this commission: 18

Recommended construction management firms in rank order:

18

1) Holder Construction Company, Atlanta, Georgia 2) The Beck Group, Atlanta, Georgia 3) Hardin Construction Company, Atlanta, Georgia
Understandings: Project I-92 "Parking Decks, Central Campus" contemplated two parking decks serving two different areas on campus.The first deck of 484 spaces is being constructedin the south precinct of the campus.
The second deck of the project will be in the northwest precinct of the campus. Additional auxiliary funds are available, and it is desired to increase the size of this deck from approximately 735 spaces to approximately 1,100 spaces. The total project cost will be revised from $7,800,000 to $11,700,000.
4. Exchange of Real Property, Carpenter Road, Tifton, University of Georgia Coastal Plain Experiment Station
Approved: The Board declared approximately 1.87 acres of real property at the University of Georgia ("UGA") Coastal Plain Experiment Station ("CPES"), Tifton, Georgia, to be no longer advantageously useful to UGA or other units of the University System of Georgia but only to the extent and for the purpose of allowing the exchange of this real property for approximately 1.82 acres of real property located in Tift County, Georgia, owned by Tift County.
The Board conveyed title to approximately 1.87 acres of real property at the UGA CPES for the use and benefit of Tift County to provide asphalt paving and maintenance of the road and right-of-way, subject to a reversion of the real property if it should cease being used as a road.
The Board accepted title to approximately 1.82 acres of real property located in Tift County for the use and benefit of the UGA CPES.
The exchange of property is subject to a Georgia EnvironmentalPolicy Act evaluation indicating no significant environmental impacts resulting from this exchange at either site.
The legal details involved with the exchange of real property are subject to review and legal approval by the Office of the Attorney General.
Understandings: In May 2000, the Board conveyed approximately 18.47 acres of real property to Tift County for paving and maintaining approximately 2.0 miles of Rigdon Aultman Road and Carpenter Road.
The Georgia Department of Transportation has determined that approximately 0.25 mile of Carpenter Road needs to be realigned to eliminate an existing acute angle of intersection with Zion
19

Hope Road. This exchange of real property will accomplish this.

This exchange is in accordance with the UGA College of Agricultural & Environmental Sciences physical master plan, which is a subset of the UGA physical master plan.

5. Disposition of Real Property, 4435 Atlanta Highway, Bogart, University of Georgia

Approved: The Board declared approximately 2.0 acres of real property located at the intersection of U.S. Highway 78 and New Jimmie Daniel Road, Bogart, Georgia, to be no longer advantageously useful to the University of Georgia ("UGA") or other units of the University System of Georgia ("USG") but only to the extent and for the purpose of allowing the sale of this real property for the benefit of UGA and the USG.

The Board authorized the sale of the above-referenced property to WARM, Inc., d/b/a Dunkin Donuts for $505,000 ($252,500 per acre).

The Board retained an approximately 2,490-square-foot ingress-egress easement for access to New Jimmie Daniel Road

The legal details involved with this sale of the above-referencedreal property will be handled by the Office of the Attorney General.

Understandings: The Board approved acquisition of the property in November 2001 as part of an approximately 7.05-acre parcel. The parking area in the front is too large for UGA's purposes, and the long-term strategy has been to sell the highway frontage when an attractive deal presented itself.

A Georgia Environmental Policy Act assessment has been completed and indicates no significant adverse effects from this sale.

Three independent appraisals were performed in September 2003, as follows:

Appraiser James L. Lee, MAI, Atlanta Robert A. Jaeger, MAI, Gainesville Ashby Krouse, MAI, Augusta

Appraised Value $500,000 $510,000 $500,000

Average $503,333

The proceeds from the sale will be directed to UGA Auxiliary Services operations, which originally funded the purchase of the property.

6. Rental Agreement, 3499 Frey Lake Road, Kennesaw, Kennesaw State University

20

Approved: The Board authorized the execution of a rental agreement between Kennesaw State University Foundation (the "Foundation"), Landlord, and the Board of Regents of the University System of Georgia, Tenant, covering approximately 2,685 square feet and approximately 0.69 acre at 3499 Frey Lake Road, Kennesaw, for the period February 1, 2004, through January 31, 2005, at a monthly rent of $1,342.50 ($16,110 per year / $6 per square foot) with options to renew on a yearto-year basis for 14 consecutive one-year periods at the same rent rate for the use of Kennesaw State University ("KSU").
The rental of this property is subject to the Foundation's completion of a satisfactory Phase I Environmental Assessment.
Authorization to execute the rental agreement was delegated to the Vice Chancellor for Facilities.
The terms of this rental agreement are subject to review and legal approval of the Office of the Attorney General.
Understandings: This rental agreement will allow program movement that will create office space for faculty.
Renovation cost is estimated at $25,000 and will be funded by the Foundation.
Operating costs are estimated to be $6,000 per year. Funding for the rental and operating costs is campus operating funds.
The property will be gifted to the Board when the Foundation debt on the real property is paid, which will be within 15 years.
7. Acquisition of Real Property, 3588 Frey Lake Road, Kennesaw, Kennesaw State University
Approved: The Board authorized the purchase of approximately 0.94 acre of real property located at 3588 Frey Lake Road, Kennesaw, from David J. Unger and Denice J. Unger, joint tenants, for $217,334 for the use and benefit of Kennesaw State University ("KSU").
The acquisition is subject to completion of a Phase I Environmental Assessment indicating no significant problems or, if environmental problems are indicated, said problems be mitigated before the property is acquired.
The legal details involvedwith this acquisitionwill be handled by the Officeof the Attorney General.
The Board also declared the building on the subject real property to be no longer advantageously
21

useful to KSU of other units of the University System of Georgia and authorized the demolition and removal of this building.

The Board requested that the Governor issue an Executive Order authorizing the demolition and removal of the building on the subject real property.
Understandings: The acquisition of the property will allow KSU to complete the campus northern east/west traffic connector, which was begun as a part of the Phase II housing project. This should significantly reduce campus traffic through the adjacent Pinetree subdivision residential neighborhood.

The property includes an approximately 2,500-square-foot two-story frame residential building in fair condition, which KSU will demolish as part of the road improvements. The estimated cost of demolishing the residence is $15,000.

Three independent appraisals of the property are as follows:

Appraiser

Appraised Value

Average

Rosemary Martin, SRA Joseph L. Walker, MAI John M. Bryant

$265,000 $200,000 $187,000

$217,334

There are no known easements, restrictions, or reversions on the property.

Funding for the purchase of the subject real property, demolition of the building, and construction of the east-west connector roadway is from KSU Parking Auxiliary funds.
8. Executive Session

This item was withdrawn prior to the Committee meeting.

9. Information Item: Architect/Engineer and Development Manager Selection Process for the Nanotechnology Research Center, Georgia Institute of Technology

Withdrawn: This item was withdrawn from the agenda.

The Vice Chancellor for Facilities, Linda M. Daniels, reported that given the circumstance outlined for the Committee in withdrawing Item 1 from this agenda, the Georgia Institute of Technology ("GIT") is again soliciting proposals for architectural/engineering services for the Nanotechnology Research Center Building ("NRCB") project. As a result of this change from a privatized to a public

22

project, GIT has elected to exercise its option (as enumerated in the original selection process documentation) to nullify the original selection process and re-solicit proposals for architectural/ engineering services in accordance with Board policies and procedures.
Regent Nesmith questioned whether the University System Office staff would actually have a role in the project.
Ms. Daniels assured him that the staff would be partners in the project. They will also sign contracts in conjunction with President Clough which must be attested by the Secretary to the Board as required for all projects over $1 million dollars. However, the leadership role for accomplishing the project will be with GIT staff. The University System Office staff wants to use this as a prototype for more efficient utilization of campus resources in future project management.
10. Information Item: Facilities Office Update, Facilities and Operations Staff Introductions
The Vice Chancellor for Facilities, Linda M. Daniels, introduced the Assistant Vice Chancellor for Facilities and Operations, V. Harold Gibson Jr., who provided a brief update on activities of the facilities and operations office. He explained that the primary responsibilities of this office are contracts and services, the capital program, and maintenance and operations.
Next, Mr. Gibson introduced the staff of the facilities and operations office, as follows:
Jeannie Wright, Program Manager Kris Lorenz, Program Manager Michael Miller, Program Manager Ron Reed, Program Manager Judy Wilder, Contracts and Budgets Manager Maxcine Hodges, Administrative Assistant
In addition to tracking and assisting with current major and minor capital projects, the facilities and operations staff have several projects in the works. They are currently working to revisit and streamline the Facilities Project Procedures Manual. They are working to refine and apply a projectscheduling template to all projects. They are also working to increase customer serviceto the System institutions. The office is developing integral working relationships with the Georgia State Finance and Investment Commission ("GSFIC") and the Governor's Office of Planning and Budget. It is assisting institutions and GSFIC in troubleshooting problem construction jobs. The staff are also strengtheningthe design peer review process. Finally, Mr. Gibson reported that the staff are working with utilities suppliers to increase their understanding of the System's purchasing power.
23

COMMITTEE ON ACADEMIC AFFAIRS
The Committeeon AcademicAffairs met on Tuesday, January 13, 2004, at approximately 3:30 p.m. in room 6041, the Training Room. Committee members in attendance were Chair William H. Cleveland and Regents W. Mansfield Jennings, Jr., Elridge W. McMillan, Doreen Stiles Poitevint, Wanda Yancey Rodwell, and Joel O. Wooten, Jr. Chair Cleveland reported to the Board that the Committee had reviewed 19 items, 16 of which required action. Additionally, 159 regular faculty appointments were reviewed and recommendedfor approval. With motion properly made, seconded, and unanimously adopted, the Board approved and authorized the following:
1. Adoption of the University System of Georgia Strategic Plan for Public Health Education, Research, and Service
Approved: The Board approved the request of Chancellor Thomas C. Meredith to adopt the University System of Georgia Strategic Plan for Public Health Education, Research, and Service, effective January 14, 2004.
Abstract: The University System of Georgia Strategic Plan for Public Health Education, Research, and Service details the logic behind, the steps taken in preparation for, and the elements of this strategic plan, which is on file with the Office of Academic Affairs. The strategic plan lays the foundation for how the University System will help meet the public health needs of Georgia citizens in education, research, and service.
Development of the plan was driven by seven considerations, as follows: 1) The receipt in fall 2003 of proposals from three System research universities to initiate master of public health ("M.P.H.") programs; 2) The need to ensure that existing public health programs at three System state universities prosper; 3) The growing awareness that Georgia has significant education, research, and service requirements in public health that are unmet; 4) The need to ensure a minimum amount of unnecessary M.P.H. program duplication; 5) The Chancellor's intention to position the University System of Georgia to become one of the national leaders in public health education, research, and service; 6) The evolving and expanding nature of public health education, research, and education; and 7) The willingness of a private source to provide a significant amount of funding to Georgia Southern University to establish a school of public health.
The objective of the University System of Georgia Strategic Plan for Public Health Education, Research, and Service is to ensure that the System becomes one of the national leaders in public health education, research, and service. The University System of Georgia Strategic Plan for Public Health Education, Research, and Service contains four key elements, as follows:
24

1) The creation of an Administrative Committee on Public Health, which, among other things, will serve as the strategic planning advisory body for public health programs across the System and foster intercollegiate and interdisciplinary cooperation, assistance, and growth, ensuring planning and cooperation so that all six public health programs in the System will prosper in their respective areas of emphasis and responsibilities;
2) The maintenanceof M.P.H. programsfocused primarilyon teachingand service at Armstrong Atlantic State University, Fort Valley State University, and Georgia Southern University;
3) The creation of M.P.H. programs focused primarily on teaching, research, and service at Georgia State University, the Medical College of Georgia, and the University of Georgia; and
4) The continuing requirement that, as with all degree programs, off-campus delivery of programs or the delivery of programs via distance learning require Board of Regents approval.
Items 2 to 5 of the agenda for the Committee on Academic Affairs pertain directly to the University System of Georgia Strategic Plan for Public Health Education, Research, and Service.
2. Establishment of the Master of Public Health, University of Georgia
Approved: The Board approved the request of President Michael F. Adams that the University of Georgia ("UGA") be authorized to establish a Master of Public Health ("M.P.H.") degree, effective January 14, 2004.
Abstract: After discussions with the Medical College of Georgia ("MCG"), UGA's M.P.H. was developed in its Biomedical and Health Sciences Institute. As a result of research and teaching strengths in biomedical and health service disciplines, the degree will be offered as an interdisciplinarycollaborationbetween the establishedDepartments of EnvironmentalHealth Science and Health Promotion and Behavior in cooperation with other public health related groups, including Foods and Nutrition, Exercise Science, and the interdisciplinary program in Toxicology and Gerontology.
Need: High incidences of obesity, cancer, diabetes, heart disease, stroke and asthma affect Georgia's populations. Child and maternal health is a concern, as evidenced by infant mortality and low birth weights. The Georgia Cancer Coalition's goal of finding effective strategies to prevent and treat cancer over the next decade is a major undertaking important to the health of Georgia's citizen. An informal survey of 80 master's-level students enrolled in 2001 in selected public health-related majors at UGA indicates that approximately 30% would have enrolled in an M.P.H. program at UGA if it had been available.
Objectives: Primary objectives of the program include 1) creation of an interdisciplinary M.P.H. at a university involvedin health researchand teaching,2) provision for an interfacebetween the state's
25

public health programs and UGA, and 3) development of collaborativerelationships between UGA, MCG, Georgia State University and other M.P.H. programs.
Curriculum: The 53-semester-hour curriculum will include courses in chemical toxicology, environmental risk assessment, water pollution and human health, and industrial hygiene.
Projected Enrollment: The institution anticipates enrollments of 40, 75, and 100 during the first three years of the program.
Funding: The program will build upon and reconfigure existing courses that are currently offered by the institution in addition to establishing new courses. Faculty who will teach, conduct research, and perform service related to the M.P.H. are already on UGA's faculty in several departments. President Adams has provided reverification that funding for the program is available at the institution.
Assessment: The Office of Academic Affairs will work with the institution to measure the success and continued effectiveness of the program. The program will be reviewed in concert with the institution's programmatic schedule of comprehensive program reviews and the Administrative Committee on Public Health's reports to the Chancellor.
3. Establishment of the Master of Public Health, Georgia State University
Approved: The Board approved the request of President Carl V. Patton that Georgia State University ("GSU") be authorized to establish a Master of Public Health ("M.P.H.") degree, effective January 14, 2004.
Abstract: GSU sought approval to establish an M.P.H. that will meet the applied public health educational and research needs of the Atlanta metropolitan area. GSU's multi-disciplinary,researchbased Institute of Public Health draws upon the faculty of all six GSU colleges. Academic and training efforts will emphasize basic prevention sciences (e.g., immunology,virology, bioinformatics, and genomics) as well as applied public health efforts (e.g., chronic disease prevention, health promotion and policy, public health ethics and law, and health communications).
Need: A 1988 study completed by the Institute of Medicine suggests that 20% of the public health workforce has actually received training in public health and that the education and training needs of the current public health workforce are multifaceted. With headquarters for the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, the American Cancer Society, the Arthritis Foundation, CARE International, the Carter Center, and The Task Force for Child Survival in Atlanta, demand exists for graduate
26

public health education in an affordable, publicly supported institution in Georgia and to conduct research and provide public health service for Atlantans and other Georgians.
Objectives: The objectives of the M.P.H. degree are 1) to prepare students to use multi-disciplinary skills to address contemporarypublic health problems,2) to train students to excel in reducingpublic health disparities in urban communities, and 3) to advance public health sciences and an understanding of the causes and prevention of disease.
Curriculum: The 39-semester-hour curriculum will include core public health courses in epidemiology, biostatistics, environmental health, and health services administration. A required practicum will be included as well as a special capstone project.
Projected Enrollment: The institution anticipates enrollments of 30, 60, and 75 for the first three years of the program.
Funding: The program will build upon and reconfigure existing courses that are currently offered by the institution in addition to establishing new courses. Faculty who will teach, conduct research, and perform service relatedto the M.P.H. are already on GSU's faculty in severaldepartments. President Patton has provided reverification that funding for the program is available at the institution.
Assessment: The Office of Academic Affairs will work with the institution to measure the success and continued effectiveness of the program. The program will be reviewed in concert with the institution's programmatic schedule of comprehensive program reviews and the Administrative Committee on Public Health's reports to the Chancellor.
4. Establishment of the Master of Public Health With a Major in Health Informatics, Medical College of Georgia
Approved: The Board approved the request of President Daniel W. Rahn that the Medical College of Georgia ("MCG") be authorized to establish a Master of Public Health ("M.P.H.") with a major in Health Informatics, effective January 14, 2004.
Abstract: MCG and the University of Georgia have closely coordinated their efforts to develop M.P.H. programs. UGA's program will produce graduates who can move into the public health component of the state's healthcare system by offeringdegree specializationin environmentalhealth science and health promotion and behavior. MCG's proposed program will add graduates to the state's healthcare system to manage healthcare organizations and information systems. Typical employment settings include hospitals, health maintenance organizations, clinics, public health departments, and other healthcare related entities.
27

Need: A compelling need exists to provide healthcare delivery and management programs to reduce morbidity and mortality rates in the United States caused by preventable factors. According to the report Healthy People 2010, approximately 65% to 70% of the morbidity and mortality rates are a consequence of preventable factors. In Georgia, more than 36,000 people each year die from heart disease, cancer, and stroke.
Objectives: The primary objective of the program is the preparation of graduates who will have the requisite skills to improve the health of populations by effectively and efficiently managing health organizations and health information systems.
Curriculum: The 39-semester-hourcurriculumplus 9-hour internship are the minimum requirements for the major. At least 28 semesterhours will includenew courses in such areas as health information systems, data managementand analysis, epidemiology,environmentalhealth, and healthcare delivery systems. The program will be offered primarily online and therefore needs to be considered as an external degree program.
Projected Enrollment: The institution anticipates enrollments of 3, 8, and 16 during the first three years of the program.
Funding: The program will build upon existing courses and establish new courses. MCG has sufficient faculty to offer an M.P.H. with a major in Health Informatics. President Rahn has provided reverification that funding for the program is available at the institution.
Assessment: The Office of Academic Affairs will work with the institution to measure the success and continued effectiveness of the program. The program will be reviewed in concert with the institution's programmatic schedule of comprehensive program reviews and the Administrative Committee on Public Health's reports to the Chancellor.
5. Establishment of the Jiann-Ping Hsu School of Public Health, Georgia Southern University
Approved: The Board approved the request of President Bruce Grube that Georgia Southern University ("GSOU") be authorized to establish the Jiann-Ping Hsu School of Public Health, effective January 14, 2004.
Abstract of School: GSOU proposes to redesignate the Department of Public Health the School of Public Health, and to name the School the Jiann-Ping Hsu School of Public Health. Dr. Karl E. Peace has committed a gift of $2.5 million to endow student scholarships, faculty support, and faculty scholarship in the school in honor of his wife, Dr. Jiann-Ping Hsu. In addition to the establishmentof the Jiann-PingHsu Schoolof Public Health,in an action that does not require formal Board approval, GSOU will rename the Center for Biostatistics in the School the Karl E. Peace
28

Center for Biostatistics. Dr. Peace has provided GSOU an additional gift of $750,000 for this purpose. These two gifts, together with the $500,000 that Dr. Peace provided to his alma mater to create the Karl E. Peace Professorship of Biostatistics, which was matched by the Eminent Scholars Endowed Trust, means that the Jiann-Ping Hsu School of Public Health will begin operations with combined endowments of at least $4.25 million.
Dr. Peace's gifts will allow the new school to strengthen all programs in the existing department, with special emphasis on course offerings in biostatistics and rural public health. The new school will establish a plan to become an accredited school of public health within five to seven years, assuming Board policies are so modified to permit this. In the absence of such modification, GSOU commits that the Jiann-Ping Hsu School of Public Health will work to have all programs within it that may be accredited achieve accreditation within five to seven years.
School Naming: Dr. Jiann-Ping Hsu received her undergraduate degree in Mathematics at the National Taiwan University and her Master of Arts in Mathematical Sciences from Columbia University. She was a research scholar in the School of Public Health at Columbia University from 1970 to 1972, after which she earned her doctorate in biostatistics at the University of California while performingstatistical research in long-termhealthcarestudies. During Dr. Hsu's career, she has held positions at the United States Food and Drug Administration, SmithKlein and French Laboratories, and at the Parke-Davis Pharmaceutical Research Division. While serving as Associate Director of Biometrics at Schering-Plough Pharmaceuticals, she also served as Section Head of Biometrics at Procter and Gamble Pharmaceuticals. Dr. Hsu's scholarly works include 15 publications and presentations on public health statistical issues.
Philanthropy: Dr. Karl E. Peace is one of the most notable living alumni of GSOU. After graduating from GSOU and earninghis Ph.D. at the Medical College of Virginia, Dr. Peace distinguishedhimself in the field of clinical trials in the pharmaceutical industry. The 1991 Star Alumnus of the Medical College of Virginia and the 1998 Distinguished Alumnus of GSOU, Dr. Peace is the founder and editor-in-chief of the Journal of Biopharmaceutical Statistics, a Fellow of the American Statistical Association, a Georgia Cancer Coalition Distinguished Cancer Scholar, Director of the GSOU Center for Biostatistics, and GSOU Professor of Biostatistics. Beyond the gifts detailed above, Dr. Peace has funded the Elsie Mae Cloud Peace Memorial Scholarship, the Karl E. Peace Award for Excellence and Scholarship, and the Biopharmaceutical Applied Statistics Symposium Scholarship at GSOU.
6. Administrative and Academic Appointments and Personnel Actions, Various System Institutions
Approved: The administrative and academic appointments were reviewed by the Chair of the Committee on Education, Research, and Extension and approved by the Board. The full list of approved appointments is on file with the Office of Faculty Affairs in the Office of Academics and Fiscal Affairs.
29

7. Establishment of the Majorin Music EducationUnder the Bachelor of Music, Clayton College & State University
Approved: The Board approved the request of President Thomas K. Harden that Clayton College & State University ("CCSU") be authorized to establish the major in Music Education under the Bachelor of Music, effective January 14, 2004.
Abstract: The addition of Music Education to the array of majors offered by the Department of Music at CCSU represents the natural evolution and maturation of a program initiated in 1991 in the wake of the inauguration of Spivey Hall. In fall 2002, CCSU added a bachelor of arts degree to its more specialized bachelor of music degrees in performance and composition.
Need: A 1999 study by the American Association for Employment in Education showed that supply and demand for music teachers in the Southeast was at equilibrium at the time of the study but that a shortage was imminent. The National Association for Music Education stated in August 2002 that the need for music educators is rising and the supply of new teachers is not keeping up with the demand caused by increasing retirement rates and attrition of new teachers. The Fine Arts/Music Coordinators of Clayton, Fulton, Fayette and Henry school districts have affirmed their support for music education at CCSU. Significant shortages of qualified music teachers are found in the areas of choral music and strings.
Objectives: The relationship with Spivey Hall and its education committee will provide students with unique educational and employment opportunities sponsored by the institution with the support of the Blank Foundation. The site-based nature of CCSU's existing teacher education program provides a strong partnership with area school systems. Students will learn in a technological educational environment.
Curriculum: The 128-semester-hour program will include such courses as elementary music methods, vocal pedagogy, conducting, scoring and arranging, and major ensemble.
Projected Enrollment: The institution anticipates enrollments of 23, 27, and 30 during the first three years of the program.
Funding: The program will reconfigure existing courses in addition to establishing new courses. President Harden has provided reverification that funding for the program is available.
Assessment: The Office of Academic Affairs will work with the institution to measure the success and continued effectiveness of the program. The program will be reviewed in concert with the institution's programmatic schedule of comprehensive program reviews.
30

8. Establishment of the Major in Liberal Studies Under the Bachelor of Arts, Fort Valley State University
Approved: The Board approved the request of President Kofi Lomotey that Fort Valley State University ("FVSU") be authorized to establish the major in Liberal Studies under the Bachelor of Arts, effective January 14, 2004.
Abstract: FVSU proposed the establishment of a major in Liberal Studies under the Bachelor of Arts. The Liberal Studies major is a transdisciplinary degree program that provides a structured set of experiences whereby students will achieve a broad preparation in the classic disciplines of humanities and sciences. Students in each of the five concentrations (Creative Arts, International Studies, Environmental Science, African World Studies, and Spanish) will gain cultural and/or scientific knowledge of the world, original thinking and/or creative ability, and an understanding of the need for seeing world affairs and individual liberal arts disciplines in the perspective of the larger context of liberal studies.
Need: Georgia has a need for graduates with strong critical thinking skills, as well as oral and written communication skills, quantitative/math, and teamwork skills. Although student skills in all of these areas would be enhanced, critical thinking and communication would be particularly emphasized and cultivated. FVSU anticipates demand for the program from students transferring with credit from earlier college attempts, students changing their major area of study, and students desiring a liberal studies foundation in preparation for graduate school.
Objectives: Students will gain a broad spectrum of academic experiences that will enable career flexibility, critical thinking, and enhanced oral and written communication skills.
Curriculum: The 120-semester-hourcurriculumwill include major courses for the concentrationareas of environmentalscience,international studies, African world studies, creative arts, and Spanish. Due to its transdisciplinary nature, the curriculum of the program is decided upon by the student and academic advisor with approval from a Liberal Studies committee.
Projected Enrollment: The institution anticipates enrollments of 24, 51, and 82 during the first three years of the program.
Funding: The program will build upon and reconfigure existing courses that are currently offered by the institution in addition to establishing new courses. President Lomotey has provided reverification that funding for the program is available at the institution.
Assessment: The Office of Academic Affairs will work with the institution to measure the success and continued effectiveness of the program. The program will be reviewed in concert with the institution's programmatic schedule of comprehensive program reviews.
31

9. Establishment of the Doctor of Philosophy in Bioinformatics, Georgia Institute of Technology
Approved: The Board approved the request of President G. Wayne Clough that the Georgia Institute of Technology ("GIT") be authorized to establish the Doctor of Philosophy ("Ph.D.") in Bioinformatics, effective January 14, 2004.
Abstract: GIT proposed the establishment of the Ph.D. in Bioinformatics. The mission of the interdisciplinary program is to educate and prepare students to reach the forefront of leadership in the field of bioinformatics and computational biology and to integrate research and education on the use of information technologies in biology and medicine.
Need: As thousands of genes and proteins are identified and sequenced each year, there is a strong need for professionals with expertise in both biological and computational science to manage and interpret this vast amount of biological information. Doctoral graduates will conduct research to develop new methods and computational software to provide interpretation of large datasets. Genomic-based approaches to drug design will be the research and development foci for pharmaceutical and biotechnological companies.
Objectives: Bioinformatics is a field in which physical sciences, life sciences, computer science, and engineering are merged to solve both fundamental and applied problems in biology and medicine. The outcomes of bioinformatics and computational biology research include: 1) new and global perspectives into the organization and function of biological systems (fundamental biology), 2) new and novel targets for drug discovery and development, and 3) genetic/proteomic profiling for pharmaco-genomics or personalized medicine.
Curriculum: Students in the program will complete a set of core courses in biology, biochemistry, mathematics, physics, and computer science, while the major emphasis of the program will be completion of an original and independent research project.
Projected Enrollment: The institution anticipates enrollments of 20 per year during the first three years of the program.
Funding: The program will build upon and reconfigure existing courses that are currently offered by the institution in addition to establishing new courses. President Clough has reverified that funding for the program is available at the institution.
Assessment: The Office of Academic Affairs will work with the institution to measure the success and continued effectiveness of the program. The program will be reviewed in concert with the institution's programmatic schedule of comprehensive program reviews.
32

10. Establishment of the Bachelor of Fine Art With a Major in Visual and Performing Arts, Savannah State University
Approved: The Board approved the request of President Carlton E. Brown that Savannah State University ("SSU") be authorized to establish the Bachelor of Fine Art ("B.F.A.") with a major in Visual and Performing Arts, effective January 14, 2004.
Abstract: SSU proposed the establishment of the B.F.A. with a major in Visual and Performing Arts. The B.F.A. is an interdisciplinary degree that integrates traditional and multicultural perspectives in its curriculum. The interdisciplinary context provides students with a nurturing environment for an in-depth investigation of art, music, theatre, dance, and the visual arts within a multicultural setting, one that is unique to the low country experience. Concentrations will be offered in Studio Art, Art History, and Music (keyboard or voice).
Need: The Departmentsof Commerceand Labor estimatethat 200,000 jobs in visual and performing arts are going unfilled.To assist students in qualifyingfor these jobs, the proposed degree program's concentrations meet the needs of the community through internships and future employment in studios, museums, community centers, and churches. The B.F.A. core responds to demands of the competitive market by requiring courses in career marketing and business management.
Objectives: The principle objectives of the program are to enhance learning at the university by offering talented students opportunities to develop as artists and performers and to educate artists in a multiculturaland multidisciplinaryperspective. The program will seek accreditation through the National Association for Schools of Theatre, the National Association of Schools of Dance, and the National Association of Schools of Art and Design.
Curriculum: The 126-semester-hourprogram will include courses to support concentrationsin visual art, art history, studio art, music, voice and keyboard performance, and theatre and dance.
Projected Enrollment: The institution anticipates enrollments of 40, 60, and 80 during the first three years of the program.
Funding: The program will build upon and reconfigure existing courses that are currently offered by the institution in addition to establishing new courses. President Brown has reverified that funding for the program is available at the institution.
Assessment: The Office of Academic Affairs will work with the institution to measure the success and continued effectiveness of the program. The program will be reviewed in concert with the institution's programmatic schedule of comprehensive program reviews.
33

11. Establishment of the Major in Geography Under the Bachelor of Arts, Georgia Southern University
Approved: The Board approved the request of President Bruce Grube that Georgia Southern University ("GSOU") be authorizedto establish the major in Geography under the Bachelor of Arts, effective January 14, 2004.
Abstract: GSOU proposed to add a major in Geography under the existing Bachelor of Arts degree. GSOU currently offers a Geography major under the existing Bachelor of Science. The main goal of the new major is to develop a comprehensive program that trains students in all three of geography's subfields: physical, technical, and human. Specific objectives include exposing students to the geographic dynamics of such issues as globalization, transcultural migration and diaspora, and regional political and economic development.
Need: The program fills a need for a comprehensive geography program in Southern Georgia. Geographers work in four basic career fields: business, government, planning, and education. Geographers perform a wide variety of jobs, including urban and regional planning, housing and community development, retail site location, environmental analysis, climatology, resource conservation, cartography, and geographicinformation systems analysis. Geographersare employed where there is a need for greater understanding of spatial issues and, in particular, how people interact with their physical and social environments. The program is congruentwith the institution's mission and strategic plan.
Objectives: The program seeks to 1) provide elementary and secondary school teachers with the knowledge to combat geographic illiteracy, 2) prepare students for graduate work in human geography, and 3) produce graduates who will advance regional planning development in Southern Georgia.
Curriculum: The 120-semester-hour program includes courses in regional geography, cartography, cultural anthropology, economic geography, and geographic information systems.
Projected Enrollment: The institution anticipates enrollments of 8, 13, and 17 during the first three years of the program.
Funding: The program will build upon and reconfigure existing courses that are currently offered by the institution in addition to establishing new courses. President Grube has provided reverification that funding for the program is available at the institution.
Assessment: The Office of Academic Affairs will work with the institution to measure the success and continued effectiveness of the program. The program will be reviewed in concert with the institution's programmatic schedule of comprehensive program reviews.
34

12. Revised Institutional Statutes, Fort Valley State University
Approved: The Board approved the request of President Kofi Lomotey that Fort Valley State University ("FVSU") be authorized to revise its institutional statutes, effective January 14, 2004.
Abstract: FVSU sought approval to revise its institutional statutes. The revision of the statutes reflects a thorough review and brings the statutes into line with present Board of Regents policies and procedures. The statues also clarify faculty involvement in governance, committee responsibilities, and committee membership. The amendments include professional administrative classifications, organizational meetings of the senate, staff advisory council membership, and senate representation with regard to faculty members.
The general faculty of FVSU approved these changes. The changes were also reviewed by the Office of Legal Affairs and found to be consistent with the current organization and administrative processes at FVSU. The revised statutes are on file in the Office of Academic Affairs of the Board of Regents.
13. Termination of the Major in Psychology Under the Master of Science, Georgia College & State University
Approved: The Board approved the request of President Dorothy Leland that Georgia College & State University ("GCSU") be authorized to terminate the major in Psychology under the Master of Science, effective January 14, 2004.
Abstract: GCSU sought approval to terminate the major in Psychology under the Master of Science. The process to deactivate the program began with campus discussions in fall 2002, and formal recommendations were sent to the University System Office in December 2002. Administrative approval to deactivate the program was provided in January 2003. A further campus review was conducted during fall 2003, and the university senate approved the termination of the degree during its October 2003 meeting. There are no students currently enrolled in the major. Previous low enrollments required a shift in personnel and financial resources to meet increased needs in other academic areas specific to the psychology discipline. Termination of the program will not have an adverse impact on faculty or students.
14. Termination of the Major in Technology Management Under the Master of Science, Columbus State University
Approved: The Board approved the request of President Frank D. Brown that Columbus State University ("CSU") be authorized to terminate the major in Technology Management under the Master of Science, effective January 14, 2004.
35

Abstract: CSU sought approval to terminate the major in Technology Management under the Master of Science as a result of its comprehensive program review process. The institution reviewed the program internally over two years ago to determine whether it should be revitalized. As a result of low enrollments, a review of institutional resources, and student selection of other majors, CSU chose to terminate the program. Termination of the major in Technology Management will not have an adverse impact on faculty or students.
15. Termination of the Major in Textile Science Under the Bachelor of Science in Family and Consumer Sciences, University of Georgia
Approved: The Board approved the request of President Michael F. Adams that the University of Georgia ("UGA") be authorized to terminate the major in Textile Science under the Bachelor of Science in Family and Consumer Sciences, effective January 14, 2004.
Abstract: UGA sought approval to terminate the major in Textile Science under the Bachelor of Science in Family and Consumer Sciences because the number of students majoring in Textile Science has been small and declining over the past six years. The trend in the department has been discussed and analyzed.Administrators and faculty determinedthat the trend is irreversiblewithout substantial scholarship resources to recruit students. Faculty voted to terminate the Textile Science major with no opposing votes. Termination of the major will not have an adverse impact on faculty or students.
16. Revision to The Policy Manual, Section 207 Organization Changes
Approved: The Board approved revisions to The Policy Manual, Section 207 Organization Changes, effective January 14, 2004.
Background: During its November2003 meeting,the Committee on Academic Affairs requestedthat the academic affairs program staff provide a recommendation on revising the approval process for institutional reorganizationrequests. At this meeting,the Vice Chancellorfor Academic,Student, and Faculty Affairs, Frank A. Butler, provided a report concerning the reorganization of institutional units and a proposed revision to The Policy Manual for endorsement by the Committee on Academic Affairs. The intent of the revision is to only recommend for Board consideration those institutional reorganization requests in which changes occur with regard to those offices that report directly to the president of a University System institution. In addition to recommended revisions to Policy 207, the academic affairs staff will also develop detailed guidelines for the approval processes, administrative and Board of Regents, for inclusion in the Academic Affairs Handbook.
The approved revisions are as follows. Please note that the strike-through texts represent deletions from the current version and highlighted texts represent additions.
36

207 ORGANIZATION CHANGES

Changes in the organizational structure of a University System institution including but not limited to the addition or elimination of a college, department, division or school, shall be submitted by the president to the Chancellor (or the Chancellor's designee) for his/her review and recommendation for action by the Board of Regents. , shall require Board of Regents approval if these changes involve the addition, deletion, or substantive name change of a unit reporting directly to the president. The Chancellor or his/her designee is authorized to approve all other organizational changes.

The additionor eliminationof any major administrativeposition(s) at the rank of Dean or above shall be submitted by the president to the Chancellor (or the Chancellor's designee) for his/her review and recommendation for action by the Board of Regents.

The addition or elimination of academic centers and institutes located on campus does not require the Chancellor's or Regents' approval. At the beginning of each fiscal year, each president shall submit to the Chancellor a list of all academic institutes and centers that are authorized to operate on each campus.

17. Information Item: Service Agreements

Pursuant to authority granted by the Board at its meeting on February 7 and 8, 1984, the presidents of the listed institutions have executed service agreements with the indicated agencies for the purposes and periods designated, with the institutions to receive payment as indicated:

University of Georgia
Georgia Commodity Commission for Peanuts Compare economics of reduced rate and conventional peanut weed management systems
Georgia Commodity Commission for Tobacco Fund support of extension tobacco on farm demonstrations
Georgia Commodity Commission for Tobacco Provide funding for printing of extension tobacco publications to include 2004 Georgia Tobacco Growers' Guide, the 2003 Georgia Tobacco ResearchExtension Report, and related publications
Georgia Commodity Commission for Tobacco Demonstrate a practical, rapid, and inexpensive procedure to determine if and at what levels byproducts of combustion may be present inside indirect-fired curing barns as a result of cracked heat exchangers, improper venting, or other causes

7/1/03 7/1/04 7/1/03 6/30/04
7/1/03 6/30/04
7/1/03 6/30/04

$5,000 $14,000 $7,000
$2,000

37

Georgia Department of Community Affairs Provide consulting services that will enable the department to better deliver downtown development design services to cities around the state
Georgia Department of Community Affairs Provide consulting services that will enable the department and its partner, the Rural Development Council, to better deliver its "Leadership Investment Infrastructure Fund" and enhance leadership development opportunities in the state
Georgia Department of Community Affairs Provide applied research and consultative services that enable the commissioner of the department and/or the Georgia Rural Development Council to prepare for the design and implementation of a comprehensive, integrated rural development strategy in Georgia
Georgia Department of Community Affairs Support the Georgia Commission for Service and Volunteerism
Georgia Department of Human Resources Provide development and technical support for the Performance Measurement and Evaluation System (PERMES)
Georgia Department of Human Resources Provide program support and coordination of 16 training and planning events in nutrition education
Georgia Department of Human Resources Provide technical assistance and training in a variety of methods in order to ensure that staff and service providers are trained and educated to provide early intervention services to children with special needs and their families in Georgia
Georgia Department of Natural Resources Produce a coastal training program for the Sapelo Island National Estuarine Research Reserve in McIntosh County, Georgia

7/1/03 6/30/04
7/1/03 6/30/04
7/1/03 6/30/04
10/1/03 9/30/04 7/28/03 6/30/04 10/1/02 12/31/03
7/1/03 6/30/04
11/1/03 10/31/04

Georgia Forestry Commission Develop a review and summary of recently published research that estimates the financial contribution of community forests and open space to local economies
Georgia Ports Authority Study the economic impact of Georgia's deepwater ports (Savannah and Brunswick) on the State of Georgia and service delivery region 12

8/12/03 8/31/04
7/1/03 6/30/04

38

$90,000
$292,500
$109,735 $145,404 $108,737 $48,500 $141,752 $80,000
$8,055 $15,000

Georgia Cancer Coalition Identify cancer clinicians and scientists who meet requirements of the Georgia Cancer Coalition Program in cancer prevention, treatment, research, and education
Georgia Childcare Council Provide childcare professionals with quality opportunities to participate in professional development activities and for directors in childcare administration
Northeast Georgia Regional Development Center Maintain Business Outreach Services office in Dalton, Georgia

8/1/03 7/31/04
10/1/03 9/30/04
10/1/02 11/30/03

$450,000 $75,447 $8,000

Total Amount January

$ 1,601,130

TOTAL AMOUNT FY 2004 TO DATE TOTAL AMOUNT FY 2003 TO JANUARY Total Amount FY 2003

$ 123,498,688 $ 20,225,613 $ 25,349,678

18. Information Item: Grants and Contracts Received by Institutions for Research, Instruction, and Public Service for Fiscal Year 2003

The Associate Vice Chancellor for Strategic Research and Analysis, Cathie Mayes Hudson, presented this information to the full Board. (See pages 13 to 15.) The total external support for contracts and grants receivedby all System institutions and the Skidaway Institute of Oceanography during fiscal year 2003 equaled $861,148,879, an increase of $66,674,054, or 8.4%, above fiscal year 2002. Contracts and grants are categorized as research, instruction, or public service. Research alone increased from $488,018,193 to $532,778,807, a 9% increase.

19. Information Item: Intellectual Property Income Summary for Fiscal Year 2003

The Associate Vice Chancellor for Strategic Research and Analysis, Cathie Mayes Hudson, presented this information to the full Board. (See pages 13 to 15.) The table below presents income received from intellectual properties during fiscal year 2003. The total income represents an increase of $806,584, or 13.1%, above fiscal year 2002.

Institution
Georgia Institute of Technology Georgia State University

Inventions
$829,262 0

Software Copyrights/ Trademarks

$1,449,415

$37,839

0

$83,808

Totals
$2,316,516 $83,808

39

Medical College of Georgia
University of Georgia
North Georgia College & State University
Totals

$345,812 $4,159,201
0

0 $23,271
0

$5,334,275 $1,472,686

$43,172 $817
$10,000

$388,984 $4,183,289
$10,000

$175,636 $6,982,597

COMMITTEE ON ORGANIZATION AND LAW
The Committee on Organization and Law met on Tuesday, January 13, 2004, at approximately 4:00 p.m. in room 7019, the Chancellor's Conference Room. Committee members in attendance were Chair Joel O. Wooten, Jr., Vice Chair Elridge W. McMillan, and Regents William H. Cleveland, W. Mansfield Jennings,Jr., DoreenStiles Poitevint, and Allan Vigil. Chair Wooten reported to the Board on Wednesday that the Committee had reviewed three items, all of which required action. Item 1 included nine applications for review, of which one was withdrawn, three were continued, and five were denied. 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. With motion properly made, seconded, and unanimouslyadopted, the Board approved and authorized the following:
1. Applications for Review
a. In the matter of Margery J. Hall, at Georgia Southwestern State University, concerning termination, the application for review was denied.
b. In the matter of Sanford D. Morrison, at Floyd College, concerning the removal of suspension from file, the application for review was withdrawn.
c. In the matter of file 1647, at the University of Georgia, concerning denial of readmission, the application for review was denied.
d. In the matter of Ricardo Hunt, at the Georgia Institute of Technology, concerning termination, the application for review was continued by request.
e. In the matter of Dennis Hooks, at the Georgia Institute of Technology, concerning termination, the application for review was continued by request.
f. In the matter of Christopher Ide, at Savannah State University, concerning counseling requirement, the application for review was denied.

40

g. In the matter of Danielle M. Bowman, at the University of Georgia, concerning termination, the application for review was denied.
h. In the matter of Maelondy Holman, at the Georgia Institute of Technology, concerning termination, the application for review was denied.
i. In the matter of Raymon P. Hunter, at the Georgia Institute of Technology, concerning termination, the application for review was continued by request.
2. Approval of the Columbus State University Mutual Aid Agreement With the Muscogee County Sheriff's Department
Approved: The Board approved the following mutual aid agreement between Columbus State University and the Muscogee County Sheriff's Department, effective January 13, 2004.
Background: Columbus State University reached an agreementwith the Muscogee County Sheriff's Department and the Columbus Police Department to provide for the rendering of extraterritorial assistance as defined in Georgia Code 36-69-2 (meaning of local emergency) and under the conditions established in Georgia Code 36-69-2 (exterritorial cooperation and assistance to local law enforcement agencies or fire departments; commander of operations). The mutual aid agreement follows a statutory format and has been approved by the Office of Legal Affairs.
3. Approval of the South Georgia College Mutual Aid Agreement With the City of Douglas
Approved: The Board approved the following mutual aid agreement between South Georgia College and the City of Douglas, effective January 13, 2004.
Background: South Georgia College reached an agreement with the City of Douglas to provide for the rendering of extraterritorial assistance as defined in Georgia Code 36-69-2 (meaning of local emergency) and under the conditions established in Georgia Code 36-69-2 (exterritorial cooperation and assistance to local law enforcementagencies or fire departments; commander of operations). The mutual aid agreement follows a statutory format and has been approved by the Office of Legal Affairs.
CHANCELLOR'S STATE OF THE SYSTEM ADDRESS
After the Committee meeting reports, Chair Harris congratulatedChancellorMeredith on his election as Chair of the American Association of State Colleges and Universities, which is a credit both to the Chancellor and the University System of Georgia. He then asked Chancellor Meredith to give his State of the System Address.
41

Chancellor Meredith responded that the honor was undoubtedly as a result of his role in the University System of Georgia. He then gave his State of the System Address, which was as follows:
Chairman Harris and members of the Board, this month marks my two-year anniversary as your Chancellor. When I arrived, Georgia was running out of money talk about timing! I keep saying, "Don't blame me; it was just a coincidence!" I'm beginning to suspect that when you were looking for a new Chancellor, your top "must have" was someone who was used to working with no cash. And you found me!
We've managed with less money, but I do not ever want this Board and our 34 presidents to become accustomed to or comfortable with this position. Only through the sheer genius and resolve of many people, including this Board, have we been able to move forward under these circumstances. The good news is the continuing, steady economic recovery. However, in terms of the state's budget picture, we have to temper our optimism. I have said before, the recovery will take time because the dollars must be collected, appropriated, and allocated for the System, and that won't happen quickly. Although there have been four straight months of increased revenue over a year ago, we are a long way from being out of the woods.
So, as we prepare for what lies ahead, let me use my time today to help point out some highlights of where we have been these past two years. I'll focus my comments in the following areas: this Board, the University System Office, our 34 institutions, key accomplishments at the System and institutional level, and the System budget. I will close with some challenges and concerns regarding what these factors mean for the System as this Board prepares for the coming year. All of my comments have a single point of reference or assessment: How do we reach our goal or confirm reaching our goal of being the best higher education system in the country?
One the strength of the Board: The foundation to creating the nation's best higher education system is its governance structure. The strength and the power of this Board to benefit the state should never be underestimated. One System, one Board, a unified governance structure: these factors do make a difference in our ability to react and to proactively address this state's needs. I appreciate all that you do for this System and the state. We have seen a number of changes in the Board's make-up and numbers over the past two years. There are six talented new members named by Governor Perdue to an already existing strong Board. You do not shy away from taking responsibility for the tough decisions and you are well respected in the state and nationally. There is confidence in this Board at every level of government. Another key factor in this Board's successful governance is the fact that this is an open Board and a responsive Board. Your actions and decisions are an open book to the public and our funding partners. The Governor and the General Assembly continue to place a very high reliance on you and your decisions. When he visited
42

in November, Governor Perdue said that the Board of Regents is "the premier board in this state."
Two the strength of the staff of this University System Office: We are blessed to have talented people working very hard. I cannot praise them highly enough in terms of how well they have dealt with our budget situation. You have a great staff here, and I know you are very proud. Our new presidents are impressed with the professional, helpful nature of the University System Office staff. David Brown, the former Interim President at Georgia College & State University, said he had never been anywhere where there was such a cooperative and helpful spirit between a system office and the institutions.
A third key area of assessment in terms of a great university system is the quality of the leadership at its institutions and, in turn, the quality of those institutions themselves. I'm pleased to report that despite the budget cuts, despite the increasingdemand for services that have been placed upon them, we continue to have great institutions. One of the highlights of my job is the time I spend on our campuses. Over the past two years, I've enlarged my understanding of our campuses the physical layout, the communities they serve, the people and the culture of each campus. The base line for quality in our institutions lies in the quality of the people who teach and work in its institutions. Without question, we have outstanding faculty and staff thousands of individuals who have and are devoting their lives and their careers to the University System of Georgia, people who continue to work with commitment, despite increased responsibilities and decreased resources. We are thankful for their accomplishments on behalf of our students. And these faculty and staff are lead by outstanding presidents. These past two years, we have seen some changes and a few departures. But the national reputation of the System continues to serve as a magnet for good new people. New presidents who have started since my arrival are Dr. Ronald M. Zaccari at Valdosta State University, Dr. Lawrence Weill at Gordon College, Dr. Richard Federinko at Middle Georgia College, and Dr. Dorothy Leland at Georgia College & State University. Our presidents have shown outstanding resolve in dealing with the current budget challenge. I'm very proud of them! University System people continue to be recognized among the nation's and the state's top leadership. Georgia Trend's current list of the "100 Most Influential Georgians" includes President Michael Adams; President Wayne Clough; Dr. Rajeev Dhawan, Director of Georgia State University's Economic Forecasting Center; Vince Dooley; our Chair, Joe Frank Harris; President Carl Patton; University of Georgia ("UGA") football coach Mark Richt; President Daniel Rahn; President Betty Siegel; and myself. However, the pinnacle of my job has been the opportunity to meet with students. And my meetings and conversationsgive me the strong assurance that the future of Georgia is in good hands as well as my Social Security!
Between the visits to campuses, the Knowledge Is Power tour last year, and speaking engagements around the state, I've had the chance to meet thousands of Georgians see
43

where they live and what makes them tick. This has given me insights into Georgia that I wish I had the time to fully share with everyone, but let me give you the "Cliff Notes." Georgia has good people. This is a good state and the nation's ninth largest and growing a state that refuses to let go of an ingrained "can do" attitude. I've commented on this spirit often, and I just can't think of an idea that would be too big for this state to consider. Again, national rankings give us a good "place marker" for how our efforts stack up against national peer institutions. That's why I note with caution that Georgia continues to belong to a very elite group of just three states which can boast two or more public universities in the nation's top 20 such institutions. The Georgia Institute of Technology ("GIT") moved up to ninth place from tenth last year, but the University of Georgia has slipped from eighteenth to twentieth. This does not necessarily mean that UGA's academic quality has slipped. On the contrary, UGA's Honors Program scored a scholarship "grand slam," with its students' having been awarded Rhodes, Marshall,Goldwater,and Truman Scholarshipsthis year. Only three other universities -- Harvard, Yale, and Brown -- can make this claim. But it does mean that some other state, some other system, some other institution has made the commitment and the investment for quality. It is a reminder that we do not live in a static world. Someone's always trying harder, and we cannot be complacent.
It is important that we take a moment to reflect on some accomplishments realized at the System level. And in this regard, we do have some very significant achievements that help us advance toward our goal of "creating a more educated Georgia." Our Intellectual Capital Partnership Program ("ICAPP") office continues to help the Georgia economy in significant ways. More than 600 Georgians will become licensed health professionals (registered nurses, pharmacists, medical technologists) through the ICAPP Health Professionals Initiative by summer of 2005. And just one year ago this month, I charged the African-American Male Initiative task force, led by Arlethia Perry-Johnson, Associate Vice Chancellor for Media and Publications, with its responsibilities in this key area of priority for the Board. Currently, six pilot projects, again funded by the Board, are underway on six campuses to help recruit and retain African-American males in the University System. In December 2003, we learned from the National Science Foundation that a yearlong effort to secure a major federal grant for our PRISM effort had been successful. PRISM stands for Partnership in Reform in Science and Mathematics. This $34.6 million five-year grant will underwrite a statewide educational reform initiative in math and science at the K-12 level. PRISM is the brainchild of Dr. Jan Kettlewell, Associate Vice Chancellor for Academic Affairs and Co-Facilitator of the Georgia P-16 Initiative, and will be administered by our P16 program. During the year, the System also was awarded two federal teacher recruitment grants totaling over $4 million. And to date, more than 400 public school administrators have participated in programs sponsored by Georgia's Leadership Institute for School Improvement, which is administered by the University System. This program is funded in
44

part by the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation. I've had the opportunity to participate in some of these Leadership Institute programs. I can tell you this effort is going to fundamentally change how we prepare school leaders.
The Georgia Public Library System received national recognition. The Clayton County Library System's Riverdale Branch Library received a 2003 Library Building Award, sponsored by the American Institute of Architects and the American Library Association. And the Southwest Georgia Regional Library System, headquartered in Bainbridge, received the National Library Award from the Institute of Museum and Library Services. The award was part of a White House ceremony presided over by First Lady Laura Bush. Another mark of our quality as a System is in the caliber of our students. Our fall 2003 enrollment hit another all-time high, reaching 247,020 students. This continues a three-year upward trend in enrollment. In addition, we are annually serving 1.2 million Georgians through Continuing Education and lifelong learning. But as quantity continues to increase, so does quality. The average composite SAT score of our first time, full-time freshmen jumped six points from fall 2002 to fall 2003. It now stands at a record high 1036. And we are keeping more of our students. We are retaining almost 81% of our first-time, full-time freshmen. Retention is another critical measure of quality, but we must look further. A great system is one that produces the best graduateswho can move into jobs throughoutthe state. We are not pleased with our graduation and completion rates. I am appointing a task force to study graduation and completion and devise a plan for improving them chaired by Provost Ronald Henry of Georgia State University. Wanda Barrs, Chair of the State Board of Education, has agreed to serve on the task force. Yet another measure of quality is the System's national and international reputation as a good place to conduct research. As you heard yesterday, between fiscal years 1999 and 2003, our external funding dollars jumped 49.7%. We generated $861 million for fiscal year 2003.
This System continues to do its job of providing access and quality at every level. We are in the midst of an unprecedented surge in demand for our services, one that shows no signs of abating. That's good news for this Board and for Georgia. We need more Georgians participating in higher education and earning degrees. But the timing of this surge in demand couldn't be worse in terms of the state's ability to provide the necessary resources. Over the same time period that we have added two and one-half GITs, cumulative budget cuts are the equivalent of the state appropriation for 21 of our institutions! That is truly the essence of our management dilemma as we move forward: the steadily widening gap between students on our campuses and the state dollars available to serve them with continued high and expected levels of academic quality. It is the biggest challenge we face. I am grateful that those elements I've discussed today our governance structure, this Board, our presidents, faculty and staff are of exceptional quality. These elements have enabled us to meet this challenge over the past two years with strong and effective management. And we made one early decision that has been critical: to establish a set of budget principles that have guided
45

our decision-making.The first and primary principle is the understandingthat we protect the classroom first. This is critical for our students and for our reputation as a System.
We continue to have a close and effective partnership with the Governor and the General Assembly. You heard from the Governor's lips his belief in the importance of the University System to this state's economic future. We have demonstrated our ability to be good team players and to be effective and efficient managers. As I've recounted to you in recent months, we have undertaken a number of internal efforts on both the System and institutional levels to be good and efficient managers. Efforts such as regionalization and "barnacle scraping" have and continue to provide tangible savings and recommendations for possible future action. Your new program to identify and recognize operational best practices at the institutional level is off to a good start, with eight institutions singled out this past October. We have a large and growing number of unfilled and vacant faculty positions. We currently have over 1,000 vacant faculty positions in our universities. A significant number of our presidents, provosts, and department heads have stepped in to fill the gap by adding teaching duties to their other administrative responsibilities. In fall 2002, one-third of our presidents were teaching classes. Additionally, 50% of our provosts, 75% of our deans, and 95% of our department heads are also back in the classroom. We are also using more parttime instructors than ever before, and we don't want to do that any more than absolutely necessary. Looking ahead, we need to continue our efforts to be more efficient and effective. In February, we will come forward with our statewide assessment project as a key mechanism to coordinate state needs, student demands, and existing resources in the most efficient way possible. With the enrollment growth coming our way, to be ready, we will be required to do careful work across many areas enrollment services, academics, the Office of Information and Instructional Technology, operations, and facilities to ensure we have the resources and facilities to serve students. Frankly, we cannot make the needed progress toward becoming the nation's premier University System if we don't have the commitment and the plan to provide state-of-the-art facilities. And we must continue to work with our funding partners to develop new approaches to using the formula to help fund quality improvements and to reward quality in the System.
Finally, we need to help Georgia focus on the educational big picture. Last year, in my State of System remarks, I said it was critical that efforts get underway to improve Georgia's educational attainment rate. It's simply at an unacceptable level compared to our peer states and the national average if Georgia is going to continue to be economically competitive. It's a focus embedded in our strategic plan. It is our mission statement: "Creating a more educated Georgia." We are participating in one of the strongest partnerships Georgia has ever seen on behalf of this state and its students. This partnership is designed to dramatically improve Georgia's educationalparticipation and attainmentrates. Earlier, I said I didn't think there was an idea too big for Georgia. Well, this is a big idea and we have people across Georgia, from all walks of life, ready and eager to go. I look forward in the coming year of
46

bringing you greater detail on this initiative. The University System of Georgia must play a leadership role in this effort. It is what is expected of this Board historically and by the nature of its stature in the state.
Georgia understands that education is the fault line separating winners and losers. We must make the case that resources are needed to put more Georgians on the right side of that fault line. And in this regard, we must work with our funding partners to begin to reverse the recent trend of declining investment in public higher education. Frankly, I've grown concerned about these trends. Our share of the state's budget is lower than it has been since 1967, and it is time now for that trend to be reversed. I believe we have support for that in the state even in a time of declining budgets. I believe there is an understanding that if this state is going to move forward,it must focus on long-terminvestmentand not just short-term satisfaction. Long-term investment for the growth of this state, and the success of this state, rests in the hands and on the shoulders of higher education. We must all work together hand in glove as we convince the leadership of this state that we are going to move this state forward.
In conclusion, the kinds of items you are authorizing and developing are the right kinds of items. This Board of Regents continues to stay on the path of "creating a more educated Georgia." You are facing tough decisions that are put on the table, and you are making the right decisions. I want you to know how much I appreciate you as your Chancellor. There are places around the country where people are panicking during the tough times. Quality is going away, and they are just doing what they can to get through the day without thinking about the long term. This Board thinks big, and on behalf of all of us in the University System of Georgia, I want you to know how much we appreciate you and thank you for your good work.
STRATEGIC PLANNING COMMITTEE, "COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE"
Chair Harris next convened the Strategic Planning Committee as a Committee of the Whole and turned the Chairmanship of the meeting over to Regent Leebern, the Chair of the Committee.
Chair Leebern said that at this meeting, the Senior Vice Chancellor for Academics and Fiscal Affairs, Daniel S. Papp, would discuss the changing face of education in the University System of Georgia.
Dr. Papp explained that he would be discussing three different areas. First, he would discuss admissions and graduation comparisonsover time. Then, he would discuss educationalopportunities that are available in and beyond the classroom. Finally, he would present some issues for the Board of Regents to resolve, many of which will be addressed next month in Chancellor Meredith's statewide assessment presentation.
47

Dr. Papp began discussingthe admissions and graduations data. He reported that in 1995, before the System implemented its heightened admissions standards, there were 25,570 freshmen enrolled in the System. They had an average SAT score of 998, and 27% of them required learning support ("LS"). Only 76% of them had completed the college-preparatory curriculum ("CPC"), which then consisted of four English courses, three mathematics courses, three social science courses, and two modern language courses. In 2002, there were 32,002 freshmen with an average SAT score of 1038. Only 15% of them needed LS, and 90% of them had completed the CPC, which then had increased by one additional mathematics course. In fall 2003, there were 34,454 freshmen in the University System with an average SAT score of 1071. Again, only 15% of them required LS, and 90% of them had completedthe CPC. So, the System's average SAT score has increased significantly.The System raised its requirements, and the students in the State of Georgia are responding.
One of the reasons this occurred, Dr. Papp explained, is the raised admissions standards that were gradually implemented between 1996 and 2002. The Board of Regents consciously chose to phase in higher admissions standards so that K-12 students would have time to prepare themselves for the higher standards that would be fully implemented in 2002. There is also no doubt that the HOPE Scholarship program has been a critical factor in influencing a higher percentage of better students to stay in Georgia, he said. The improved quality of the System's institutions also plays a role in attracting better students. Over the past decade, all System institutions have been on an upward trend with better students and better salaries to attract better faculty and administrators. Higher education is a reputation-driven industry, and this improved quality is due in part to reputation and in part to the quality of the faculty, students, and administration. The University System has been balancing quality and access. As part of the heightened admissions standards, one of the conscious efforts of the Board of Regents was to move the education of LS students in particular increasingly to the two-year institutions and have the research institutions concentrate more on research and the state and regional universities provide additional educational opportunities. This conscious division of the University System has achieved good success. As a result, the University System of Georgia is not what it used to be.
Dr. Papp next discussed graduation and retention rates. The System's retention rate has increased from 73.6% in 1996 to 80.7% in 2003. As a result of higher admissions standards, the System is retaining more students. The numberof baccalaureatedegrees awarded has also increasedfrom 19,608 in 1996 to 22,200 in 2003. However, the System's graduation rates are still not where we want them to be. The graduation rate was 48.7% in 1996 and 50.3% in 2003. The Chancellor is appointing a task force to study what needs to be done to improve the System's graduation rate. Dr. Papp noted that already the graduation rate has improved as a result of the System's increased admissions standards. One of the things the task force will need to examine is the differences among the six-year graduation rates of the major gender and ethnic groups. One of the reasons the System is not doing better with graduationrates is that there are few support programs for students beyond the freshman year, but there are just no funds available for such programs. Another reason may be personal economics. There are many students in the System who find it necessary to work while going to
48

school, which may distract them from their studies. There are other students who may not have the money to stay in school at all, and so they go into the job market. There are other students who are not full-time students at all, and therefore, they are not as likely to graduate within six years. Other factors include student preparation level and course difficulty. There are challenges coming from the K-12 system that need to be addressed, said Dr. Papp. There are also students who entered before increased admissions standards were fully implemented, and it will take a while before the System is operating fully under the new standards. Finally, a changing student political culture may influence graduation rates. The concept of graduating from college in four years has somewhat fallen to the wayside throughout the nation, and therefore, national standards of measurement have moved from four-year to six-year graduation rates. However, this changed culture has altered student expectations.
Next, Dr. Papp discussed the educational opportunities provided to System students. He stressed that most of the education that takes place in the University System of Georgia occurs in traditional classrooms, but there is an incredible array of other opportunities as well. There have been changes in traditional classrooms. Cooperative education is playing an increasingly large role throughout the United States and in the University System, as are internships, research-based education, study abroad opportunities, distance learning, and graduate and professional education. Over the course of subsequent Board meetings this spring, people from the institutions will be coming to the Board meetings to discuss these types of opportunities in more detail.
With regard to the traditional classroom, Dr. Papp said that many institutions have in-residence instructors such as businesspersons, diplomats, and military officers. These are people who have been successful in other walks of life who are brought in by faculty and administrators to share their experiences with college students in order to apply theory to practice. Visiting lecturers are also employed for this purpose. For example, when Dr. Papp taught courses on strategic nuclear weapons, he would have visiting lecturers come in to discuss what it is really like to have duty on a nuclear missile submarine or on a B-52 squadron. The students were enthralled. Many faculty members are realizing that in the business world, there has been a shift toward team efforts. Therefore, they are now providing students with more opportunities for group/team projects. There is also cooperative education, which is long-term real-world work experience. Ordinarily, after spending a full freshman year at an institution, he or she may spend a semester working in the field and then back and forth from the classroom to the field. Such students are not likely to graduate in six years, but they will graduate with valuable work experience.The Georgia Institute of Technology ("GIT") leads the University System in cooperative education opportunities with 3,335 students and 700 employers participating in such programs in 2002. As a matter of fact, GIT has the largest non-required cooperative program in the nation. Dr. Papp noted that one of the often-overlooked advantages of cooperative programs is the money that students make. The GIT programs have provided students with $23 million in earnings. There are also sizeable programs at Armstrong Atlantic State University, Southern Polytechnic State University ("SPSU"), and Valdosta State University. Some students would rather have internships than participate in cooperative education.
49

Internships are short-term real-world work experiences for one or more semesters. There is close faculty oversight in most internships to provide a set of objectives for the experience. For example, students may work in Washington,D.C. congressionaloffices, Georgia legislativeoffices, CARE, the United Nations World Health Organization, Lockheed, and CNN.
Dr. Papp said that research-based education is done mainly, but not exclusively, at research institutions, there is close faculty-student collaborationto provide students the opportunity to learn to do research. This is done primarily at the junior and senior levels, and for the most part, researchbased education is targeted toward student support of faculty members conducting surveys, interviews, or laboratory work. In the area of study abroad, there are over 250 programs and over 4,000 participants a year. Dr. Papp said that the System is working to increase its programmatic scope and number of participants. He reported that the University of Georgia had recently been identified as one of the top ten public institutions in the nation in terms of study abroad opportunities, but all sectors of the System offer such opportunities.
Distance learning is any educational experience in which students and faculty are separated by time or distance. The System currently offers over 3,276 distance learning courses, or 2.9% of all courses. The Internet without doubt has been a tremendous boost to distance learning, said Dr. Papp. It provides the opportunity to reach students who are not on campuses. The University System's first fully distance learning program was the Master of Science in Quality Assurance at SPSU. The System now has 79 degree programs in which students can earn a degree fully online. With regard to graduate and professional programs, Dr. Papp reported that the System has experienced significant growth since 1995, but it has in experiencedleveling off or even a decline since 1992. This could be attributed to fundingor program mix. However,graduate degreesare criticalto the expansion of research funding. The System has had some very significant growth in external research funding in the past few years, but there are some issues to examine if the System wants to continue to expand.
In closing, Dr. Papp presented a number of issues for the Regents to consider. First, how can the System serve large and rapidly increasing numbers of students? How can it meet the different needs of a more diverse student body? How can the System increase graduation rates? How can it expand access to and utilizationof different educationalopportunities? Finally, how can the System provide the right mix of learning support, bachelor, graduate, and professional programs? Dr. Papp said that there are many issues to resolve and that the staff are looking to the wisdom of the Board.
Regent Jennings asked whether he could get a copy of the PowerPoint presentation, and Dr. Papp assured him that he would.
Regent NeSmith asked whether there is a mechanism to provide credit hours for internships and cooperative education.
50

Dr. Papp replied that most internships do in fact earn credit hours. However, in cooperative programs, the students are employed full-time and are working strictly for experience and pay.
Regent Jolly asked why postbaccalaureate degrees have declined in the last year.
Dr. Papp responded that there are many individual opinions, but there have not been any studies on the phenomenon yet. The staff are going to examine this issue and come back to the Regents with recommendations. He said there are theories regarding funding and capacity. For example, the research universities, which educated all of the doctoral and professional students, are at capacity.
Noting that the retention rates are measured from freshman to sophomore year, Regent Cater asked whether student attrition is happening after the sophomore year. He also asked whether there is data suggesting that the higher admissions standards have improved retention and graduation rates.
With regard to Regent Cater's first question, Dr. Papp said that there are data indicating that the primary loss of students is between the fall of the second year and the fall of the third year. With regard to Regent Cater's second question, Dr. Papp responded that the retention rates are much better following the implementation of the higher admissions standards and that graduation rates also appear to be improving. Nationally, there are many studies that show that a student's high school preparation level plays a significant role in college success and may be the best single indicator for student success in higher education.
Regent White asked whether it is true that offering distance learning makes higher education more accessible to students who might not otherwise be able to attend college because of its inherent flexibility.
Dr. Papp said that it is.
Regent White asked whether distance learning makes faculty more efficient. In other words, can a faculty member teach more courses via distance learning than in a traditional classroom setting?
Dr. Papp introduced the Assistant Vice Chancellor for Advanced Learning Technologies, Kris Biesinger, to answer this question.
Dr. Biesinger responded that a faculty member cannot teach more classes at a distance. Distance learning class sizes must stay relatively small, unless they have a graduate student to assist with the logistics associated with teaching.
Dr. Papp added that a faculty member might in fact have to have a smaller class because students may become less inhibited online and ask more questions of the instructor.
51

Regent White responded that is good. He asked whether the System saves money on facilities through distance learning programs.
Dr. Biesinger said that the System does save money on facilities, but it still must accommodate the needs of distance learning students.
Regent Pittard asked whether students are getting a less valuable education as a result of burgeoning enrollments, unfilled faculty positions, and the increased use of part-time faculty to teach.
Dr. Papp said that in some instances, they are. Administrators do their utmost to ensure that parttime faculty are of the highest quality, but the harsh reality is that administrators do not have the same level of influence over part-time faculty that they do over full-time faculty. Part-time faculty may well be dedicated to educating students, but they may not be. However, full-time faculty do a myriad of things beyond instruction. They also arrange internships and cooperative experiences, serve on committees,advise students, etc. Many part-time faculty do not do these things. Dr. Papp said there are some wonderful part-time faculty members, but if there are too many, educational quality may suffer. Some institutions may already be at that point.
Chancellor Meredith noted that the University System Office monitors the numbers of part-time faculty at each institution. He concurred that part-time faculty are not always as accessible to students as full-time faculty. Moreover, while the availability of qualified part-time faculty is much better in the metropolitan Atlanta area, it is not as good in rural areas.
Regent Pittard said that everyone is aware of the struggles in secondary education and that the saving grace for education in Georgia has been higher education. He wondered how future generations would look back on how the state got through this crisis in the best interest of the student. He encouraged the Regents to remind the legislators constantly what is happening.
Chancellor Meredith responded that it is an age-old debate whether to just fill the classroom or to hold on to quality. There is a debate going on at the K-12 level, which is short on teachers, and there is a proposal before the Professional Standards Commission to lower the bar for teachers to qualify to teach. The University System Office has taken a strong stand against that proposal. He said that education is more critical than ever before, and now is not the time to lower the bar for people who are teaching other people.
Dr. Papp added that the Associate Vice Chancellor for Strategic Research and Analysis, Cathie Mayes Hudson, had recently collected data on the increased use of part-time faculty in the System and that it will be very enlightening for the Regents.
Regent NeSmith noted that in his State of the System Address, the Chancellorhad said that even the deans and provosts are teaching classes. He said he thought that might not only help the current
52

situation, but also keep the administration in tune with what is going on in the classroom and what is the focus of higher education.
Regent Cleveland asked whether the System's graduation rates are comparable with graduation rates across the country.
Dr. Papp said that Georgia is forty-first among the states, which is low. However, he said, that he expects Georgia's graduation rates to improve as a result of the raised admissions standards and the Chancellor's initiative.
Regent Cleveland also asked whether students are tracked beyond six years to see whether they are graduating.
Dr. Papp responded that graduation rates are tracked out to 12 years, and the 12-year graduation rates are around 59%. So, students do persevere. He reiterated that these are the graduation rates of students who began as first-time full-time students. The fact that they persevere indicates that there are students who are dedicated even when they have to attend part-time or change majors.
Regent Hunt asked whether there are not some part-time faculty who are actually better but cannot obligate themselves to teaching full-time.
Dr. Papp replied that is true. In fact, some of the part-time faculty are superb.
Regent Jolly asked whether the System intends to expand the numbers of students taking advantage of distance learning opportunities.
Dr. Papp responded that the percentage of students who take courses via distance learning is likely to expand automatically. Some of that expansion is a function of students who are already enrolled at an institution. The question is whether the System should require students to take distance learning courses.
Chair Leebern suggested that the University System of Georgia should be competitive with other institutions, such as the University of Phoenix, that are offering degrees online. He also asked how many students are encouraged to study abroad in countries other than Western Europe.
Dr. Papp replied that one of the great successes of the Board's renewed emphasis on international education has been the emphasis on overseas education in places other than Europe. He called upon the Senior Advisor for Academic Affairs and Director of International Programs, Richard C. Sutton, to elaborate.
Dr. Sutton said that the System has an expanded number of study abroad destinations, and more
53

importantly, more students want to go outside of Western European locations.
Dr. Papp stated that Dr. Sutton has done a masterful job in coordination with international studies coordinators at the institutions to push in this direction.
Regent Hunt asked whether the Regents could have an educational session sometime on what exactly is involved in distance learning.
Dr. Papp replied that there would be a presentation on distance learninglater this spring and he could also arrange for an informational session at some other time. He said that Dr. Biesinger has done a wonderful job in this regard. Moreover, one of the reasons the System has 79 programs offered via distance learning is because the faculty have been converting their traditional offerings into online educational opportunities.
Chair Leebern said there might be retired faculty in the state who could be tapped to teach classes in the System.
Regent Carter shared that a parent had recently told him that students at some schools, not necessarily in the System, are being encouraged to take lighter course loads so that more students can be enrolled at the same time. He asked whether this is the case.
Dr. Papp responded that the University System of Georgia does not encourage students to take lighter loads. Rather, the institutions encourage students to take heavier loads to accelerate their time to graduation. He said he had not heard about this nationally either.
Regent Pittard asked whether some institutions in the United States impose fees on students who are still enrolled and have not graduated after four years.
Dr. Papp said that some do.
Chancellor Meredith agreed that there have been some experiments with that, but it is not widespread.
Dr. Papp said that some presidents have considereddifferent methods to accelerate graduationrates.
Seeing that there were no further questions or comments, Chair Leebern thanked Dr. Papp for this informative presentation and adjourned the meeting of the Strategic Planning Committee as a Committee of the Whole.
54

UNFINISHED BUSINESS
Chair Harris said that in the Regents' folders were reports of three actions taken by the Chancellor on behalf of the Board since the November 2003 meeting. These items required ratification by the Board. He asked Regent NeSmith to present these items to the Board.
Regent NeSmith reported that the Board had already approved the three items, but all of them required modifications, which Chancellor Meredith administratively approved, as follows:
Acquisition of Real Property,318 Tenth Street, Georgia Institute of Technology The purchase price of the property was increased from $227,670 to $252,670. The remaining actions and understandings contained in the original August 2003 Board action remain the same.
Rental Agreement, 130 North Irwin Street, Milledgeville, Georgia College & State University The number of parking spaces was decreased from 540 to 517. The remaining actions and understanding contained in the original August 2003 Board action remain the same.
Rental Agreement, 13040 Abercorn Street, Armstrong Atlantic State University The rental rate was increased by $3.98 per square foot because the original rent did not include operating expenses, including utilities, maintenance, janitorial, and pest control. The remaining actions and understanding contained in the original November 2003 Board action remain the same.
Regent Leebern asked why there was an increase in the rental agreement at AASU.
Regent NeSmith replied that the original item did not include maintenance costs.
Motion properly made and seconded, the Board ratified these actions taken by the Chancellor.
NEW BUSINESS
There was no new business at this meeting.
PETITIONS AND COMMUNICATIONS
Secretary Gail S. Weber announced that the next Board meeting would take place on Tuesday, February 3, and Wednesday, February 4, 2004, in the Board Room in Atlanta, Georgia. She noted that this is one week earlier than usual.
55

On January 20, 2004, at 10:50 a.m. in room 351 of the Capitol, Chancellor Meredith will give his fiscal year 2005 budget presentation between the Joint Appropriations Committee. She said that it is most helpful to the Chancellor to have Regents there to support the University System.
Secretary Weber noted that today was Georgia State University Day at the Capitol and the university hopes to have Regents attend. At 11:30 a.m., lunch will be served for the Regents and the executive committees of System institution foundations, followed by a presentation at noon on foundation governance by Indiana University Foundation President Curtis R. Simic, which was arranged by Chair Harris and Chancellor Meredith.
On Wednesday, February 11, 2004, at 6:00 p.m., there would be a reception hosted by the Department of Technical and Adult Education for the Board of Regents and the Board of Education. The legislative leadership will be invited, and it is important that Regents attend.
The Valdosta State University Chamber Singers had sent a note to the Regents to let them know that their tour of Italy had been a tremendous success.
Chair Harris encouraged the Regents to attend the presentation by Mr. Simic and to make the foundation representatives feel warmly at home.
Chancellor Meredith noted that this presentation was only for those invited and that large numbers of people were interested in attending. He then introduced Mr. Simic and welcomed him to the meeting.
ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business to come before the Board, the meeting was adjourned at approximately 11:25 a.m. on January 14, 2004.

s/ Joe Frank Harris Chair, Board of Regents University System of Georgia

s/ Gail S. Weber Secretary, Board of Regents University System of Georgia

56