Executive Committee of the State Board of Higher Education
Teleconference Meeting 15 April 2004
Approve placeholder legislature concepts. Because committees are still
studying these - these are placeholders that could easily go away once
the committee has come to a firmer position on what they want to do.
580/03 Ability to carry this out might depend on what IT is left in Chancellors
office - . Need time to develop potential. Richmond concerned about implementation.
Need to discuss costs. We have to discuss this more carefully. Draw resources
from other priorities? Students have information in a forward looking capacity.
In terms of other ones. Do they really require legislative action? Just
keeping our options option. No prejudice to removing one later. As these
go forward and their are more discussions - process to start to look at
them is very short. When come to board in may - where there are dollars
attached - will be policy package - another step in making a decision -
is this something that requires a legislative change - or is it a budget
change that can move forward without that. It is anticipated - with short
time frame we have - some of analysis not completed - put placeholders
out there. Not uncommon that they are withdrawn. In legislative process
- rough draft. Just a thoughtful process - because of DAS requirements
- just needs to be put in. Political downside to not expressing an interest
in continuing discussion with others who are interested if don't put them
in.
Desire of some of campuses to streamline administrative requirements -
require legislative change. Legislative advisory committee from OUS and
individual campuses - sent out a memo - came back with list of things -
base on governors guidelines - we got list and eliminated around 75% of
ideas - not politically feasible - of remaining list - several could be
handled administratively by board - a few legislative concepts advanced
- 5/6 - discussion legislative initiatives - didn't want to go forward
with placeholders - there is one of those - it is hoped that most of those
items that remained of interest will continue to be discussed - and try
to make changes thru other means than legislation - if do need legislative
change - governor's office keeps some general place holders - need governor's
consent to add another placeholder - it is possible - that is another outlet
for us. Also as budget legislation goes thru - if related to budget interest
- ways/means committee can deal with it. Or can go to senator or representative
and ask them to sponsor it. Needs board approval of course. Other safety
valves that are available.
There really is a general decision are not going to take legislative changes
in regularatory - could have put it in a placeholder - have we basically
decided we are not going to legislature to ask for any changes that require
legislative action?
Talked with John Yunker and Neil Bryant - on those legislative intiiatives
not to go forward.
John Yunker: Neil put it very well. Did go thru administrative flexibility
package with DAS and Governor and some conversations with legislature -
strong concensus - many issues - changing general fund bond match issue
or the rest would receive no support from legislature, governor, DAS -
with some many other items on the agenda should not persue administrative
flexibility initiatives in this session. Only one wanted to persue was
580-7.
As we go thru appropriate role for Chancellor's office. In next legislative
session may be requesting other administrative actions. May be premature
this session. As continue this analysis - as we find something that makes
sense - that we have the discussion and go to governor and use other placeholder
or option.
This was concept brought forward in last legislative session. Memorandum
of understanding. Hasn't worked as well as campuses had hoped. Allow campuses
to have more flexibility in contract review. Save money 400,000 but timing
of things getting done. Not use Att. J. Contract more than 75,000 has to
be reviewed. Discussions with Attorney General's office. Hopeful will be
sucessful. MardiLyn has had conversations. Helpful to have that legislative
concept as placeholder. Like you to reconsider that. Putting it in as a
placeholder doesn't mean will drop it as a bill but would like to have
that option and flexibility available. There is a need for greater flexibility
in retaining legal services. I am concerned they may have their hands tied
in providing services in a timely fashion. John Yunker. This was a major
concern with the Universities. Issue from other side. Need to have good
relation with Att. Gen. Has agreed with us - would need to revise processes
to provide better services. Put in a concept in want more delegation from
the AG's office might help in those negotiations. Don't have any problem
with concept with understanding can always withdraw it.
AUTHORIZES OUT TO EMPLOY OR RETAIN ATTORNIES AND ELIMINATE DOJ EFFICIENCY
REVIEWS ON LEGAL CONTRACTS.
