UNIVERSITY OF WEST ALABAMA
BOARD OF TRUSTEES
MEETING MINUTES
SEPTEMBER 30, 2003

TAKEN BY: MARGO N. BRYAN
NOTARY PUBLIC AND COURT REPORTER
P R O C E E D I N G S

MR. MINUS: We're called to order. I'll call the role. Dr. Oliviera?
DR. OLIVIERA: Present.
MR. MINUS: Mr. Watkins?
MR. WATKINS: Present.
MR. MINUS: Mr. Duke?
MR. DUKE: Here.
MR. MINUS: Mr. Keahey?
MR. KEAHEY: Here.
MR. MINUS: Mr. Spree? Mr.
Spree?
MR. SPREE: Here.
MR. MINUS: Mr. Smith?
MR. SMITH: Here.
MR. MINUS: Mr. Minus? Here.
Mr. Saad? Mr. Bunn? Mr. Umphrey? Ms.
Nolen? Mr. Hamrick? Quorum being present, we'll start. First item of business is that we will go into executive session. If you'll cut your cameras off and reporters excuse us.
MR. WATKINS: I make a motion to go into executive session.
MR. SMITH: I second it.
(EXECUTIVE SESSION WAS CALLED TO ORDER)
MR. MINUS: All right. I'm gone come with something here this morning right off the bat. Y'all have Dr. Holland's proposal in front of you and then I'm going to run down something that I've worked on, some with his help, some without. Keep in mind that this is contingent on those tuition increases being effective the fall semester. Bear with me. Let me get through with it and get through with it, we'll discuss it and we'll talk about it. Let me get through with it, okay. For 2003, 2004 budget to be same as 2002, 2003 to include budget resolution with the exception of what the Board adopted on September the 8th, 2003 and the following resolution: Number one: To remove item number six from resolution passed by Board on September the 8th, 2003. Item number six was the Board directing the president to come with a $250,000 recommendation in cost-cutting measures. Item number two: Change item number four to give the president the discretion on money moving auxiliary funds to the general fund. Item number four with our resolution on September 8th directed the president to remove $250,000 from our auxiliary account over to our general fund to replenish the reserve that we were spending. Item number three: Authorize staff pay raises. Item number four: --
MR. SMITH: Faculty pay raises, wasn't it?
MR. MINUS: No. We've already done faculty. We've already done faculty. This is a resolution as of today, now. We're not addressing anything that we did on September the 8th other than the first two items that we talked about. Number three: Authorize staff pay raises. Number four: Increase graduate school tuition by 15.5 percent. Number five: Increase undergraduate tuition by 35 percent. Number six: Increase student activity fee by $25 per semester to fund Job Ship program recommended by the SGA. I will say something about that. We have approximately 80 percent of our kids here on some kind of scholarship or grant. This $25 would go to a work program for that 20 percent of children who do not qualify for any scholarships or the parents are making too much money to qualify for grants. It would allow -- it would allow it to be put into a pool and allow these kids to do work programs around the campus and again, it was recommended by the student government association. Number seven: Eliminate effective January 1, 2004 $75,000 in funds for the UWA Regional Center for Community and Economic Development. In this year's budget, the governor's office cut $100,000. At a later time, they reinstated 25,000 of it. If y'all recall, they put 25 percent back into these programs to give them a quarter to try to find alternative funding. It is my understanding we were using that 100,000 for this community development and economic development program. And the last one on number eight it would increase residence hall rent by $150 per semester to be used for security, hall directors, and covering additional operating expenses. We have had -- from talking to the administration, we have had some complaints or concerns from parents about their children parking in these dormitories at night and going from the parking lot to the dormitories. This would allow us to hire two part-time security people that would be in these parking lots with these kids at night. It would also -- right now currently we have from time to time had trouble with our dormitories. Our hall directors right now are just plain students. There was studies done coordinated with the University of North Alabama, Jacksonville, and Montevallo. Those are the three comparable schools of our position and they have graduate students. It is the opinion of the administration that these students are much more mature and can handle situations a little better maybe than just a student in these halls and hopefully that would calm down some of the problems that we're having in these dormitories.
MR. WATKINS: Will it take all of that money to do that?
MR. MINUS: No, sir. It would take $50 to do the security. Excuse me.
MR. WATKINS: Will the balance of that money go to replenish the auxiliary fund in the event that the president in the exercise of his discretion decides to transfer some money from the auxiliary fund into the general fund?
MR. MINUS: That is the intent of your Chairman's motion. Yes, sir.
MR. WATKINS: How many rooms do we currently rent in our dorms?
MR. MINUS: It was about 60 percent. I think y'all said it was based on a thousand.
DR. HOLLAND: I don't know exactly. There are 140, for example, in Speith. I'm assuming that Seldon has a comparable number and then Stickney and Sisk are less than that, probably 250 all together. We typically have about 650 students on campus in dormitories.
MR. MINUS: The figures are based on a thousand residents over the fall and spring semesters.
MR. WATKINS: 500 and 500?
MR. MINUS: That's correct. Just to give y'all an interesting figure that was furnished to me yesterday by Dr. Taylor, I want to say two things. Number one, the University of West Alabama overall had a 17 percent increase in enrollment this fall. It was the largest of any institution in the State of Alabama. Our undergraduate enrollment was up considerably. The way I read it, approximately 93 kids. The other part of that -- and which is about 10 or 12 percent maybe. The other increase came through the CSU program, which is the internet program, and our graduate -- our graduate program. But I will show you why I recommended a 15 and a half percent increase for graduates versus a 5 percent for undergraduates. Undergraduate students on campus we have 570, which is 34 percent that live in these dormitory rooms. Local and off campus it's 420. In other words, they live in apartments or complexes around the community, which is 25 percent, and we have 41 percent commuters. That's with our undergraduate program. Well, those kids that's living on campus and living locally, they're going to spend money in our community and they're going to contribute to the economy. On your graduate student program, you have 3 percent, 13 graduate students out of 461 living on campus. You have 7 percent that live locally, but off campus and you have 90 percent that commute. So it was in the judgment of the Chair that the brunt of this tuition increase be bourn by the graduate students. And again, that was just my judgment. On our special audits and that's the -- I assume that's the CSU, Dr. Taylor? Naturally, 100 percent of those are all commuters. Giving you a breakdown of roughly 27 percent on campus, 21 percent local off campus, and 50 percent commutes. I thought those two printouts were quite interesting. All right. Now, to go back and this to include the president, please, and the provost, please, and any board members, we'll take these items one by one. If there's no question, I want a motion and a second. Maybe we need a motion and a second to get it before everybody. Is that what we need? Okay. Is there a motion to the proposal that I have made to the Board?
MR. SPREE: You want a motion to discuss?
MR. MINUS: Well, no. You need a motion to adopt and then a second and then you discuss and amend or vote it down or however you want to do it.
MR. PRUITT: You have to have a motion to get it on the floor.
DR. OLIVIERA: I move to discuss -- that we discuss the present budget.
MR. MINUS: We're gone discuss it all.
MR. KEAHEY: I make a motion we adopt the recommendations to the budget as proposed by the Chairman.
MR. MINUS: Is there a second?
DR. OLIVIERA: I'll second it.
MR. MINUS: The motion has been made by Keahey, seconded by Dr. Oliviera and it's before the Board now. So let's go item by item if you would. Take the president's --
MR. SMITH: Mr. Chairman?
MR. MINUS: Yes, sir.
MR. SMITH: Might I make just an opening statement here on what we're talking about?
MR. MINUS: Yes, sir, please.
MR. SMITH: As you all know, I'm violently opposed to a tuition increase of any sort. I never made any bones about that. I think that we need to look at how we operate within what we're doing and what we're charging students and families to come to school here and to go to every length to try to do that without putting more of a burden on them. I know we talked about three million dollars being out there in student loans and grants and all that, but still and all, that's either federal grants or that's loans that these students are gone have to pay back. I think that responsibly acting that we can come up with a budget today without a tuition increase in it, but I think Richard, it's gone take you and David getting involved and talking about some things that we can do to make that happen. And I want to see -- and when we leave here today, I want to see us all have put forth our best effort at doing that because I don't -- I know the law about we're responsible for the budget of the school and I don't think that we've had the proper input to pass a budget today, though I know that responsibly we've got to put a budget in place today. Now, I'm gone be opposed to a tuition increase of any kind and you can count that when we vote on this. But next year, the good Lord willing, we're not going to come down to this point again to where I don't know enough about what's going on in the school to be able to responsibly react to a budget for this school. And I'm not pointing any fingers and I'm not blaming anybody. But this man right year, Mr. Mann Minus, our chairman, has done everything in his power to try to put together a budget for this school for this coming year and he's done that, Richard, with no cooperation. Let me just make you a promise. Next year we're gone come to this point and we're not gone do that and I mean that. I'm not being ugly and I'm not pointing fingers and I'm not being unduly harsh on anybody. But you're responsible to this Board for this budget and when people come and tell me that we micromanage, that's wrong because I wouldn't have no part of micromanaging for what we're talking about.
DR. HOLLAND: May I respond?
MR. SMITH: You certainly may.
DR. HOLLAND: I thought it was my responsibility to propose a budget and then you react to that and this is the budget and there was an earlier version of this budget. As far as cost-saving measures, let me tell you what we've done if you'll just look. Since 1991, we have dropped 19 programs at this institution, those are majors, minors and so forth, but we've eliminated them. But that has saved a great deal of money. Since I became resident, we have merged two academic units, eliminated a chair position, a secretarial position. And in academic support, which is in Dr. Taylor's area, we have eliminated one full position. In institutional advancement, we have eliminated a full-time position. In the president's office, we have eliminated a half a position. This budget that I have before you now, the earlier version, contained an additional $18,000 in expenses, programs in liberal arts, natural sciences, math, and counseling center, $10,000 for athletic travel, 1,500 for alumni. We've eliminated all of that. I, like you, feel a responsibility to this institution and the students. I in no way want to present a budget that puts them at a disadvantage for coming here. But I also tell you that if we are going to grow as an institution, there's certain, you know, resources you have to have.
MR. SMITH: Absolutely.
DR. HOLLAND: And we have also always been at a disadvantage as far as budgets. If you look back over the last three years due to proration and state budgets, we have lost over $600,000 to operate this institution. And I spent time with the parents and the students at orientation talking about why they come here is cost is the fourth issue they really talk about. The first one is the campus and the people; the second one is the quality of their educational experience; the third is close to home; and then fourth and cost and I recognize that. But we want them to have a quality education and it does cost money to do that. And I wish I could propose a budget that called for no increase. But if you will look nationwide 49 states have raised tuition. Every institution in the State of Alabama is raising tuition because they're no longer state resources even federal resources to a certain extent have been reduced. So this budget is just realistic as far as our current needs. And if you go and start cutting, I ask you where do you want to cut. You know, when you look at the academic areas, the different departments, athletic and non athletic support units, which ones do you want to cut because that then has an impact on recruiting students and keeping students here.
MR. SMITH: Okay. One other thing. We're talking about 15 and a half percent increase in tuition?
MR. MINUS: Yes, sir.
MR. SMITH: We're talking about $125 dorm increase. We're talking about a $25 Job Ship increase or fee. Now, I don't understand these things that we talked about. We talked about the $125 dorm fee.
MR. WATKINS: Actually, for a point of clarification. We're not talking about a 15.5 tuition increase if we're talking about Mann's proposal. We're talking about a 5 percent tuition increase for undergraduates and 15.5 for graduates with these additional fees. Dr. Holland has not requested any additional fees. He's simply requested a 15.5 percent tuition increase for undergraduate students. So it's really two separate things.
MR. SMITH: So what we're talking about is we're talking about 5 percent for undergraduates. We're talking about 15 and a half percent for graduates and then we're talking about 125 dorm fee and we're talking about the 25 job fee. Well look, the job fee thing coming from the student government association, that ain't no problem. We need to do that and the part on the dorms, you know, I understand that. I've been around here enough that I understand the situation that we're talking about on the dorms. I don't have a problem with that. Mr. Chairman, --
MR. MINUS: Sir.
MR. SMITH: -- where are we coming up with the difference from the 5 percent increase? If you will, talk to us about that.
MR. MINUS: Yes, sir. Let me -- I apologize that.
DR. HOLLAND: And let me just preface that.
MR. MINUS: Yes, sir.
DR. HOLLAND: A problem I have with that is remember this charge is per hour. That's how the tuition is computed. Undergraduates take 12, 18 hours. A graduate student takes 3 to 5, so you can't generate very much money at charging graduate students 15 because they take a third of the course load as undergraduates. So I don't understand the differential there. You're not generating
very much money.
MR. MINUS: Let me --
DR. HOLLAND: If graduate students took as many hours as undergraduates, then you could do that.
MR. MINUS: Well, let me first say this and then we'll get into it. The only reason that I came with any tuition increase at all was because of the $304,000 unfunded mandate from the State of Alabama. If we had not had that, it is my thought that we could have passed a budget without any tuition increase. But with a 300, over $300,000 unfunded mandate, we're in the position where either we're gone have to raise tuition or we're gone have to cut jobs. And I will ask y'all as a Board to consider what kind
of economic impact that would be for this community if we had to cut jobs. I have said this to several board members in the past that that in my judgment is just not an option for me living here four generations with my family, graduate from this university. Cutting positions here is just not an option for me. It would be very difficult for me to do. And I had something worked out. Dr. Holland didn't agree with it. Y'all don't agree with it and I can understand all that. But I had something worked out that we could have possibly gotten by with the exception of this $304,000 unfunded mandate. To address Dr. Holland's question about undergraduates -- I mean graduate tuition, I just took the figure they gave me on what the graduate student tuition increase generated and took 15
percent of it and came up with $12,000. Again, I did that on my own. I assumed that was the right thing to do. Yes, ma'am.
DR. OLIVIERA: Dr. Holland, did you make all the administrative cuts you could make before presenting this?
DR. HOLLAND: I just told you of all those I made since I was president of about six positions all together and not in the faculty side, in the staff support side.
DR. OLIVIERA: Because we talked about, you know, making a level funding for staff and faculty, dean positions and things like that. And when we cut some of those, does that leave anything or do anything?
DR. HOLLAND: We talked about that. And when you make those adjustments, you're only talking all together about $20,000.
MR. SMITH: Richard, what is our faculty-staff ratio?
DR. HOLLAND: If you look at the full-time faculty, it's right at 100 and then we have about 10 to 11 adjunct all together and then we have right at 168 staff positions.
MR. SMITH: So we've got 268 --
DR. HOLLAND: Employees.
MR. SMITH: -- employees and what, 97 of them is full-time faculty; is that right?
DR. HOLLAND: Well, probably closer to 100.
MR. SMITH: David, what kind of ratio is that? Have you figured that up?
DR. TAYLOR: No. It's about what, one, one and a half.
MR. MINUS: You through, John?
MR. SMITH: I think -- yeah, go ahead.
MR. MINUS: Okay. I want you to look at the proposed budget that Dr. Holland passed out to you and I'm going to go down it line for line and show you where I came up with the fonts. Utilities were the same. Insurance, we addressed that at our last board meeting. Faculty, we addressed that at our last board meeting. The staff was included in my resolution for today. On your scholarship programs, as you know, if you increase tuition, you increase the cost of scholarships. So if your football program, for example, is getting 35 scholarships under today's tuition and we increase tuition 15 percent, then they wouldn't get but 32 scholarships if your money stayed the same. That's your 59 and 75. I changed that to 43630 by lowering your 15.5 percent requested tuition increase to 5 percent. So you had a savings of $92,000 there.
MR. SMITH: That's on both of them?
MR. MINUS: Yes, sir. Total savings of 92,000. The unfunded mandates, there's just not anything we can do about that. I mean, that's just how it is. If you go down the other list that was submitted there, it is my understanding that with the exception of the job scholarships on Congressman Davis' office, Artur Davis' office, every one of those was recommendations made by SACS at our last accreditation visit. We kept all of those in place. So if you look at Dr. Holland's $800,000 figure at the bottom that he's looking for, here's what we did under my proposal. We had a 5 percent tuition increase.
MR. WATKINS: Mr. Chairman, excuse me a second. Am I correct that you're saying that the budget resolution that you're proposing would keep those items under other on the budget document that Dr. Holland has presented to us?
MR. MINUS: Yes, sir, it does.
MR. WATKINS: Where in your resolution does it do that?
MR. MINUS: Well, it says -- well, it doesn't, so we need to add that. That's a very good point. And we'll go --
MR. WATKINS: It's your intention when you proposed this budget resolution to include --
MR. MINUS: My intention on this budget resolution to come up with Dr. Holland's $800,000 on this bottom line and here's how I did it. Add a 5 percent tuition increase for undergraduates. We have authorized the use of $250,000 of our reserve. We have scholarship savings of $92,000. You have savings of approximately $45,000 from previous resolutions the Board adopted on September 8th. We eliminated the community -- all we did with the funds going to the University of West Alabama Community and Economic Development -- Regional Center for Community Economic Development is we just -- it was cut from us in our Montgomery budget, so it was cut here. That's all we did, the $75,000. And then using the figures -- and again, I absolutely could be wrong. But using the tuition figures estimated here on the chart, on the 15.5 percent for graduate students, I just took 15.5 percent times this figure here and came up with $120,000.
MR. DUKE: You want to pass out a copy of that, please.
MR. MINUS: Yes, sir. This is the only copy I've got.
DR. OLIVIERA: Of the recruiting and scholarships, how much is recruiting and how much is scholarships?
DR. HOLLAND: On which one?
DR. OLIVIERA: Under the --
MR. MINUS: Let me get through, Doris, and I swear to you we'll do whatever you -- I promise you. You add those figures up and you get $842,000. That's roughly $42,000 more than what Dr. Holland has requested. I left it at that because I wasn't real sure of my figures. All I was trying to do -- I know everybody here is concerned about tuition increases to include the administration and I know this board is. I also know that this board or the administration had no -- nothing at all to do with this over $300,000 unfunded mandates dictated by the State of Alabama. If we are required to raise tuition 5 percent, we will still be -- still be the least expensive -- we'll still be the best education buy for a parent's, mama's and daddy's dollar. Hopefully it would not affect any of our quality of education. Something else and this weighed heavy on me. It really weighed heavy on me when I was trying to work this up is next year. If what we're being told is true, next year this board is gone be faced with two horrendous decisions. One is we're gone have to replenish that reserve. Now we've put $50,000 a year -- if the figures of 1,000 rooms per year is right with this dorm increase, we've put $50,000 a year to replenish that. It will be there to replenish that. But that would take four or five years. The biggest thing we've got to worry about is -- I'm reading the same thing you guys have been reading. You know, we could be sitting here dropping dead at 20 percent increase next year just to bring us back up to the level that we want to stay at. I'm sure next year we're going to have a tremendous increase in health insurance cost again. I don't know what the answer is. You guys -- some of you were with me when we met with the Governor and they indicated that this health insurance when we told them and I told them that that was our biggest problem over here, some kind of cost control measure on health insurance and they indicated to us that they were working on that. That that was a top priority for them. Going into the PEEHIP. Is that what you call it, PEEHIP?
DR. HOLLAND: PEEHIP.
MR. MINUS: I don't think it's gone happen. I don't think it's gone save us any money. I don't know what to do. Right now I would personally oppose bidding it out. I think Mr. Watkins is right. We may say $50,000 this year and next year and then they're gone wack us and we're not gone have the benefits that we currently have. I just don't know. You guys that do personal, I know mine, Nat's, all of ours are going up. So I don't know if there's anything we can do.
MR. WATKINS: Mr. Chairman, I want to start by thanking you and Dr. Holland and Dr. Taylor for the work that y'all have put in to get us to this point. I understand, John, your point of view. I don't want to raise tuition. We're serving a lot of people who are on -- who are getting money from the Feds or from somewhere to come to school here. A lot of them are first-generation students. I don't want to do anything that's going to prevent them or deter them from getting an education. That's who we serve. By the same token, I think that we've done all that we can do, all that can be done to cut costs at this point. Today is September the 30th. Tomorrow is October the 1st, the beginning of our new fiscal year. I think it is our responsibility to pass a budget that will enable this school to continue to do what it's been doing and to continue to move forward under Dr. Holland's leadership. I think a 5 percent tuition increase is the bare minimum that we could get by with. I think to try to get by at this point with these unfunded mandates and the other costs that we've had to absorb that anything less would not be workable. I don't think it would work.
MR. MINUS: Nat, may I say something? You guys understand this, all right. With what I presented to you, Dr. Holland doesn't like it. They don't like to spend their reserves. John doesn't like it because he's dead set against tuition increases. I don't like it because I'm not gone support people losing their jobs up here. Well, what the hell are we gone do? I mean, if you don't believe anything I tell you, you can believe this, we had it without a tuition increase until these unfunded mandates came along and there's nothing anybody can do about that.
MR. DUKE: Excuse me.
MR. MINUS: Yes, sir.
MR. DUKE: Is what you're proposing gone raise the $303,000 to cover the unfunded mandates?
MR. MINUS: Yes, sir.
MR. DUKE: How much have you figured it would increase?
MR. MINUS: What I'm proposing, Dwight, would cover the full $800,000 which included the $304,000 mandate on Dr. Holland's proposed budget. It funded it by cuts and it funded it by tuition increases.
MR. DUKE: How low does your proposal lower the $300,000 increase?
MR. MINUS: I didn't understand that question.
MR. DUKE: What you're proposing is not an $800,000 increase; is that correct?
MR. MINUS: No, sir, no, sir.
MR. DUKE: How much is your proposal going to increase the budget?
MR. WATKINS: The 5 percent --
MR. DUKE: 5 percent and 15 percent --
MR. WATKINS: Will generate roughly 275,000 to $300,000.
MR. MINUS: The revenue measures are this: 5 percent tuition on undergraduates, 15 and a half percent on graduates. Then you do -- and I think John is right about that. You do have to talk and consider the fact that we're putting an additional $25 fee on them for the job program and we're putting an additional $150 fee on them per semester now for the rooms. Those fees -- y'all keep in mind those fees, the $25 fee for the job program and the $150 fee for the dormitories are going directly to benefit those kids either with jobs or security or some program that's gone directly benefit those children. Now the SGA did not recommend -- Dr. Holland did not -- listen, that $150 on that tuition in -- on that dormitory rent was 100 percent me. It was not discussed with Dr. Holland. It was not --
DR. HOLLAND: The amount was not. The need was.
MR. MINUS: Well the need was.
DR. HOLLAND: Yes.
MR. SMITH: Recommended from the students of this school?
MR. MINUS: That's correct.
DR. HOLLAND: Yeah.
MR. MINUS: And, John, you understand some parents, too. They were concerned about their children. But to go back to your tuition increase. Here we are, okay. We spent our reserve, which I can understand he doesn't support. We've raised tuition. I can understand you don't support. And here I'm not gone support, not that this means anything, but I'm not gone support and y'all are not either. Hell, you're born and raised here, the loss of jobs up here. So with those three things in mind here, draw something better and I'll vote for it.
DR. HOLLAND: Let me just raise one or two questions.
MR. WATKINS: I'm gonna have to leave. I left court to get here and she'll probably put me in jail when I get back. I would like to call the question let's go ahead and take a vote on this.
MR. MINUS: The question has been called for which cuts off debate.
MR. SMITH: Which proposal? That is on Mann's proposal.
MR. MINUS: This is on my proposal.
MR. WATKINS: The motion is on
the floor. The motion is seconded.
MR. MINUS: All in favor say aye.
DR. OLIVIERA: That's your proposal?
MR. SPREE: Now wait now. We -- what did we ever decide about whether it's gone by retroactive or not?
MR. MINUS: This is retroactive.
MR. PRUITT: I have to ask. Is this the only thing that's been given out?
DR. HOLLAND: No. There were three sheets.
MR. SPREE: Well, I haven't seen any of them. Don't we need to know that?
MR. MINUS: Can you put your call for the question right there until we get two minutes worth of work here? Let's make sure that legally we're gone be all right.
DR. OLIVIERA: What we're voting on is what you just proposed?
MR. MINUS: Yes, ma'am. What we're voting on, Doris, is my proposal. And if you don't want to do it, don't do it, Hon.
DR. HOLLAND: Can I discuss one part of that?
MR. MINUS: Yes, please.
DR. HOLLAND: You are recommending closing our center for community and economic development.
MR. MINUS: I am recommending that we fund it for the next three months.
DR. HOLLAND: That's closing it. But what you -- this institution historically has not served this region. It has not worked with the governmental agencies in this region and through this center we're now working with Congressman Davis' office. We have a Sumter County Health Care committee that we're working with and we have raised $65,000 for that group. We are opening a truck driver training school through this group, through this center. We are receiving a $65,000 grant from BellSouth through this center. There's a great deal of interest in the Black Belt and you hear all the time about these Black Belt funds that are coming into this area. Without this office, we do not participate. This money is going to go to Tuskeegee. It's going to go to Alabama State. It's going to go to Auburn. It's going to go to Alabama and we're going to sit here once again as an institution not serving the needs of this area. This office has two people in it who are constantly working with city and county and federal and state agencies raising money for this area. We have worked with the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation to raise money for health care in the Black Belt. We are right now being considered as the center for two big programs with health care in the South, in the Black Belt. If you eliminate this, we're out of the ballgame on all of that. We just lose all of that.
MR. WATKINS: With all of this Black Belt money floating around and all the good that this institution is doing and the center is doing, surely we'd be able to replace that funding, wouldn't we?
DR. HOLLAND: Not if you cut out $75,000 you can't because the money that's coming in is restricted for health care use in Sumter County or in this West Alabama Regional Alliance, the five counties we work with. We also are a member on the commission on the future of East Mississippi, West Alabama out of this agency --
MR. WATKINS: Do you not think that between now and the end of this year because I believe this takes effect January 1 that we could come up with some way to replace this funding?
DR. HOLLAND: I don't see how you'd come up to 75,000.
MR. SPREE: If we sent to 6 percent, 5 and a half percent, 7 percent, what would cover it to keep it?
MR. MINUS: 75,000 would take an additional percent probably.
DR. HOLLAND: You're taking away the regional role of this university if you do that.
MR. MINUS: Well, Dr. Holland, we just got this last year.
DR. HOLLAND: Yes. Because we were the last institution in the state and we have done more -- you want us to just sit here and not work with commissions?
MR. MINUS: Go ahead, John.
MR. SMITH: Richard, I've heard more about it today than I have ever. We need to know. I want to tell you
something. I know the work that you've done.
MR. MINUS: Y'all don't say that.
MR. SMITH: Listen to me, though. To try to pull this together and to work with this and to try to get us a budget that we can work with. And as opposed as I am to a tuition increase, I understand why you're talking about 5 percent in tuition increase. I understand that. But for new programs as strapped as we are and as strapped as this whole state is -- and I understand. Believe me. I understand the importance of working with this community. I want to let's press on with the call for the question, but I want to ask you to take this next three months and see what you can do and call on some people to help you, okay, and try to replace that.
DR. HOLLAND: You gone go to the state government to get it?
MR. SMITH: Richard, there's a lot of places you can get it. I'm going to refer it back to your call for the question.
MR. SMITH: All right. The question is before the Board -- are we ready to --
MR. SMITH: Mann, Drayton has still got some questions about the legality on the retroactive on the tuition increase. I think we need that.
MR. DUKE: I think we need to go in executive session to discuss it.
MR. KEAHEY: I second it.
MR. MINUS: The motion to go into executive session has been seconded. All in favor say aye.
ALL MEMBERS: Aye.
MR. MINUS: All opposed. Well, let's do it then.
(EXECUTIVE SESSION)
MR. MINUS: The question has been called for on the motion of Mr. Keahey. Seconded by Dorris Oliviera. Question called for by Mr. Watkins. All in favor say aye.
ALL MEMBERS: Aye.
MR. MINUS: All opposed say no. The ayes have it. One question here. Yes, sir.
(At this time, Nathan G. Watkins, Jr. excused himself from the meeting)
MR. SMITH: Mr. Chairman, I've got a little motion I want to make before we adjourn, recess.
MR. MINUS: Yes, sir.
MR. SMITH: I make a motion that we amend the agenda that we're under right now in order to consent to the assignment of a lease agreement dated August 1st, 1992 in deed book 178 at page 324 of the records in the probate office of Sumter County, Alabama between the City of Livingston Downtown Redevelopment Authority and Main Street and Alabama General Partnership as assignee of Charles F. James, III. and Ann G. James to Southern Investments, LLC. and Alabama LLC. and to ratify and confirm all other terms and conditions of said lease agreement. And I've got your copy of this.
MR. MINUS: Is there a second?
MR. KEAHEY: Point of order.
MR. MINUS: Yes, sir.
MR. KEAHEY: We need a motion and a second on motion to amend the agenda before that.
MR. MINUS: Separate? His motion did ask for a motion, but you need that separate?
MR. KEAHEY: You've got to --
MR. SMITH: It was for a motion to amend the agenda.
MR. KEAHEY: We need to vote on that.
MR. MINUS: The motion is to amend the agenda. All in favor say aye.
ALL MEMBERS: Aye.
MR. MINUS: All opposed no. The ayes have it.That brings this up. John has
made the motion. Is there a second and then we'll discuss it?
MR. KEAHEY: I second it.
MR. MINUS: Seconded by Mr. Keahey.
MR. SMITH: What this is, it is a motion that the Board allow the transfer
f the group of apartments from the Alabama General Partnership Main Street between the City of Livingston Redevelopment Party and Main Street and Alabama General Partnership to the Southern Investment, LLC., which is an Alabama LLC. And that's what this motion is asking that we permit. We, as a board, --
MR. MINUS: Isn't it the --
MR. SMITH: We, in fact, probably need to make this motion from the land use committee of this Board of Trustees to the Board.
MR. MINUS: Okay.
MR. SMITH: Okay. That's what we do. That's where your motion is,
okay.
MR. KEAHEY: It's coming from the land use?
MR. SMITH: Yeah, from the land use committee because this is a situation dealing with the land use of this university.
MR. MINUS: Okay. What it is, boys and girls, we have some apartments up here called Twin Oaks. That property belongs to the University of West Alabama. We have a 50-year lease with the original people who did --
MR. SMITH: Main Street.
MR. MINUS: All right. Is it Southern LLC.?
MR. SMITH: Southern, LLC., Southern Investments, LLC.
MR. MINUS: Southern Investments, LLC. is purchasing the apartments and what we're doing is approving that that lease be transferred or assigned, whatever the legal word is. It affects us none at all. All right. The motion has been made and seconded. All in favor say aye.
ALL MEMBERS: Aye.
MR. MINUS: All opposed no. Okay. The Board is gone stand in recess and the Chairman will reconvene it at a time convenient for the Chair.

C E R T I F I C A T E
STATE OF ALABAMA)
JEFFERSON COUNTY)
I hereby certify that the above and foregoing board meeting was taken down by me in stenotype, and the material thereto were transcribed by means of
computer-aided transcription, and that the foregoing represents a true and crrect transcript of the board meeting. I further certify that I am neither of counsel nor of kin to the parties to the action, nor am I in any way interested in the result of said cause.
____________________________
MARGO NETTLES BRYAN
My commission expires
May 4, 2004