CHANGES FOR REGENTS
of Regents stymied efforts by an interim legislative committee in 2012 to redo the higher education funding formula.
Woodhouse said it is critical that the Legislature gets accurate information from the board and higher education system to create a culture of accountability to lawmakers and the public.
The act, which will come in separate legislation, proposes several goals, including a requirement that campus presidents have the authority to present their budgets directly to the Board of Regents and the Legislature. Presidents would also be hired and fired by the board,.
It would also support whistle-blower protections for system employees and allow for a full investigation of the malfeasance brought to light by the 2016 Review-Journal story. PLAYING POLITICS
Regent Allison Stephens said the board would lose its independence and would be subject to political whims with the passage of AJR5. Regent Cedric Crear agreed in comments at the board meeting.
Committee Chairwoman Olivia Diaz, D-North Las Vegas, said the 2012 funding study involved dishonesty from higher education representatives who kept information from lawmakers.
Regent Trevor Hayes was the only regent to voice his support of the proposed change at the Regents meeting.
Hayes said he believes the board should be smaller, and that the members should be appointed and paid.
Compensation, he said, would allow the regents more time to focus on the issues of higher education, rather than treating it as a side job.
Hayes said if it passes the Legislature this session, the board could create a fact-finding committee to present both pros and cons.
“We would have a more educated decisions to take to the Legislature the next time,” he said. The Review-Journal’s Natalie Bruzda contributed to this report. Contact Sean Whaley at swhaley@ reviewjournal.com or 775-461-3820. Follow @ seanw801 on Twitter.