Rebuilt HTML — PaddleOCR-VL (Baidu)

The Board of Regents' Chair, Regent Tammi Dukes, called the meeting to order at 10:07 a.m.

Ten (10) Regents were in attendance and present at roll call. A quorum was therefore established.

Regent Dukes stated that given today's meeting is a special called meeting the Regents must adhere to the agenda and may not introduce any additional topics.

Regent Dukes asked that before she begins the meeting that the academic affairs agenda item be moved to the end of the agenda and instead, the Board will address the academic affairs policies that require the board's approval.

Dr. Dailey said the policies before the board for approval are in response to Senate Bill 185 related to compliance and updates in policy. Also included are procedures related to dismissal, probation and warning.

Regent Obielodan said he is not sure what the procedure is but asked if this should have come to the academic committee before the presentation because he did not recall seeing this before and he is the chair of the committee. Dr. Dailey responded no in this particular case because they had to respond to Senate Bill 185 that was signed in April and they did not have the opportunity to get the committee in place and instead had to bring things directly to the board. He said it was not their intention to leave the academic committee out.

Regent Hatchett said he was a little uncomfortable with the fact that the committee had not reviewed it and wanted to register that.

Dr. Dailey responded that they tried to get it to the board as quickly as possible and agreed that it typically goes to the academic committee first.

Regent Hatchett asked if this was the right time to ask about the humanities of academic programs under areas of study. Dr. Dailey responded that later would be more appropriate.

Regent Fields said because of Senate Bill 185, the policies didn't go through the normal channels and is that going to be the case on other things that are going to come up as it relates to that bill. Dr. Dailey responded yes and no and further explained his response.

Regent Hatchett spoke on the role that the board has in Senate Bill 185, Section 2, and specifically adequate due diligence. Dr. Dailey responded.

Regent Rushing asked if the Board could re-send the policy changes to her. Chair Dukes responded that it was sent May 12 with the board book, but that she would ask Secretary Sergent to send the book directly to her.

Chair Dukes asked for a motion to approve the revisions to the online academic appeals policy, the revised Academic Standings Policy, Canvas Archiving Policy, Academics Admission Policy, revised Online Global Faculty Handbook and a Workload Agreement Policy. Regent Fields made a motion to approve the revisions and Regent Hatchett seconded the motion. Regent Obielodan abstained from voting saying he has not had the opportunity to review the policy. Motion Passed.

Dr. Dailey said at the point where they had degrees conferred, they had not confirmed all honorary degrees and they wanted to confer the honorary degrees that were granted at commencement. Dr. Dailey said according to board policy, the board is the entity that confers or grants the conferring of degrees.

Chair Dukes said she knows one of the recipients was Frank Taylor. Dr. Dailey said there was also Dr. Richard Rosen, who was a contributor to their nursing program.

Chair Dukes asked for a motion to approve the honorary degrees. Regent Hatchett made a motion and Regent Moyer seconded the motion. Motion passed.

Presented by Jack McNear, Associate VP of Capital Planning and Facilities Management.

Mr. McNear said there are two items to discuss and one is a correction. He said when they did the approval for the additional funding for Shauntee Hall, the total amount was written as $9,680,000 and the correct figure is $10,680,000 and he wanted to correct it for the record.

Mr. NcNear discussed the renovation of Hunter Hall, a residence hall on campus. He said there was already $750,000 put in this fund and they are requesting approval for an additional $7.25 million, which would take the project to $8.25 million.

Chair Dukes asked if they were using asset preservation funding for that. Mr. McNear responded yes and said this will be from the 2024-26 bond fund.

Regent Moyer asked after the renovations are complete, how much revenue will this generate. Mr. McNear said he does not know but he can get the answer. He said he will talk to auxiliary services since they are on the income side of it.

Regent Grimshaw asked if there will be an increase in capacity or a movement from lower quality housing to better when the project is done. Mr. McNear responded that it will be better quality housing when the project is done.

Dr. Heather Bigard said there was a study done of all the residence halls a few years ago and many of the renovations are coming v as a result of the study. She said those improvements are made so that they can generate more income off of the residence halls.

Chair Dukes said she would like to see a list of all those buildings that are currently being occupied - whether it be office space, academic space or residence halls - and the entire schedule or plan for renovation or when it was last renovated so that they can have a good perception of what's needed versus what's been done. Mr. McNear responded that he will be able to provide that to her.

Regent Moyer asked if Mr. McNear could give a sense of occupancy rates in all the dorms that they have. Mr. McNear said that he could.

Regent Moseley said one of the questions or concerns he has is that if they are spending

Mr. McNear said there have been policies put into place to be more strict with the students and that there are quite a few students that have been expelled due to damage to the rooms. He said the whole situation as far as how students feel about the residence halls and what is expected of them is improving. He said if there is some damage done, it is documented and charged to the student.

Regent Moyer asked the following: when did they discover the damage was done; if it was when the students moved out; and if they were doing room inspections. Mr. McNear said no, it's ongoing. He said there are room inspections being conducted by resident directors and resident assistants and when they find an issue they document it, get a cost for repairs and then that is supposed to be assessed to the students.

Regent Hatchett asked if any of them wanted to take a look at the new dorm to see what kind of condition it's in, would be they welcomed to do that. Chair Dukes and Mr. McNear both responded in the affirmative. Chair Dukes further elaborated that she was privy to see some of the damage that was done and saw some of the pictures in the new dorm and was really disappointed at how students have maintained a place where they have to live. She said they have to be more strict when it comes to taking care of their stuff.

Mr. McNear said if at any point anyone wants to schedule a walkthrough, he will be available to do that.

Chair Dukes asked if the board was ready to approve the improvements to Hunter Hall.

Regent Obielodan asked how much are they approving as he does not see the figure they are approving.

Mr. McNear said they are approving $7.5 million and there is already $750,000 that was approved prior.

Regent Obielodan asked if that is sufficient or is it over projected. Mr. McNear said it was an estimate.

Regent Moyer asked about the source of the funding. Dr. Bigard said this particular project is coming from the asset preservation capital bond fund dollars that the legislature appropriated. She said it was from the $30 million pool of funds from 2024-26 and further expanded on the funding from bond allocations.

Regent Grimshaw asked about the time box on spending. Dr. Bigard said they need to show progression on the project and her understanding is as long as they get the project in motion, they will be able to continue to access the funds.

Regent Obielodan asked if the legal funding was for $750,000 and now the request is for $7 million. Mr. McNear responded.

Regent Moyer asked about the limitations of spending the $50 million pool of money. Dr. Bigard responded that it depends on when it was allocated. Regent Moyer and Dr. Bigard further discussed the funds.

Chair Dukes asked for a motion for the approval of the renovations. Regent Fields made a motion for the approval of the capital project for Hunter Hall. Regent Grimshaw seconded the motion. There were no dissenting votes. Motion Passed.

Regent Obielodan asked about Shauntee Hall being on the agenda. Chair Dukes said that was a correction from a typo from the original approval and should be noted there was a mistake in the original ask.

Dr. Bigard requested a motion to amend the approval of Shauntee Hall. She said there was a typo in the last board meeting and the minutes didn't reflect the full amount of the approval of $10.68 million. Chair Dukes asked for a motion. Regent Stringer made the motion. Regent Hatchett seconded the motion. Chair Dukes said the Shauntee Hall correction has been approved. No dissenting votes. Motion Passed.

Chair Dukes said they are getting ready to go into closed session to discuss any proposed pending litigation; to discuss records exempted from disclosures; and to discuss specific appointments, dismissals and disciplinary actions.

Secretary Sergent clarified the sections of KRS 61.810(1)(c), (f) and (m) to discuss pending and possible litigation, personnel matters that may lead to the appointment, discipline, or dismissal of an individual employee, member, or student and records exempted from public disclosure under KRS 61.878(1)(m).

Chair Dukes asked for motion to go into closed session. Regent Moseley made the motion to go into closed session. Regent Fields seconded the motion. Motion Passed.

Regent Dukes asked for a motion to end the closed session and reconvene into open session. Regent Moyer made the motion and Regent Moyer seconded the motion. Motion Passed.

Dr. Michael Dailey presented the Academic Programs Review. He said as part of Senate Bill 185 obligations, the Division of Academic Affairs had to conduct a comprehensive academic review process that started in 2023.

Dr. Dailey provided an overview and extensive summary of the six Guiding Principles; the four phases; and Program Review – tasks at hand.

Dr. Dailey said that SB 185 had expectations for KSU to create a list of programs that the KSU board could propose to maintain, to discontinue, to change or alter and that program list had to then be submitted to the council on post-secondary education. He said any changes that are recommended by the board that are above the 25% have to be submitted to SACCLC and CPE.

Dr. Dailey further stated that KSU is a four-year institution, always has been and always will be. He further added that the polytech institutions that are four-year institutions must

Dr. Dailey said that Senate Bill 185 requires them to identify up to 10 academic areas of study. He identified six areas including applied sciences, engineering, health, humanities, natural sciences and technology. He gave an illustration/overview of how they got there and the majors in each area of study.

Chair Dukes asked for a motion for approval of the proposed program continuing and discontinuing with teach out planning. Regent Fields made the motion.

Secretary Sergent said for the record that the programs for continuing would be (1) nursing, AS, BS, residential and online; (2) computer science; (3) cybersecurity, BS online, MS potential; (4) MS environmental science and technology, residential; (5) interdisciplinary studies, BS and AS STEM+; (6) general education dual credit PEP; (7) psychology, BS, MA counseling, forensic school; (8) special education, MA online, redesigned in 2025, protected; (9) exercise science, BS, new CIP; (10) aquaculture MS, BS, aquatic sciences Fall 2026; (11) criminal justice, BS, residential and online; (12) biology, BS, residential, manufacturing and agriculture engineering introduced in 2025; and (13) MS in biological and agricultural engineering introduced in 2025.

The motion was seconded by Regent Moyer. Chair Dukes said the proposed changes or retention are approved. No dissenting votes. Motion Passed.

Secretary Sergent said the Board needed to approve the programs that require curriculum redesign, delivery modification or repositioning.

Secretary Sergent said for the record that those programs are: (1) Agriculture, food and environment, BS, residential, change to include specifications such as animal science, plant science; (2) business administration, BS, to reduce complexity in an MA residential and online; (3) the DPN online; (4) elementary education, BA; (5) mathematics BS; (6) music and industry curriculum redesign, marketability; (7) mass communication, curriculum redesign, Technology Integration, and digital media; (8) chemistry, BS reopened to support engineering; (9) and psychology MA curriculum alignment with workforce and clinical practice.

Chair Dukes asked for a motion for redesign of these programs. Regent Stringer made the motion. Regent Fields seconded the motion. No dissenting votes. Motion Passed. The redesign of those programs was approved.

Secretary Sergent said the third motion is to approve the programs to be discontinued with the teach out, which will be submitted to the accreditor on July 1 and will be recommended for closure. The programs are the bachelor of music education; bachelor of music performance; bachelor of arts in political science and the bachelor of arts in child development and family study.

Chair Dukes asked for a motion to approve recommending closure of those programs. Regent Grimshaw made the motion and it was seconded by Regent Fields. Chair Dukes said the recommendation of discontinuing those specified programs is approved. Motion Passed. No dissenting votes.

Regent Dukes made final remarks and asked for motion to adjourn the meeting. Regent Fields made a motion to adjourn the special board meeting. It was seconded by Regent Stringer.

The meeting was adjourned.