University formula for renovations criticized

Tuesday, Aug. 31, 1999 | 1:40 a.m.

On paper, class sizes are shrinking dramatically at Nevada colleges and universities - literally.

For that matter, so are offices, laboratories, hallways and broom closets.

No, it's not the result of a science fiction shrinking ray or a rift in the space-time continuum. The culprit is an outdated depreciation formula that shaves space from campus buildings over 10 years old.

Under the formula, by the time a campus building reaches its 40th year, the structure is supposedly in such poor shape that 60 percent of it isn't being used. But in reality, almost all of the space remains occupied.

Regent Steve Sisolak wants to get rid of the formula at a Sept. 9 and 10 Board of Regents meeting in Reno.

"This is a game that we're playing and I just don't see the benefit of it," Sisolak said. "Just because a building is 10, 20, 30 years old doesn't mean it's any less functional than a brand new building."

It's unclear, however, how much impact the formula has on legislative decisions to order new campus buildings.

Capital project requests to Nevada lawmakers have always been political in nature and not based on empirical data, said Jim Randolph, the system's vice chancellor for finance and planning.

Randolph claims the depreciation figures are part of an internal process and not something shown to the Legislature as a true representation of a campus' building needs.

And in an Aug. 19 memo to regents, he said the formula serves as a way for administrators to prioritize the system's capital improvement projects.

Carol Harter, president of the University of Nevada, Las Vegas, believes the creative math needs to go.

"It's a bad practice, and it should be changed," Harter said.

Ashok Dhingra, UNR's vice president for finance, said he is not opposed to getting rid of the formula.

"You can get rid of the depreciation schedules as long as you have some mechanism to gauge the need for renovation," he said. "Depreciation was supposed to do that."

Dhingra said the depreciation formula was not meant to be deceptive. Rather, it was supposed to take renovation needs into account on older campuses.