Tuesday, Dec. 10, 2002 | 10:47 a.m.
The state Board of Regents, which oversees higher education in Nevada, could make history this week.
If it votes to censure a board member, it would be the first such vote since it was established in 1864.
Even though the word "censure" is nowhere on Thursday's agenda, board conduct will be discussed and a public reprimand could come to a vote.
"Censure is a possibility," Chairman Doug Seastrand said. "I have not been given anything from general counsel to say that that is not a possibility."
During the 45 minutes slated for "public airing," as it is being called, board members will review the conduct of three of their own: Regents Linda Howard, Howard Rosenberg and Mark Alden. They will weigh the gravity of their recent behavior and whether it was deserving of a public reprimand.
"I am interested in hearing what these regents have to say about their conduct," said Regent Doug Hill, who requested that Howard and Rosenberg be considered for censure.
Howard viewed the personnel file of a county commissioner who worked for the University of Nevada, Las Vegas and looked at student records of two students who publicly disagreed with her. She also received the names and grades of more than 15,000 UNLV students.
Rosenberg intervened on behalf of an employee at the University of Nevada, Reno who was terminated.
Alden said, and Seastrand confirmed, that he volunteered to have his conduct discussed before the board. Alden made an offensive remark about Howard during a live radio show, which sparked public controversy.
Whether board members will vote to censure one or all of the members is uncertain. So far board members are in a wait-and-see mood.
"Whether it rises to that level (of censure) is a personal thing," Regent Steve Sisolak said. "I think it will depend on their explanations."
Sisolak said he is most troubled over Howard's look at the records of two students who disagreed with her on the issue of raising admissions standards at the universities.
"I have a problem with that, and that's my No. 1 area of concern," Sisolak said.
Regent Jill Derby said she is not certain censure is a fitting response.
"My initial reaction is that I don't see that it would be helpful, and I don't think it would be a positive thing for the board," Derby said.
James Hulse, a University of Nevada, Reno professor who has written two books about the Board of Regents, said he cannot remember a time when the board voted to censure its own members. Two attempts were made in the past and they proved to be disastrous.
Former Regent Lonnie Hammargren was brought into closed session in the early '90s so the board could discuss his behavior, Hulse said.
"The attorney general's office ended up telling the board they could not bring a public official into closed session," Hulse said. "As far as I know, nothing ever happened to (Hammargren)."
The board felt some heat in 1995 when it considered former Regent Nancy Price for censure. Because of a poll taken of board members before the meeting, the attorney general's office determined the board had violated the Open Meeting Law and took the case to court.
Hulse said despite the controversies the board is dealing with now, all boards go through problems.
"Democracy is a messy process," Hulse said. "Winston Churchill once said that, 'Democracy is the worst form of government except for all those other forms that have been tried from time to time.' "
archive
