Editorial: Regents had no business revising law

Friday, Jan. 16, 2004 | 8:45 a.m.

It was no secret in March 1995 when the Board of Regents voted 6-4 to raise tuition for students within the University and Community College System. The vote was controversial because in 1993 the board had unanimously agreed to hold off on any tuition increases until 1997. Amid an overall state budget crisis the issue became very public and students were among those offering their views before the regents voted.

Another of the board's actions at that meeting, however, was not very public. It cast aside a state law by increasing -- from six months to 12 months -- the length of time you have to be a Nevada resident before becoming eligible for in-state tuition rates. This action came to light just within the past few days, thanks to Sarah Renteria, a Community College of Southern Nevada student from California who did her homework. In registering for her spring classes, she was surprised when college officials told her she wasn't eligible for the much lower rate because she hadn't yet resided in Nevada for a year. To no avail, she pointed out the state law on residency. The law clearly states a requirement of six months, which she met. She took the issue to Regent Steve Sisolak, who has been serving on the board since 1998. He is working to rectify this nine-year-ol d mistake.

The Board of Regents, whose members are elected, is authorized to independently establish academic and administrative policy for the University and Community College System of Nevada -- in all areas not specifically covered by law. But if it wants a state law changed, it must go through the Legislature. Boards are not empowered to change laws at their own discretion. As Sisolak says: "If there's a law we don't like, then the Legislature (would be the governing body) to change it." Otherwise there would be chaos.

As soon as the board can legally meet on this issue, it should order the state's colleges and universities to begin offering the in-state tuition rate to student applicants who have been here six months. Additionally, no matter how expensive or time consuming, the University and Community College System of Nevada should begin tracking down every student who was illegally charged the higher rate since 1995. Refunds are in order and it's more than a matter of honor. It's a matter of law.