Disposiciones Generales

Whereas, the Texas Legislature chartered Texas A&M University-Kingsville in 1917 as South Texas Normal School, and it opened in 1925 as South Texas State Teachers College; and

Whereas, the school later became the Texas College of Arts and Industries, and in 1967, Texas A&I University; and

Whereas, Texas A&I University joined The Texas A&M University System in 1989; and

Whereas, in 1993, the Board of Regents of The Texas A&M University System, after much consideration, voted to change the name from Texas A&I University to Texas A&M University-Kingsville to better reflect its membership in the A&M System; and

Whereas, in the 75th Regular Session of the Texas Legislature (1997), State Senator Carlos Truan introduced Senate Bill 1044, sponsored by Representative Irma Rangel, which codified the university’s name change in the Texas Education Code to “reflect its affiliation with one of the largest systems of higher education”; and

Whereas, Senate Bill 1044 was approved by the Senate by a vote of 31 Yeas and 0 Nays, and was approved by the House by a vote of 139 Yeas, 0 Nays, two present not voting; and

Whereas, Senate Bill 1044 was signed by the Governor on May 23, 1997 and became effective immediately; and

Whereas, several legislative proposals seeking to change the university’s name back to Texas A&I University were filed during the 81st (2009) and 82nd (2011) Regular Sessions of the Legislature, all of which were unsuccessful; and

Whereas, the Legislative Budget Board determined that the cost of the name change proposed during the 81st Regular Session of the Legislature “would total $1.9 million in General Revenue and institutional funds” based on estimates provided by the A&M System; and

Minutes – August 2-3, 2012 Page 30 of 43 Whereas, in 2009 the university gathered exhaustive data regarding the views of its student body, staff, faculty and alumni on the proposed name change, and the university found there was overwhelming support for maintaining the Texas A&M University- Kingsville name, as demonstrated, in part, through a student body survey and resolutions adopted by the Student Government Association, Faculty Senate, Regents Professors, Kingsville Area Industrial Development Foundation and University Staff Council; and

Whereas, changing the university’s name back to Texas A&I University could create the misconception that the university had been removed from The Texas A&M University System, in addition to the financial consequences and concerns identified above; now, therefore, be it

Resolved, that we, the members of the Board of Regents of The Texas A&M University System, strongly support the continued use of the name Texas A&M University-Kingsville to identify the system university located in Kingsville, Texas; recognize the value of the university’s clear affiliation with the A&M System; and do not believe a name change back to Texas A&I University would be in the best interest of the university, its students, faculty, staff, alumni, the A&M System, or the State of Texas.

~~~~

Chancellor Sharp presented Item 50 regarding consultations which began between himself, Dr. Loftin and Dr. Nancy Dickey, President of TAMHSC, last fall about moving the TAMHSC under the flagship university. He said the advantages were primarily in research because TAMHSC did a wonderful job, in not only education but also research; they produced doctors at 30% to 40% less cost than the state average and had the best MCAT scores in the state. He said they believed that if the TAMHSC moved under Texas A&M, the $80 million in research dollars currently not counting toward Texas A&M’s

ranking, would move them from 19th _{or 20}th _{to 12}th _{or 14}th _{in the nation. He said perhaps}

more importantly, it would have an enormous effect on collaboration between life sciences, chemistry, engineering, and those departments in Texas A&M in conjunction with the university. He said Dr. Dickey suggested a way to move TAMHSC as a block under Texas A&M and remain TAMHSC. He said Regent Mendoza input assurances to make sure that the funding remained intact.

Regent Wilson asked Dr. Loftin if this would have a positive or any effect in their Association of American Universities (AAU) rankings. Dr. Loftin said initially it might have a negative effect as those rankings are based on research dollars from federal sources, divided by the total faculty count. He said it could lower that ranking slightly for the short term, due to the addition of faculty from all parts of the TAMHSC, not just the College of Medicine. He added that they believed that within three to five years maximum, they could overcome that through synergy in terms of research activities, collaboration and seeking increased federal funding for joint projects involving faculty from TAMHSC and Texas A&M. He said there could be a short-term detrimental effect on AAU, because they did not look at total research dollars, but those normalized by the number of faculty.

Minutes – August 2-3, 2012 Page 31 of 43 Regent White said he applauded the concept and hoped that it improved collaboration, which was important. He said if that was an outcome, it was to be applauded. He said the Board had moved TAMHSC out from under Texas A&M to ensure they would enhance its opportunity for funding. He noted that he had an overarching concern, and they had added language to protect that, but it continued to be a concern. He said they had been very successful in the current strategy and he did not want to reverse that success by doing this. He said they had assurances and languages in this item, but it remained a concern if he voted in favor of this and went forward. He said his second overarching concern was the acceptance of the larger medical community. He noted that it was evolving at the speed of light and they were all wrestling with the future of medicine. He added that he wanted the assurance of everyone involved that they would maintain that integrity and agility. He said if they did not, they were going in the wrong direction, rather than what he thought could be the right direction, if handled correctly. He said they had discussed these concerns before but they continued to be of concern to him and others.

Dr. Loftin said in response to his first comment, he shared that completely. He said it was critical that the health institute formula funding still be applied to TAMHSC in the new administrative arrangement; without that, it could not happen. He said they had made it clear in the background information for Item 50 that they would back away from this, if it were discovered to be the case. He said in response to Regent White’s second concern, he understood and he was correct -- medical science and in fact, the life sciences in general, were where the action was. He said they had done a lot in this particular area through Regent White’s leadership involving the BARDA project, to bring a lot of attention to Brazos County. He said they would have opportunities they had not had in the past to build partnerships and evolve their programs to meet the rapidly changing needs of not just the old medical community, but the emerging “one health community” which consumed not only the TAMHSC areas, but the College of Veterinary Medicine & Biomedical Science, College of Science, College of Agriculture & Life Sciences, as well. He said they had a lot going on here that they believed would position this new administrative structure even better than it had been in the past to be nimble and to be able to take advantage of the opportunities that were presented.

Regent White said he had immense faith in Dr. Loftin, Chancellor Sharp and Dr. Dickey; he just wanted them to get it right.

Regent Mendoza said it was refreshing to hear that it would not move forward if it impacted funding to TAMHSC and knew the Chancellor would keep them informed of that. She said to underscore, as the steering committee moved forward and looked at the appropriate structure that they keep in mind the nimbleness and agility to be able to respond quickly to infrastructure and different types of investments and so they could move this forward post haste, so they could grow TAMHSC. She said the plans had been established and they had to keep it moving. She said the two points she wanted to underscore were if there was any impact to funding, they were assured they would take a step backward and secondly, as the steering committee looked at the structure, it was important they keep their nimbleness and be able to move quickly. She said it would be a shame to add yet another layer of bureaucracy in order to make things happen.

Minutes – August 2-3, 2012 Page 32 of 43 There were no further comments or questions.

On motion of Regent Schwertner, seconded by Regent Foster and by a unanimous vote, the following minute order was approved (190):

~~~~