Voter redo: Question 1 approval would allow Nevada Legislature’s oversight of Board of Regents

Question 1 may be a familiar sight for Nevada voters when they receive their ballot next month.

It’s a recycled version of a 2020 ballot question that seeks to remove constitutional protection for the Nevada System of Higher Education’s Board of Regents and places its governing power in the Nevada Legislature.

Question 1 – also known as “The Nevada Higher Education Reform, Accountability and Oversight Amendment – was added to this year’s ballot with the passage of Senate Joint Resolution 7 by the 2023 Legislature.

It proposes to amend the Nevada Constitution by making the Board of Regents a body whose membership, powers and duties are governed by the Legislature. The amendment, if approved, would put “the Board of Regents and NSHE on par with every other governing board and state agency,” said Sen. Marilyn Dondero Loop, D-Las Vegas, a cosponsor of SJR 7.

“In the lead up to previous sessions, NSHE has sometimes tried to alter control or misrepresent information provided to policymakers, including the Nevada Legislature,” said Dondero Loop during a March 2023 Senate Committee on Legislative Operations and Elections meeting. “As policymakers, we must be focused on building longstanding and stable systems of governance, not on individual personalities. This higher education system belongs to all Nevadans.”

The resolution will only become effective if voters approve Question 1 this November.

The origin of the question dates to the 2017 Nevada Legislature, when Assembly Joint Resolution 5 was introduced by former Assemblyman Elliot Anderson, who sponsored the bill, and former Sen. Joyce Woodhouse — the sole cosponsor.

Much like its later versions, the proposal sought to remove the Board of Regents’ constitutional protection and allow the Legislature to “provide by statute for the governance, control and management of the State University and for the reasonable protection of individual academic freedom.”

The proposal was created after it was revealed in April 2016 that the Board of Regents purposely stymied efforts by the 2012 Interim Committee to study and reconstruct the state’s higher-education funding formula.

During a presentation submitted to members during an Assembly Legislative Operations and Elections Committee meeting in March 2017, former NSHE Chancellor Dan Klaich asked a Colorado-based think tank, National Center for Higher Education Management Systems, for help and later presented findings from the report to the Interim Committee as independent data.

Except, it was discovered that NSHE had a large influence on the research results and system officials — including Klaich — had even written a memo under management system letterhead.

Additionally, a 2023 audit of NSHE found that its institutions “engaged in questionable and inappropriate financial activities” between 2018 and 2022 due to “vague or insufficient Board policies and a lack of systemwide oversight,” according to a ballot guide issued by the Nevada Secretary of State’s office.

Some of these actions apparently included moving state funds between accounts designated for different purposes and redirecting state funds to different institutions without legislative approval, among others.

Nevada is currently the only state where a single elected board with constitutional status controls and manages the state’s entire system of public higher education.

During a Senate Committee on Legislative Operations and Elections meeting in 2017, Anderson explained that the Board of Regents would still oversee higher education in Nevada, but the Legislature would have the power to pass laws that specifically affect the board under AJR 5. He argued that it would ensure the board “can be held accountable.”

The Board of Regents was established in 1864 by the Nevada Constitution — with the first board assembled a year later — and has been responsible for governing all the higher education institutions under the NSHE. Dondero Loop in 2023 said the Board of Regents ended up in the state constitution so land-grant funding under the Morrill Act of 1862 — also known as the Morrill Land Grant College Act, which set aside federal lands and funding to erect colleges — could be accessed.

AJR 5 was passed by the 2017 and 2019 Legislatures, which allowed it to appear on the 2020 ballot. But the 2020 question was defeated — by fewer than 4,000 votes out of 1.2 million votes cast.

The question hasn’t gone without its criticisms.

In 2023, former Board of Regents Vice Chair Joseph Arrascada said Nevadans struck down Question 1 in 2020 because it “sought to change nearly 160 years of Nevada history” and that further attempts to pass the amendment would be “questioning the voters’ will.” He likened efforts to get the question back on the ballot to those of “an election denier” and added that it wouldn’t improve higher education in the state, workforce development or advanced research.

“The people of Nevada rejected those changes during the 2020 elections and now the voice of the people is not being respected,” Arrascada said during the March 21, 2023, Senate committee meeting. “This do-over is not for the will of the people. It is for a few individuals who feel it is necessary to remove the Regents and uproot the Nevada Constitution.”

Arrascada also claimed that the measure would create “uncertainty, could significantly lower the morale of those working on each campus and obstruct Nevada System of Higher Education’s immediate and long-term strategic plan.”

During the same Senate committee meeting,Jim DeGraffenreid — national committeeman for the Nevada Republican Party — also voiced his opposition to the measure, calling it “a persistent holograph” that had already been rejected once by voters. He complained that the resolution would remove the constitutional process of electing the Board of Regents against the will of Nevada voters.

Supporters of Question 1 believe the proposal will lead to more transparency within the Board of Regents and allow the Legislature to change NSHE policies and procedures to better fit Nevada’s needs. Taxpayers and students, the supporters say, would benefit from the greater legislative oversight by “reducing the potential for further fiscal mismanagement within NSHE,” according to the Nevada secretary of state’s guide.

Dondero Loop, in her 2023 committee presentation, said passage of SJR 7 — and later, Question 1 — “would see a resurgence of strong support for NSHE and the Board of Regents.”

A spokeswoman said NSHE was remaining neutral on the ballot questions and would work with the Legislature regardless of the November outcome to increase the management and monitoring of Nevada colleges and universities.

“Consistent with the guidelines set forth by NRS 281A.520, the Nevada System of Higher Education maintains a neutral stance on ballot initiatives,” said Elizabeth Callahan, public information officer for NSHE. “Regardless of the outcome in November, we look forward to continuing to work collaboratively with the Legislature to enhance the governance and oversight of public higher education in Nevada. NSHE remains committed to fulfilling its mission of providing quality education and fostering academic excellence across its institutions.”

[email protected] / 702-948-7854 / @gracedarocha