Viewing page 95 of 272

This transcription has been completed. Contact us with corrections.

-79-

weakening the decision-making process.

The Regents' discussion focused on three potential solutions to this matter.

First, there had been proposed a policy of holding a portion of each meeting in public with the balance to be in executive session. Investments, personnel, and other internal matters would continue to be discussed in the executive portion of the meeting. Most budgetary and policy matters could be discussed in the public session. The Board would have discretion as to agenda organization, however. The Regents questioned whether this would be a satisfactory solution, because of the possible conjecture of the press present as to what was considered in the closed session.

Second, it was proposed to adopt a policy of holding one public meeting each year--perhaps the one in May--with the other two meetings to be executive sessions. This would effectively reestablish the concept of an annual program meeting and provide valuable information on the Institution's programs and activities both to the Regents and the public. Nonetheless, there was considerable sentiment that this solution would not meet the need which the press apparently feels for some insight into the business of the Board. The other two meetings of the year, remaining closed much like the executive sessions just discussed, might give rise to ill-founded conjecture among the press and public.

Finally, the Regents discussed continuing the existing policy of executive session with full briefings for the press after each meeting and the submission of detailed summaries and minutes to appropriate members of Congress. It was pointed out that the staff efforts to inform