MINUTES FOR BOARD MEETING OF THE NEVADA STATE BOARD OF
ARCHITECTURE, INTERIOR DESIGN AND RESIDENTIAL DESIGN
Siena Hotel Spa & Casino, One S. Lake St., Lupa
Meeting Room, Reno, Nevada 89505
Tuesday, March 11, 2008
Chairman George Garlock called the meeting to
order at 5:30 p.m.
Roll Call: Greg Erny, Judith Fermoile, George Garlock,
John Klai, JoAnn Oppenheimer Gore, Derrell Parker, Bill Snyder and Larry
Tindall. Larry Henry was absent.
Also in attendance: Gina Spaulding, Executive Director; Betty
Ruark, Chief Investigator; Laura Bach, Rebecca Gaul and Monica Harrison, staff.
AGENDA ITEM 1 Public
workshop for LCB field R-199-07, proposed amendments to NAC 623.900
and NAC 623.905
A workshop was held to
solicit comments on proposed amendments to NAC 623.900 and NAC 623.905.
Five people attended the
workshop to listen to the board discussions. The public did not comment or
suggest any changes to the proposed regulations.
Garlock closed the workshop for LCB File No. R199-07.
AGENDA ITEM 2 Town hall
meeting to receive feedback about the draft regulation for
implementation of continuing education
requirements as a condition for license
renewal pursuant to NRS 623.255
Six registrants attended the
workshop to listen to the board explanation of the regulation’s intent. Architect Scott Brown commented that he knew
the board had tabled the discussion regarding continuing education two years
ago and asked the board what had changed since that last discussion. Erny responded that the AIA was going to put
forth a bill to the legislature to mandate continuing education as a condition
of license renewal. The board decided
to revisit the issue to craft a proposed regulation that was appropriate for
all three professions it regulates.
There were no further
comments regarding the proposed continuing education regulation, however, a
lengthy discussion ensued regarding problems with the Tahoe Regional Planning
Agency and possible solutions that could be implemented in the future.
Chairman
Garlock adjourned the meeting at 6:30 p.m.
* * * * * * * * * *
Wednesday, March 12, 2008
Chairman George Garlock called the meeting to
order at 8:35 a.m.
Roll Call: Greg Erny, Judith Fermoile, George Garlock,
John Klai, JoAnn Oppenheimer Gore, Derrell Parker, Bill Snyder and Larry
Tindall. Larry Henry was absent.
Also in attendance: Gina Spaulding, Executive Director; Betty
Ruark, Chief Investigator; Dianna Hegeduis, Legal Counsel; Laura Bach, Rebecca
Gaul, Monica Harrison and Stacey Hatfield, staff.
AGENDA ITEM 1 Approval
of consent agenda
Consent agenda included
the following:
Architects
– Registration by Reciprocity
|
6118 |
Paul
Acquaro Jr. |
6134 |
Ann
M. Dennis |
6148 |
Charles
B. Browne |
|
6119 |
Caitlin
Kelley |
6135 |
Frank
M. Grieco |
6149 |
Thomas
A. Heinz |
|
6120 |
John
C. Mann |
6136 |
David
S. Hills |
6150 |
Mercedes
M. Laudano |
|
6121 |
Alex
E. Toye |
6137 |
Scott
F. Lurie |
6151 |
Daniel
J. Lickel |
|
6122 |
Pamela
Whitehead |
6138 |
George
Metzger |
6152 |
Kirk
P. Morris |
|
6123 |
Hok-Wai
Wong |
6139 |
David
C. Parker |
6153 |
Charles
K. Taylor |
|
6124 |
Daniel
W. Beauchamp |
6140 |
Earl
Randell |
6154 |
Lamberto
Smigliani |
|
6125 |
Mark
S. Wasescha |
6141 |
Heather
Smigliani |
6155 |
William
E. Bringham |
|
6126 |
Rania
Alomar |
6142 |
Geoffrey
M. Varga |
6156 |
John
G. Hampton |
|
6127 |
Richard
Hardaway |
6143 |
Lawrence
Bogdanow |
6157 |
Robert
M. Jacob |
|
6128 |
Jay
R. Larsson |
6144 |
Marko
E. Botich |
6158 |
Matthew
C. Lamont |
|
6130 |
Thomas
J. O’Connor |
6145 |
Thomas
J. Hellman |
6159 |
Lino
Picinic |
|
6131 |
Kamal
Paul |
6146 |
Timothy
K. Mattheis |
6160 |
Francis
S. Wang |
|
6132 |
Jeffry
S. Reddy |
6147 |
Gary
L. Reddick |
|
|
|
6133 |
James
L. Allred |
|
|
|
|
Residential
Designers – Registration by Reciprocity
|
274-P |
Merle
V. Avila |
276-P |
Thomas
E. Leishman |
278-P |
William T. Ruhl |
|
275-P |
Robert
D. Hotten |
277-P |
John
I. Roberts |
|
|
Spaulding said that
agenda item 1B should be pulled from the consent agenda, as the minutes from
the January meeting are not ready for board approval due to recent server
problems and the loss of data. Garlock
said agenda items 1E-1 and 1E-2 would be held until after the new registrants
are sworn-in. Board members requested
agenda items 1F-3 and 1F-7 be pulled from the consent agenda.
Motion: Klai
moved to approve the consent agenda, items 1A, 1C, 1D, 1E-3 through 1F-2, 1F-4
through 1F-6, 1F-8 and 1F-9. Motion
seconded by Fermoile.
Vote: All in
favor. Motion passes.
AGENDA
ITEM 1F-3 Firm registration approval request:
Danielle Rios Design Studio (DRDS)
Motion: Klai moved to approve the firm registration
“Danielle Rios
Design Studio (DRDS).” Motion seconded by Fermoile.
Erny said it was unclear
if the registrant was going to be practicing under Danielle Rios Design Studio or Millennium Association, Inc. Spaulding said that Ms. Rios’s husband, a
licensed general contractor, would be practicing under Millennium, and Ms. Rios
will practice under, Danielle Rios Design Studio.
Vote: Six in
favor: Fermoile, Klai, Oppenheimer
Gore, Parker, Snyder and Tindall.
One opposed: Erny. Motion
passes.
AGENDA
ITEM 1F-7 Firm registration approval request:
FCA
Motion: Tindall moved to approve the firm
registration “FCA.”
Motion seconded by Fermoile.
Erny said that when
people own “one-third” of a corporation, mathematically it won’t add up to 100
percent. He said that in the future he
would like the application to list the exact percentage of ownership in the firm
instead of fractions.
Vote: All in
favor. Motion passes.
AGENDA ITEM 3 Discussion
and possible approval of the amended 2007-08 Board Master
Calendar
and the proposed 2008-09 Board Master Calendar
Spaulding said the proposed
changes to the 2007-08 calendar are the addition of a Las Vegas town hall
meeting on continuing education on April 9, an NCIRC meeting on April 16, and a
meeting to revise the Nevada Supplemental Exam for RIDs on May 7. She also proposed moving the June board
meeting to June 4. Board members agreed
with these changes.
Spaulding presented the
proposed 2008-09 Board Master Calendar.
Board members said the dates looked good and would get back to her with
any conflicts.
Motion: Erny moved to approve the amended 2007-08
Board Master Calendar and the proposed 2008-09 Board Master Calendar. Motion seconded by Tindall.
Vote: All in
favor. Motion passes.
AGENDA ITEM 6 Discussion
and possible decision regarding proposed meeting date for the Nevada
Construction
Industry Relations Committee (NCIRC) – April 16, 2008
Spaulding
said that it is time for the Blue Book to be updated; the current edition is
2004. She said that Garlock, Parker and
Tindall are the current board representatives to the committee and Parker is
the NCIRC Chairman. These board members
said they would continue on NCIRC.
Motion: Tindall moved to approve the April 16, 2008
meeting date for the NCIRC meeting.
Motion seconded by Snyder.
Vote: All in
favor. Motion passes.
AGENDA
ITEM 2A Deliberations/Action on applications for
registration: Architectural
Snyder swore in the
following individuals as architects:
1. Jason M. Andoscia......... ....................... 6162
2. Nathaniel B. Walker............ ....................... 6161
3. George A. Bergman......... ....................... 6163
Motion: Fermoile moved to approve the registration of the above
referenced individuals as architects.
Motion seconded by Klai.
Vote: All in
favor. Motion passes.
AGENDA
ITEM 2B Deliberations/Action on applications for
registration: Registered interior
design
Snyder swore in the
following individuals as registered interior designers:
1.
Sonja Foree. ....................... 141-ID
2.
Mayumi Koshiba........... ....................... 143-ID
3.
Kirsten Shull ....................... 144-ID
Motion: Klai moved to approve the registration of the above
referenced individuals as registered interior designers. Motion seconded by Parker.
Vote: All in favor. Motion passes.
Garlock asked if the new registrants had any
comments about the registration process.
New registrants thanked staff for help with the registration
process.
AGENDA ITEM 1E-1 Firm name approval
request: Sjol Designs
Motion: Klai moved to
approve the firm name “Sjol Designs.” Motion seconded by Snyder.
Vote: All in
favor. Motion passes.
AGENDA
ITEM 1E-2 Firm name approval request:
Foree Interiors
Motion: Erny
moved to approve the firm name “Foree Interiors.” Motion seconded by Snyder.
Vote: All in
favor. Motion passes.
AGENDA ITEM 4A-1 Case No.
05-064N – In the matter of John MacDonald
The respondent is alleged to
have violated NRS 623.360.1(c) by preparing the construction documents for a
custom home, for which the permit was pulled and the residence built by an
owner/builder, without the respondent having a certificate of registration
issued by the board.
Staff received information
from the Washoe County Building Department that an owner/builder had listed
Highpoint Drafting as the party that prepared the drawings for their custom
home to be located in Reno, Nevada.
Subsequent investigation revealed that John MacDonald, of Highpoint
Drafting Assistance, had prepared the construction documents for the residence,
which had been submitted to the Washoe County Building Department for plan
check and issuance of a building permit.
The Respondent was sent a
Notice of Charges concerning this project and a letter of response was
received. The respondent’s case was
discussed with Chief Investigator Ruark and the decision was made to offer the
respondent an opportunity to settle this issue informally rather than face a
disciplinary hearing before the board.
A settlement agreement was negotiated incorporating a Guilt Clause, an
Assurance of Discontinuance Clause and investigative costs in the amount of
$1,000. Staff recommends approval of
the settlement agreement.
Board members discussed the
issue of engineers stamping the work of unlicensed individuals, which under
this board’s opinion is aiding and abetting the unlicensed practice of
architecture. They said it is a good
issue to discuss at NCIRC.
Motion: Parker
moved to approve the settlement agreement.
Motion seconded by Fermoile.
Vote: All in
favor. Motion passes.
AGENDA ITEM 4A-2 Case No.
06-069N – In the matter of Kathy Adlao
The respondent is alleged to
have violated NRS 623.360.1(a)(b)(c) by holding herself out as being qualified
to provide services which fall under the practice of architecture and residential
design and by engaging in the practice of architecture and residential design
for multiple owner/builder projects, without having a certificate of
registration issued by the board.
Staff originally received a
complaint alleging that the respondent was advertising as a draftsman under
Adlao Designs and alleged that she designed a custom home for the Matt Bernard
residence in Douglas County. Gaul
subsequently interviewed the respondent as she had a pending application for
registration as a residential designer in Nevada. Further investigation revealed that the respondent had
advertised, in print media and on the Internet, services that fall under the
practices of architecture and residential design, and that she also prepared
drawings for multiple owner/builder projects in northern Nevada.
The respondent was sent a
Notice of Charges concerning this project and a letter of response was
received. The respondent’s case was
discussed with Chief Investigator Ruark and the decision was made to offer the
respondent and opportunity to settle this issue informally rather than face a
disciplinary hearing before the board.
A settlement agreement was negotiated incorporating a Guilt Clause, and
Effect on Licensure Clause, an administrative penalty of $5,500 and investigative
costs in the amount of $2,500. Staff
recommends approval of the settlement agreement.
Board members discussed the
difficulty of educating the public about the regulation of architecture,
registered interior design and residential design. They suggested having a “canned article” that could be placed in
Realtors’ newsletters or placing articles in the Real Estate sections of the
newspapers. Board members also
suggested the board provide a “bag stuffer” for the Hospitality Design Expo in
Las Vegas.
Motion: Klai moved
to approve the settlement agreement.
Motion seconded by Parker.
Vote: All in
favor. Motion passes.
AGENDA ITEM 4A-3 Case No.
07-033N – In the matter of Jordan Banares and Kimberly Daoust
The Respondents are alleged
to have committed six violations of NRS 623.360.1(a), six violations of NRS
623.360.1(b) and six violations of NRS 623.360.1(c), by holding themselves out
as being qualified to practice registered interior design and by engaging in
the practice of registered interior design, without holding a certificate of
registration in Nevada nor working under the responsible control of a Nevada
registrant. The respondents are alleged
to have committed these violations by disseminating proposals for registered
interior design services directly to the client prior to a registrant being
involved; by disseminating information and photographs and color renderings on
their website and marketing brochure without disclosing and giving proper
credit to the Nevada registrants involved in the projects; and by engaging in
the practice of registered interior design by preparing presentation boards,
color renderings and hand sketches for multiple areas of the Southern Highlands
Casino located in Las Vegas.
Staff received a complaint
regarding the respondents’ old website where respondent Banares had taken
credit for the architectural design of the Icehouse project. Further investigation revealed that the
respondents were involved in the Southern Highlands project and had responded
to a request for proposal and prepared renderings and presentation boards for
multiple areas of the casino without holding a certificate of registration and
prior to working under the responsible control of a Nevada registrant. Additionally, respondents removed their old
website and replaced it with a new website which showed multiple Nevada
projects for which they performed regulated services falling under the practice
of registered interior design, without listing themselves as a design
consultant to the Nevada registrant involved with the project.
The respondents were sent a
Notice of Charges concerning these projects and a letter of response was
received. The respondents’ case was
discussed with Chief Investigator Ruark and the decision was made to offer the
respondents an opportunity to settle this issue informally rather than face a
disciplinary hearing before the board.
A settlement agreement was negotiated incorporating an Effect on
Licensure Clause, an administrative penalty of $60,000 and investigative costs
in the amount of $6,000. Staff
recommends approval of the settlement agreement.
Board members asked if
either respondent is pursuing licensure.
Spaulding said that Ms. Daoust had submitted an application. Board members directed staff to ask Ms. Daoust
to provide a list of any current or future projects she is working on while she
is in the registration process.
Motion: Parker
moved to approve the settlement agreement.
Motion seconded by Tindall.
Garlock recused himself.
Vote: All in
favor. Motion passes.
AGENDA ITEM 5 Public
hearing regarding LCB file R199-07, proposed amendments to NAC
623.900
and NAC 623.905
A public hearing was held to
solicit comments on proposed amendments to NAC 623.900 and NAC 623.905. Spaulding said the workshop for these
proposed changes was held on March 11.
There was no public present
to offer comments, nor were any written comments received prior to the public
hearing.
Motion: Parker moved
to approve LCB file R199-07. Motion
seconded by Oppenheimer Gore.
Vote: All in
favor. Motion passes.
AGENDA ITEM 4A-4 Case No.
08-034N – In the matter of Robert Snow
The respondent is alleged to
have violated NRS 623.360.1(a)(b)(c) by holding himself out as being qualified
to practice architecture and engaging in the practice of architecture, by
meeting with city of North Las Vegas officials and showing them preliminary
drawings he prepared for a commercial mixed used project, prior to obtaining
his certificate of registration issued by the board.
During the reciprocity
process respondent informed staff that he had met with city of North Las Vegas
officials to show them preliminary drawings for a new mixed used project. Respondent had initially prepared drawings
to renovate the Section 8 housing units on the property but was informed by
city officials that they wanted to build a new mixed-use facility and not
renovate the 40 year-old buildings.
Respondent then prepared the preliminary drawings for the new mixed-use
facility.
The respondent was sent a
Notice of Charges concerning this project and a letter of response was
received. The respondent's case was
discussed with Chief Investigator Ruark and the decision was made to offer the
respondent an opportunity to settle this issue informally rather than face a disciplinary
hearing before the board. A settlement
agreement was negotiated incorporating a Guilt Clause, an administrative
penalty of $12,500 and investigative costs in the amount of $1,500. Staff recommends approval of the settlement
agreement.
Motion: Klai moved
to approve the settlement agreement.
Motion seconded by Erny.
Vote: All in
favor. Motion passes.
AGENDA ITEM 4A-5 Case No.
08-040N – In the matter of Carol Faccinetti
The respondent is alleged to
have violated NRS 623.360.1(a)(b) by holding herself out as being qualified to
practice registered interior design by meeting directly with clients prior
obtaining her certificate of registration and prior to working under the
responsible control of a registrant.
During a routine phone call
to respondent regarding her registration file it was revealed by respondent
that she had worked on a commercial project and a residential remodel in which
she performed services that were regulated.
Upon further investigation it was determined that the respondent held
herself out as being qualified to perform services that fall under the practice
of registered interior design by meeting directly with the clients prior to
working under the responsible control of a registrant and prior to her
obtaining a certificate of registration issued by the board. After contracting with the clients,
respondent proceeded to work under the responsible control of a Nevada
registrant.
The respondent was sent a
Notice of Charges concerning this project and a letter of response was
received. The respondent's case was
discussed with Chief Investigator Ruark and the decision was made to offer the
respondent an opportunity to settle this issue informally rather than face a
disciplinary hearing before the board.
A settlement agreement was negotiated incorporating a No Contest Clause,
An Effect on Licensure Clause, completion and passing of the Registration Quiz
at 100 percent prior to the board meeting, an administrative penalty of $2,500
and investigative costs in the amount of $1,500. Staff recommends approval of the settlement agreement.
Motion: Klai moved
to approve the settlement agreement.
Motion seconded by Parker.
Vote: All in
favor. Motion passes.
AGENDA ITEM 4A-6 Case No.
07-042N – In the matter of Michael Bast
The respondent is alleged to
have violated NRS 623.360.1(a)(b)(c) by holding himself out as being qualified
to provide services that fall under the practices of architecture and
residential design, and by engaging in the practices of architecture and residential
design, when he submitted drawings that had not been prepared by himself or a
Nevada-registered design professional for plan check and permitting to the
Pershing County Planning and Building Department.
During a random review of
drawings submitted to the Pershing County Planning and Building Department,
staff discovered that the respondent had submitted drawings to the building
department that had not been prepared by him or a Nevada-registered design
professional. Further review revealed
that the respondent, a Nevada-licensed general contractor, owned the properties
in question and had initially stated that he had submitted the drawings under
the owner/builder exemption. He later
insisted that he had submitted the drawings under the contractor’s
exemption. Subsequent investigation
revealed that the two properties, which had been built, were sold less than 45
days after receiving the certificate of occupancy, which is prohibited under
the owner/builder exemption in NRS 624.031.
Additionally, the drawings had been purchased from other sources and not
prepared by himself, as a contractor, or by one of his employees. Therefore, the respondent worked outside
both the owner/builder exemption and the contractor’s exemption of NRS
623.330.1(d)(e), which constitutes violations of NRS 623.360.1(a)(b)(c).
The respondent was sent a
Notice of Charges concerning this project and a letter of response was
received. The respondent was not
willing to enter into a settlement agreement with board staff; therefore, the
state Attorney General’s office filed a complaint and scheduled a formal
hearing for March 12, 2008, in Reno, Nevada.
Subsequent negotiation resulted in the respondent agreeing to settle
this issued informally by entering into a settlement agreement rather than
proceeding with the disciplinary hearing.
A settlement agreement was negotiated incorporating a Guilt Clause, an
Assurance of Discontinuance Clause, an administrative penalty of $5,000 and
investigative costs in the amount of $3,800.
Staff recommends approval of the settlement agreement.
Motion: Tindall
moved to approve the settlement agreement.
Motion seconded by Klai.
Vote: All in
favor. Motion passes.
AGENDA ITEM 4B Discussion
and possible decision regarding closure of enforcement cases
Ruark
recommended the following cases, which were investigated, for closure without
disciplinary action:
|
05-009N |
05-057N |
05-065N |
07-010N |
|
05-026N |
05-061N |
05-068N |
07-055N |
|
05-055N |
05-063N |
06-021N |
07-069N |
Motion: Erny moved
to close the above-referenced cases.
Motion seconded by Parker.
Vote: All in
favor. Motion passes.
AGENDA ITEM 4C Enforcement
report
Ruark
said that she and Gaul attended the Reno Home Show earlier in the week. She said the Reno show was much larger than
the show in Las Vegas, which she and Bach attended the previous month. She said there were packaged home-plan
vendors at the shows that they were able to educate about Nevada laws.
After the Reno show, Ruark and Gaul visited a number
of northern Nevada building departments.
They also visited business licensing departments to find out if they had
categories for registered interior designers or residential designers and what
criteria they had for someone getting a business license in those categories.
Ruark said that as they were leaving the Washoe
County Building Department, they saw handouts for owner/builders that appeared
to be fill-in-the-blank plans for simple projects, like a garage, deck or patio
cover. She asked what the board’s
position was on this type on document.
Board members said that a number of building departments have similar
handouts to assist owner/builders. They
stressed that these handouts should be guidelines for owner/builders, not
fill-in-the-blank plans. Board members
directed staff to send a letter to building departments with this information.
AGENDA ITEM 4D Discussion
and possible decision regarding what constitutes disciplinary action
and
need for clarifying regulation pertaining to settlement with unlicensed
individuals
Ruark
told board members that she has recently found out that some attorneys consider
“No Guilt Clauses” in settlement agreements to not be a form of disciplinary
action, and as such, advise clients that they do not have to report it to other
state licensing agencies. Board members
reiterated that they consider settlement/consent agreements entered into with
unlicensed individuals to be disciplinary action regardless of the guilt
clause.
The board adjourned for
lunch.
AGENDA ITEM 7 Discussion
and possible decision regarding proposed meeting date for the Exam
Committee
to update the RID Nevada Supplemental Examination
Spaulding
said this was discussed under Agenda Item 3; the committee will meet on May 7.
AGENDA ITEM 8 Discussion
and possible decision regarding proposed statute changes to NRS
Chapter
623 for the 2009 Legislative Session
Spaulding said board members identified potential
subjects for bills draft during the planning session in July 2007. Proposed language is included in the agenda
books for review. She said she usually
receives a request for bill drafts (BDR) from the governor’s office in May and
then has a limited period of time to submit BDRs. She said the board could finalize any BDRs at the next
meeting.
Spaulding said there are some proposed housekeeping
changes:
·
NRS 623.190.6(c) should
to be changed to reflect the name changes in the updated Residential Design
Exam;
·
NRS 623.192.1(d)(1)
should be changed to reflect FIDER’s name change to the Council for Interior
Design Accreditation;
·
NRS 623.350 should to be
changed to reflect the board’s position that any firm operating in the state
must have a resident registrant working regularly in the office. This has always been the board’s position,
but as a result of past LCB codification, this requirement has been limited to
firms not wholly owned by registrants.
·
NRS 623.365 should be
changed to the previous language requiring 30 days notice for any board hearing
as the statute was modified by LCB in error after that 2005 Legislative Session.
Spaulding said the proposed
new language instituting emeritus status is language the board agreed to at the
planning session. She said this was
language copied from another state’s statute.
Board members suggested wordsmith changes to the proposed language. Board members discussed the proposed
eligibility requirements. They said
emeritus status should be given to registrants who have been practicing for a
long time in the state and have given something to Nevada. Board members said the age requirement
should be 60 years old and the registrant should be a resident registrant for
at least five years.
Spaulding said the board has
been discussing clarifying the definition of responsible control to take into
account current practice. Spaulding said
that she presented language to LCB and LCB said the proposal was very
confusing. Board members said that
looking at the proposal with fresh eyes, they agreed that it was confusing and
that the definition should be left as is.
Staff and board members discussed what constitutes “technical
submissions.” Board members said that
it covers everything under the practice of architecture, registered interior
design or residential design, not only documents submitted to a public
authority.
Spaulding said that during
the planning session the board members expressed they wanted to pursue
requiring written contracts. She
presented language used in California and in Ohio. She said the language covers the scenarios that board members
thought may not require a contract, such as services for long-term client that
have been provided in the past. Ruark
said she believes that requiring written contracts will help head off many
enforcement complaints. Board members
agreed that requiring written contracts will help to protect the public. They said they do not want the proposed
statute to be as prescriptive and detailed as California law. They asked Spaulding to pare down the
required elements and present it again at the next board meeting.
AGENDA ITEM 9 Discussion
and possible decision regarding updating firm name guidelines
Spaulding said there has
been discussion recently about approving firm names that contain the name or
acronym of a state other than Nevada.
She reminded board members that if the firm is filing with the Secretary
of State as a foreign corporation they must register using the same name they
use in the home state. Board members
remained split on whether this practice should be allowed and said they would discuss
it again at a future board meeting.
AGENDA
ITEM 14 Public information report
Hatfield
presented proposed new letterhead and logos created by Robertson Wood. Board members said they did not like the
proposals and gave feedback for a second round of proposals.
Hatfield presented a draft notice about withdrawing as design professional of record, taken from a recent article in “Focus.” Board members directed Hatfield to post the notice to the website and send it to Nevada building departments.
She reported that she spoke to the Professional Practice class at IADT.
AGENDA ITEM 10A Review
and discussion regarding the draft resolutions to be acted upon at the 2008
NCARB Annual Meeting and Conference
Spaulding said that these
items would be discussed at the WCARB meeting, so no decision regarding the
board’s position needs to be made today.
AGENDA ITEM 11A FYI: BOD meeting minutes, December 2007 and
January 2008
Spaulding said this item was provided for board
members’ information.
AGENDA ITEM 12A Update
on the RD Examination administered on February 15, 2008
Spaulding said the results from the first
administration of the new exam are in the board books. She said no one passed “Structural
Technology,” one out of 11 passed “Materials and Methods” and four out of 10
passed “Building Systems and Life Safety.”
She recommended the board administer the exam a few times before making
any decisions on revising the exam.
AGENDA ITEM 13 Executive
director report
Spaulding said that AIA is
putting together an effort to request the board change the IDP/ARE
sequencing. She received requests to
put it on the board agenda after the agenda was posted, so it could not be
discussed at this meeting.
Spaulding said that the
server was down for nine days because the independent contractor provided by
DoIT was in over his head installing new hard drives. She said unfortunately they lost six weeks worth of data, but
most of it should be able to be reentered into the database because of hard
copies in the files.
Spaulding said she would be
setting a meeting for the RID Broadly Experienced committee soon because there
is a new binder to review. She said she
would begin bringing in new architect members to train.
Spaulding reported that she
will moderate a breakout session at the NCARB Annual Meeting regarding
disciplinary action.
AGENDA ITEM 15 Items for future agenda
·
Future implementation of
IDEP
·
Discussion on how to best
protect the public against unlicensed individuals doing residential design and
regulated areas of residential interior design
·
BDRs for 2009 legislative
session
·
Discussion regarding firm
name guidelines
AGENDA ITEM 16 Public comment
There
was no public comment.
Chairman Garlock adjourned the meeting at
4:10 p.m.
|
______________________________ William Snyder, Secretary/Treasurer |
_________________________________ Gina Spaulding, Executive Director |