June 10, 2009

MINUTES FOR BOARD MEETING OF THE NEVADA STATE BOARD OF ARCHITECTURE, INTERIOR DESI= GN AND RESIDENTIAL DESIGN

June 9-10, 2009

Board Conference Room, 2080 E. Flamingo Rd., Su= ite 120, Las Vegas, NV 89119

Tuesday, June 9, 2009=

Chairman George Garl= ock called the meeting to order at 5:30 p.m.

Roll Call: Greg Erny, Judith Fermoile, George Garlock, Larry Henry, John Klai, JoAnn Oppenheimer Gore, Derrell Parker, B= ill Snyder and Larry Tindall.

Also in attendance:<= span style=3D'mso-spacerun:yes'> Gina Spaulding, Executive Directo= r; Betty Ruark, Chief Investigator; Monica Harrison and Stacey Hatfield, staf= f.

AGENDA ITEM 1<= /u> &nbs= p; Young Architects Forum town hall meeting with board – Open discussion by

= ; &= nbsp; &nb= sp; students and architects on any and all issues regarding education, licensing and

= ; &= nbsp; &nb= sp; the practice of architecture

Board members met informally with architecture students, interns and new professionals to di= scuss items of interest to the emerging and young professionals.

Chairman Garlock adjourned the meeting at 7:30 p.m.

* * * * * * * * * *

Wednesday, June 10, 2= 009

Chairman Garlock called the meeting to= order at 9:00 a.m.

Roll Call: Greg Erny, Judith Fermoile, George Garlock, Larry Henry, John Klai, JoAnn Oppenheimer Gore, Derrell Parker, B= ill Snyder and Larry Tindall.

Also in attendance:<= span style=3D'mso-spacerun:yes'> Gina Spaulding, Executive Directo= r; Betty Ruark, Chief Investigator; Dianna Hegeduis, Legal Counsel; Monica Harrison and Stacey Hatfield, staff.

AGENDA ITEM 1<= /u> &nbs= p; Approval of consent agenda

<= /span>

Consent agenda inclu= ded the following:

A. Approval of Agenda

B. Approval of Minutes: March 18, 2009=

C. Secretary/= Treasurer Report

1. Nevada Architect, Registered Interior Designer = and Residential Designer Licensing Statistics

2. Smith Barney quarterly statement, Bank of Ameri= ca , Community Bank monthly statements and NSBAIDRD QR month ended 3/31/09=

D. Ratificati= on of Reciprocal Licenses (see attached list)

E. Firm Name Approval Requests

1. Community by Design

2. Doug Walton/Architect PLLC

3. Environmental Design Group

4. MGA Architecture

5. North Pacific, Inc.

6. VDesign

7. Wikoff Design Studio, LLC

8. Threesixzero

9. Advanced Residential Design

10. DK&Architect

F. Firm Regis= tration Approval Requests

1. Visioneering Studios Architecture, Inc.

2. Coda Architecture, LLC

3. RBI Design

4. MulvannyG2 Architecture Corporation<= /span>

Architects: Registration by reciprocity<= /o:p>

6378	Richard E. Nowicki	6390	Carlos A. Cadiz	6401	Kenneth McCracken
6379	Charles R. Rowe, III	6391	Donald R. Dethlefs, Jr.	6402	Douglas Oberst
6380	Michael E. Koch	6392	Kenneth B. Harris	6403	David L. Robar
6381	Mark E. Levine	6393	Nancy K. Keenan	6404	Alan G. Rose
6382	John C. Lopeman	6394	Henry Tom	6405	May T. Sung
6383	Rodney L. Sartain	6395	Mark R. Vacha	6406	Craig J. Almeleh
6384	Annie V. Schwemmer	6396	Emanuele Arguelles	6407	Thomas J. Mesuk
6385	Mark W. Vaughan	6397	Chris B. Baker	6408	William D. Pounds, Jr.
6386	Solim Gasparik	6398	Willard A. Barnes	6409	Keith A. Wismer
6387	David E. Green	6399	Charles I. Briegel	6410	Gregory B. Cook
6388	Melanie C. Smythe	6400	John P. Gibson	6411	Bruce H. Schmiedl
6389	David J. Bury

Residential designers: Registration by r= eciprocity

290-P

Michael P. Thieme

Garlock said items 1= E-9 and 1E-10 would be pulled until after the new registrants are sworn-in. Board members requested agenda it= ems 1C-1, 1E-1, 1E-3, 1E-5, 1E-8 and 1F-1 be pulled from the consent agenda.

Motion: Henry moved to approve the consent agenda, items 1A= , 1B, 1C-2, 1D, 1E-2, 1E-4, 1E-6, 1E-7, and 1F-2 through 1F-4. Motion seconded by Klai.

Vote: = All in favor. Motion passes. <= /o:p>

AGENDA ITEM 1C-1 Nevada architect, registered interior designer and residential des= igner licensing

= ; &= nbsp; &nb= sp; statistics

Board members asked = how the numbers of licenses compared to a year ago. Spaulding said the current number= s are lower than last year, but not by a large percentage.

Motion: Erny moved to approve the Nevada architect, registered interior designer and residential designer <= /span>licensing statistics. Motion seconded by Fermoile.

Vote: = All in favor. Motion passes. <= /o:p>

AGENDA ITEM 1E-1 Firm name approval request: Community by Design<= o:p>

Motion: Klai moved to approve the firm name “Community by Design.” Motion secon= ded by Fermoile.

Klai said he thought the firm name was too broad and possibly misleading. Spaulding said that the registran= t owner was in the audience and available to answer questions. Spaulding also said that she pass= ed this one through to the board because a similar name had previously been approv= ed by the board; that firm is now defunct. The registrant owner explained that she planned to market the firm = as being responsive to this community, which is why she chose the name.

Vote: = All in favor. Motion passes. <= /o:p>

AGENDA ITEM 1E-3 Firm name approval request: Environmental Design Group, LLC

Motion: Klai moved to approve the firm name “Environmental Design Group, LLC.” Motion seconded by Henry.

Klai said his concern was the same as with the previous item and asked if this = name was too broad and possibly misleading.&nb= sp; He also questioned use of the term “group,” since the application showed only one member. Spaulding said that the registrant owner was in the audience and available to answer questions. The registrant owner said there are plans to have a group of design profession= als, and that he currently has employees. He said he is using a more generic name, as opposed to named partne= rs, as it is easier for transition.

Vote: = All in favor. Motion passes. <= /o:p>

AGENDA ITEM 1E-5 Firm name approval request: North Pacific, Inc.<= o:p>

Motion: Snyder moved to approve the firm name “North Pacific, Inc.” Motion secon= ded by Klai.

Klai said he again was concerned that this name may be too generic and possibly misleading. Board members sa= id these newer, broader names, seem to be the current direction firm names are going.

Vote: = All in favor. Motion passes. <= /o:p>

Board members discussed the number of approved firm names in the database and questioned which ones were still active.&= nbsp; Spaulding said when the database is revamped it would be a good tim= e to gather and update that information. She suggested the board could convene a task force at that time to gather the information and propose guidelines for how to keep that informa= tion up to date in the future, and other related policy.

AGENDA ITEM 1E-8 Firm name approval request: Threesixzero

Motion: Klai moved to approve the firm name “Threesixzero.” Motion seconded by Henry.

Klai said he believed a similar firm name was already in use. Staff checked board records and confirmed there was a Nevada registered firm using “360 Architecture.” Board m= embers said the firm names were too closely related and could be confusing to the public.

Vote: = Tindall in favor. Erny, Fermoile, Garlock, Henry, Klai, Oppenheimer Gore, Parker and Snyder opposed. Motion fails.

Motion: Klai moved to deny approval of th= e firm name “Threesixzero.” Motion seconded by Erny.

Vote: Erny, Fermoile, Gar= lock, Henry, Klai, Oppenheimer Gore, Parker and Snyder in favor. Tindall opposed. Motion passes.

AGENDA ITEM 1F-1 Firm name registration approval request: Visioneering Studios Architecture= ,

= ; &= nbsp; &nb= sp; Inc.

Motion: Klai moved to approve the firm name “Visioneering Studios Architecture, Inc.<= span style=3D'font-size:11.0pt'>” Motion seconded by Snyder.

Erny said the non-registrant owner needs to be reminded that he cannot hold him= self out as being able to provide professional services. Spaulding said this is a common c= oncern with a number of firm registrations and that language has been added to the approval letter to caution non-registrants about what they can and cannot = do.

Vote: = All in favor. Motion passes. <= /o:p>

AGENDA ITEM 2 &nbs= p; Discussion and possible decision regarding Jennifer Bahmiller’s application for=

&nb= sp; = ; &= nbsp; &nb= sp; registered interior designer registration pursuant to NRS 623.192.1(d)(3)<= /span>

Motion: = Synder moved to approve Jennifer Bahmiller’s application for registered int= erior designer registration. Motion seconded by Fermoile.

Spaulding stated that= the committee recommended approval of Ms. Bahmiller’s application. She added that Ms. Bahmiller is a= UNR graduate. Ms. Bahmiller answ= ered board member questions.

Vote: = All in favor. Motion passes. <= /o:p>

AGENDA ITEM 3A Deliberations/Action = on applications for registration: Architectural

Snyder swore in the following individuals as architects:

1. Kasey A. Baker............................. 6412=

2. Do Seong Kim............................... 6413

3. Daron J. Lynch.............................. 6414

4. Brandon Y. K. Maldonado............ 6415

5. Robert Messiana............................ 6416

6. Jeremy A. Packer........................... 6417

7. Jeff A. Wagner.............................. 6418

Motion: = Klai moved to approve the registration of the above referenced individuals as architects.&nbs= p; Motion seconded by Fermoile.

Vote: = All in favor. Motion passes. <= /o:p>

AGENDA ITEM 3B Deliberations/Action = on applications for registration: Registered interior design

Snyder swore in the following individuals as registered interior designers:<= /p>

1. Chloe A. Chudina............= .............. 172-ID

2. Jennifer A. Bahmiller.......= ............. 173-ID

Motion: = Parker moved to approve the registration of the above referenced individuals as registered interior designers. Motion seconded by Fermoile. <= /p>

Vote: = All in favor. Motion passes. <= /o:p>

AGENDA ITEM 3C Deliberations/Action = on applications for registration: Residential designers

Snyder swore in the following individuals as residential designers:

1. Thomas J. McCleister........= ............ 291-P

2. Richard J. Scanlan..........= ............... 292-P

3. Rick E. Tester..............= .................. 293-P

Motion: = Tindall moved to approve the registration of the above referenced individuals as residential designers. Motion seconded by Klai. <= /p>

Vote: = All in favor. Motion passes. <= /o:p>

Garlock asked if the new registrants = had any comments about the registration process.&= nbsp; New registrants had no comments about the process.

AGENDA ITEM 1E-9 Firm name approval request: Advanced Residential Design

Motion: Henry moved to approve the firm name “Advanced Residential Design.” Motion seconded by Snyder.

Board members said the term “advanced” implied an endorsement or lev= el of superiority, such as “World’s Best,” which is contrary to firm name guidelines and could mislead the public. The owner registrant said he chos= e the term because he will practice in an “advanced” way, such as us= ing computer drafting instead of hand drafting.

Vote: = Tindall in favor. Erny, Fermoile, Garlock, Henry, Klai, Oppenheimer Gore, Parker and Snyder opposed. Motion fails.

Motion: Klai moved to deny approval of th= e firm name “Advanced Residential Design.” Motion seconded by Snyder.

Vote: Erny, Fermoile, Gar= lock, Henry, Klai, Oppenheimer Gore, Parker and Snyder in favor. Tindall opposed. Motion passes.

AGENDA ITEM 1E-10 Firm na= me approval request: DK&Arc= hitect

Motion: Klai moved to approve the firm name “DK&Architect.” Motion seconded by Snyder. <= /o:p>

Board members said the name was confusing, but that it did comply with firm name guidelines. The owner regist= rant indicated he may apply for a variation of the name, which would be clearer= , in the future.

Vote: Erny, Fermoile, Gar= lock, Henry, Klai, Parker, Snyder and Tindall in favor. Oppenheimer Gore opposed. Motion passes.

AGENDA ITEM 4 &nbs= p; Discussion and possible decision regarding the application of Michael G. Hull for

&nb= sp; = ; &= nbsp; &nb= sp; architectural reciprocal registration

Spaulding said Mr. Hu= ll’s NCARB record contains disciplinary action. Spaulding said that the Maryland board disciplined him for practici= ng architecture with an expired license.&nbs= p; His license in Maryland was restored.

Motion: = Erny moved to approve the reciprocal registration for Michael G. Hull. Motion seconded by Fermoile. =

Vote: = All in favor. Motion passes. <= /o:p>

AGENDA ITEM 5 &nbs= p; Discussion and possible decision to amend continuing education regulation to

&nb= sp; = ; &= nbsp; &nb= sp; add a provision for emeritus status

Spaulding said that s= ince the board’s bill creating an emeritus status for retiring registrant= s has been signed into law, the board can begin the process of amending the continuing education regulation to allow an exception for emeritus registrants. She presented p= roposed language, as originally written when drafting the initial continuing educa= tion regulation.

Board members discussed the intent of the emeri= tus status bill and said registrants need to be clearly educated about what “emeritus status” means.

Motion: = Erny moved to approve the draft language to exempt emeritus registrants from the continuing education requirements. Motion seconded by Oppenheimer Gore.

Vote: = All in favor. Motion passes. <= /o:p>

AGENDA ITEM 6 &nbs= p; 2009 Legislative Session debriefing – James Wadhams, Board Lobbyist =

Spaulding said Mr. Wa= dhams was not able to attend due to a personal matter, but he would likely speak= to the board at the August meeting. In Wadhams stead, Spaulding submitted a one-page debrief, which she reviewed = with board members. Spaulding also reviewed the board’s bill tracking list.

The board adjourned for lunch.

AGENDA ITEM 7A-1<= /b> &nb= sp; Case No. 09-036N – In the matter of Jill McGovern

The respondent is all= eged to have violated NRS 623.360.1(a)(b)(c) by holding herself and her firm out as being qualified to provide architectural and residential design services w= hen she prepared construction documents for a residential remodel in Incline Village, Nevada, without having a certificate of registration issued by the board.

During a visit to the Incline Village office of the Washoe County Building Department, staff rec= eived information that a residential designer had attempted to submit a set of construction documents for plan check and permitting. The documents were rejected becau= se the residential designer did not have a Nevada seal to affix to the documents.= The designer removed her title bl= ock from the documents, which were later submitted to the Reno office of the W= ashoe County Building Department as an owner/builder project. Subsequent investigation revealed= that the residential designer was a non-registrant from Olympic Valley, Califor= nia.

The respondent was se= nt a Notice of Investigation concerning this project and a letter of response w= as received. The respondent's c= ase was discussed with Chief Investigator Ruark and the decision was made to offer= the respondent an opportunity to settle the issue informally rather than face a disciplinary hearing before the board.&nb= sp; A settlement agreement was negotiated incorporating a Guilt Clause,= an administrative penalty of $3,500 and investigative costs in the amount of $1,500. Staff recommends app= roval of the settlement agreement.

Motion: = Snyder moved to approve the settlement agreement. Motion seconded by Fermoile.

Vote: = All in favor. Motion passes. <= /o:p>

AGENDA ITEM 7A-2<= /b>  &nb= sp; Case No. 09-046N – In the matter of Jered Plouzek and Mark Wilson

The respondents are a= lleged to have violated NRS 623.360.1(a)(b) by holding themselves out as being qualified to provide architectural services when they responded to a Reque= st for Qualifications for a public works project in Mesquite, Nevada, without having a certificate of registration issued by the board.

During respondent Jer= ed Plouzek’s reciprocity interview, he informed staff that his firm was asked to submit a proposal for a “splash pad” project in Mesqu= ite, Nevada. When Investigator Ga= ul queried if anyone from the firm had met with the City of Mesquite, Plouzek stated that his partner, Mark Wilson, had met with city representatives in December 2008. Subsequent investigation revealed that the firm had responded to a “Request for= Qualifications for Professional Architectural Services for the Design of an Addition to t= he Mesquite Community and Senior Center and Other Possible Projects (RFQ No. 08-05),” prior to respondent Plouzek being issued a certificate of registration.



The respondents were = sent a Notice of Charges concerning this case and a letter of response was received. The respondents= 217; case was discussed with Chief Investigator Ruark and the decision was made= to offer the respondents an opportunity to settle the issue informally rather= than face a disciplinary hearing before the board. A settlement agreement was negoti= ated incorporating a Guilt Clause, an administrative penalty of $2,500 and inve= stigative costs in the amount of $1,200. Staff recommends approval of the settlement agreement.

Motion: = Klai moved to approve the settlement agreement. Motion seconded by Fermoile.

Vote: = All in favor. Motion passes. <= /o:p>

AGENDA ITEM 7A-3<= /b>  &nb= sp; Case No. 09-045N – In the matter of David Gieratz

The respondent is all= eged to have violated NRS 623.360.1(a)(b)(c) by working outside the contractorR= 17;s exemption when he submitted three sets of construction documents for plan = check and permitting to the building department, which were not prepared by him = or his employee.

This enforcement case= is in follow-up to case 08-077N, in which the board found a non-registrant to be= in violation of NRS 623.360.1(a)(b)(c), when the non-registrant prepared construction documents for three commercial tenant improvement projects located in Fernley, Nevada. These construction documents were then submitted by this respondent, general contractor David Gieratz. Respondent Gieratz = signed the attestation on the stamp entitled “Contractor Prepared Plans,= 221; which read, “These plans have been prepared and submitted by the contractor as a design/build project, and as an exception to NRS 623.330, = for work to be performed under the license category of the undersigned contrac= tor as authorized by NRS 624.020.”

The respondent was se= nt a Notice of Investigation concerning this project and a letter of response w= as received. The respondent's c= ase was discussed with Chief Investigator Ruark and the decision was made to offer= the respondent an opportunity to settle the issue informally rather than face a disciplinary hearing before the board.&nb= sp; A settlement agreement was negotiated incorporating a Guilt Clause,= an Additional Terms and Conditions Clause, an administrative penalty of $5,50= 0 and investigative costs in the amount of $1,000. Staff recommends approval of the settlement agreement.

Motion: = Snyder moved to approve the settlement agreement. Motion seconded by Oppenheimer Gore.

Vote: = All in favor. Motion passes. <= /o:p>

AGENDA ITEM 7A-4<= /b>  &nb= sp; Case No. 09-064N – In the matter of Scott Turner

The respondent is all= eged to have violated NRS 623.360.1(c) by engaging in the practice of architecture= for the remodel of a single family residence, without having a certificate of registration issued by the board.

Staff received a call= from the respondent inquiring which state would have jurisdiction in collecting monies owed for a project located in Nevada. Upon further questioning, it was discovered that the respondent was originally hired to prepare plans for a Montana residence his clients were considering. Instead, the clients decided to r= emodel the home they already owned in Lamoille, Nevada. The respondent prepared floor pla= ns and elevations for the client’s Nevada residence, without having a Nevada certificate of registration.

The respondent was se= nt a Notice of Charges concerning this project and a letter of response was received. The respondent's c= ase was discussed with Chief Investigator Ruark and the decision was made to offer= the respondent an opportunity to settle the issue informally rather than face a disciplinary hearing before the board.&nb= sp; A settlement agreement was negotiated incorporating a No Contest Cl= ause, an administrative penalty of $1,000 and investigative costs in the amount = of $1,300. Staff recommends app= roval of the settlement agreement.

Motion: = Snyder moved to approve the settlement agreement. Motion seconded by Henry.

Vote: = All in favor. Motion passes. <= /o:p>

Board members discussed how to best educate bui= lding departments about NRS 623 so that they don’t inadvertently give the public incorrect information about designing projects in Nevada.

AGENDA ITEM 7A-5<= /b>  &nb= sp; Case No. 09-066N – In the matter of Paul Evans

The respondent is all= eged to have committed three violations of NRS 623.360.1(b) and three violations o= f NRS 623.360.1(c) by holding himself out as being qualified to practice architecture, and by engaging in the practice of architecture, for three restaurants located in Nevada, without having a certificate of registration issued by the board.

During the background investigation of reciprocity applicant, Respondent Paul Evans, he disclose= d on his application that he had prepared schematic drawings for a restaurant c= hain in Nevada. Further investiga= tion revealed that the respondent had prepared drawings for three locations of = the Café Rio restaurant chain, prior to receiving a certificate of registration by the board. <= o:p>

The respondent was se= nt a Notice of Charges concerning these projects and a letter of response was received. The respondent's c= ase was discussed with Chief Investigator Ruark and the decision was made to offer= the respondent an opportunity to settle the issue informally rather than face a disciplinary hearing before the board.&nb= sp; A settlement agreement was negotiated incorporating a Guilt Clause,= an administrative penalty of $18,000 and investigative costs in the amount of $1,200. Staff recommends approval of the settlement agreement.

Motion: = Erny moved to approve the settlement agreement. Motion seconded by Fermoile.

Vote: = All in favor. Motion passes. <= /o:p>

AGENDA ITEM 7A-6<= /b>  &nb= sp; Case No. 09-073N – In the matter of John Kristedja =

The respondent is all= eged to have violated NRS 623.360.1(a)(b)(c) by holding himself out as being quali= fied to practice architecture, and by engaging in the practice of architecture,= for a commercial project, without having a certificate of registration issued = by the board.

During the background investigation of reciprocity applicant, Respondent John Kristedja, he disc= losed on his application that he had prepared design drawings to submit to the Boulder City Planning Department for a special use permit for the United Methodist Church. Additional= ly, staff received anonymous information that the respondent had applied for t= he special use permit and prepared drawings for the same church. Further investigation revealed th= at the respondent had also issued a proposal to prepare construction drawings pri= or to having a certificate of registration by the board.

The respondent was se= nt a Notice of Charges concerning this project and a letter of response was received. The respondent's c= ase was discussed with Chief Investigator Ruark and the decision was made to offer= the respondent an opportunity to settle the issue informally rather than face a disciplinary hearing before the board.&nb= sp; A settlement agreement was negotiated incorporating a Guilt Clause,= an Effect on Licensure Clause, an administrative penalty of $10,000 and investigative costs in the amount of $1,200. 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. <= /o:p>

AGENDA ITEM 7B  &nb= sp;     Discussion and possible decision regarding closure of enforcement cases

Ruark recommended the following cases, which were investigated, for closure with= out disciplinary action:

08-015N

08-043R

08-057R

08-084R

09-002N

08-025N

Motion: = Parker moved to close the above-referenced cases. Motion seconded by Snyder.

Vote: = All in favor. Motion passes. <= /o:p>

AGENDA ITEM 7C  &nb= sp;     Enforcement report

Ruark said at the last meeting there was a discussion regarding guilt clauses an= d the board’s concern as to whether an action was considered “disciplinary action” if there was no guilt clause in the settlement agreement. She sa= id that under administrative law, this board has the right to say that an action i= s, or is not, disciplinary action. Board members said that all cases resolved with settlement agreements are consid= ered disciplinary action, whether or not a guilt clause is included.=

AGENDA ITEM 8     &nbs= p;    Committee report regarding Nevada RID Supplemental Examination review/

  &nb= sp;            = ;            &= nbsp;           &nb= sp; rewrite on April 22, 2009 and May 13, 2009

Spaulding reported that the committee has nearly completed its review and rewrite of= the Nevada Supplemental Exam. Sp= aulding said that the new exam has been administered twice and it is apparent that= the questions are more technical on the new exams. She said it is difficult for the = exam to be completed in the allotted 45 minutes and would like the board to consid= er increasing the time allowed to 75 minutes. Spaulding also asked the board to consider allowing all reference materials into the exam now, not only the IBC. She said some of the new questions reference other reference materials. Spaulding said the committee supports increasing the testing time as well as allowing all reference materials into the exam. =

Board members suggested convening a pretesting group of recently licensed archit= ects and registered interior designers to take the exam in the future.

Motion: = Snyder moved to increase testing time for the N= evada Supplemental Exam to 75 minutes and to allow candidates to bring all refer= ence materials into the exam. Mot= ion seconded by Fermoile.

Vote: All in favor. Motion passes.<= /p>

AGENDA ITEM 9A        Discussion and possib= le decision regarding WCARB bylaw amendments to be

  &nb= sp;            = ;            &= nbsp;           &nb= sp; voted on at the 2009 NCARB Annual Business Meeting in Chicago, IL

Spaulding said the bylaws that will be voted on= at the regional meeting are in the board agenda books. Board members had no comments on = the bylaw amendments.

AGENDA ITEM 9B  &nb= sp;     FYI: WCARB regional meeting minutes fr= om March 26-27, 2009

Spaulding said this item was provided for board members’ information.

AGENDA ITEM 9C  &nb= sp;     Discussion and possible decision regarding NCARB resolutions to be acted upon

  &nb= sp;            = ;            &= nbsp;           &nb= sp; at the 2009 Annual Meeting and Conference in Chicago, IL

Board members discussed the resolutions slated = for consideration at the NCARB Annual Meeting.

Resolution 2009-01: Amends “Model Law” &#= 8211; Clarifying the definition of “Responsible Control”<= /span>

No opposition was voiced.

Resolution 2009-02: Amends “Handbook for Intern= s and Architects” – Applying Five-Year Rolling Clock to Previously P= assed Divisions and Authorizations to Test

No opposition was voiced.

Resolution 2009-03: Amends “Handbook for Intern= s and Architects” – Transfers Specific Education Requirements and the Education Standard to the “Education Guidelines”

No opposition was voiced.

Resolution 2009-04: Amends “Handbook for Intern= s and Architects” – Transfers the Intern Development Program Require= ments to the “IDP Guidelines”

Board members said they would wait to hear discussion on this item at the meeting, as they are concerned about the possibility of giving up the board’s rights to have input into what = is allowed under IDP.

Resolution 2009-05: Revokes the membership of the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico for Failure to Pay Annual Membership Dues=

No opposition was voiced.

AGENDA ITEM 9D  &nb= sp;     FYI: NCARB ARE security FAQs and news = clip regarding NCARB BOD action

  &nb= sp;            = ;            &= nbsp;           &nb= sp; taken against ARE confidentiality agreement violators

Spaulding suggested an article be included in Focus about all of the recent ARE confidentiality agreement violations.&nbs= p; Board members agreed this is a serious issue and that the informati= on should also be shared with candidates by sending a letter to all registran= ts asking them to share it with any interns in the office.<= /p>

AGENDA ITEM 9E  &nb= sp;     FYI: NCARB BOD summary meeting minutes= for April 2009

Spaulding said this item was provided for board members’ information.

AGENDA ITEM 10A  &nb= sp;   FYI: NCIDQ BOD meeting minutes for Jan= uary, March and April 2009

Spaulding said this item was provided for board members’ information.

AGENDA ITEM 10B  &nb= sp;   FYI: NCIDQ Board of Delegates conferen= ce call backup documentation held on

  &nb= sp;            = ;            &= nbsp;           &nb= sp; May 6, 2009

Spaulding said this item was provided for board members’ information.

<= /p>
AGENDA ITEM 10C  &nb= sp;   NCIDQ Call for Resolutions for the 2009 Council of Delegates meeting in San

  &nb= sp;            = ;            &= nbsp;           &nb= sp; Antonio, TX on November 13-14, 2009

Spaulding said this item was provided for board members’ information.

AGENDA ITEM 11  &nb= sp;     Update regarding TMCC and the Residential Design Examination

Spaulding said that Ellis Antunez, the board’s contact at TM= CC, is retiring. Ric Licata has = assured her that the board will still be able to use the TMCC facilities for the residential design examination. Board members asked Spaulding to find out the status of the residential design d= egree programs at TMCC and CSN.

<= /p>
AGENDA ITEM 12  &nb= sp;     Executive director report

Spaulding said the bo= ard will start reviewing its regulations at the next board meeting and will co= ntinue at future board meetings. Sh= e also said it is time for a committee to look at the RID Substantially Equivalent application to see which items are relevant and possibly update it to the latest CIDA standards. Spaul= ding said that staff is beginning to get ready for CEU implementation, which go= es into effect in 2010. She sai= d the board should issue a certificate of appreciation for the code expert who assisted in the rewrite of the RID Supplemental Exam. Board members agreed. Spaulding reported she was appoin= ted to NCARB’s IDP Committee. Board members supported her appointment.

AGENDA ITEM 13        Public information re= port

Hatfield said that the most recent issue of Focus was in the agenda books, as well as the tracking report. Also included is the Special Legislative Edition, which will be sent the day af= ter the board meeting. She repor= ted that the board was invited to speak at the AIA High School Design Awards, = but she wasn’t able to attend due to a legislative hearing in Carson City. Hatfield said news cli= ps were also included in the agenda books. She said the website update in underway.

AGENDA ITEM 14        Items for future agen= da

·         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

·         NAC 623 revie= w

·         Possible upda= te of RID Substantially Equivalent application

AGENDA ITEM 15        Public comment <= /o:p>

There was no public comment.

Chairman Garlock adjourned the meeting at 4:50 p.m.

______________________________

William Snyder, Secretary/Treasurer<= o:p>

_________________________________

Gina Spaulding, Executive Director