BILL REQ. #:  H-1387.1 



_____________________________________________ 

HOUSE BILL 1808
_____________________________________________
State of Washington58th Legislature2003 Regular Session

By Representatives Kenney, Cox, Fromhold, Priest, Berkey, Jarrett, Gombosky, Morrell, Chase, McCoy and Lantz

Read first time 02/11/2003.   Referred to Committee on Higher Education.



     AN ACT Relating to establishing standards of review in order to change lines of instruction at research universities; amending RCW 28B.10.115; and adding a new section to chapter 28B.80 RCW.

BE IT ENACTED BY THE LEGISLATURE OF THE STATE OF WASHINGTON:

Sec. 1   RCW 28B.10.115 and 1985 c 218 s 1 are each amended to read as follows:
     The courses of instruction of both the University of Washington and Washington State University shall embrace as major lines, pharmacy, architecture, civil engineering, ((electrical engineering,)) mechanical engineering, chemical engineering, and forest management as distinguished from forest products and logging engineering which are exclusive to the University of Washington. These major lines shall be offered and taught at said institutions only.

NEW SECTION.  Sec. 2   A new section is added to chapter 28B.80 RCW to read as follows:
     (1) This section applies to any amendment to RCW 28B.10.115 after January 1, 2003, that changes the major lines of instruction exclusive to the University of Washington or Washington State University, including the amendments in chapter . . ., Laws of 2003 (this act).
     (2) If a four-year institution requests approval under RCW 28B.80.340 of a new degree program that is the result of legislation enacted to change the terms of RCW 28B.10.115, the higher education coordinating board shall require the institution to submit the following information as part of the board's review of the proposed program:
     (a) Detailed evidence of why the program is justified, including the size and scope of student, employer, and community demand for the program;
     (b) A comprehensive cost and benefit analysis regarding the proposed program, including evidence for why the proposed program would be more cost-effective than relying on public or private programs already in place;
     (c) Projected future enrollment in the program and substantiation of the enrollment estimates; and
     (d) Additional information as requested by the board regarding demand, need, and cost-effectiveness of the program.
     (3) The higher education coordinating board shall submit a complete analysis of a proposed program under this section to the higher education committees of the legislature before making a final determination regarding approval of the program.

--- END ---