111 Congress Ave. Suite 2800 Austin, Texas 78701

Law Office of Joseph R. Knight

Joseph R. Knight Office 512-457-0231 Mobile 512-750-1270 Fax 512-684-7681 jknight@knighttxlaw.com

July 7, 2015

Via Email Daniel Sharphorn UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS SYSTEM OFFICE OF THE GENERAL COUNSEL 201 West 7th Street, 6th Floor Austin, Texas 78701

RE: University of Texas system Board of Regents Meeting July 8, 2015

Dear Dan:

Based on telephone discussions with Francie Frederick and Pat Lochridge, I understand that outside counsel to Chancellor McRaven, intends to address the Board of Regents on July 8 during an executive session with respect to the following agenda items:

1. Consultation with Attorney Regarding Legal Matters or Pending and/or Contemplated Litigation or Settlement Offers Section 551.071

a. U. T. System Board of Regents: Discussion with Counsel on pending legal issues b. U. T. System Board of Regents: Discussion and appropriate

action concerning legal issues related to litigation styled Hall v. McRaven

I further understand that Regent Hall may be excluded both from the executive session and from any vote that may be taken in open session on the above-referenced topics.

This will confirm, as I discussed at length by phone with Mr. Lochridge, that Regent Hall objects to the UT Systems effort to exclude him from participating fully in the Board of Regents meeting. We are aware of no authority for the System to exclude Regent Hall. To the extent Chancellor McRavens counsel has a legal right to consult with the Board of Regents outside of an open meeting and without waiving the Chancellors attorney-client privilege, Regent Hall has an right to participate in that consultation that is identical and equal to the right of every other Regent.

Regent Hall does not have a conflict of interest on the subject of the litigation styled Hall v. McRaven. The issue at stake in the lawsuitwhether the Chancellor has a legal duty to provide access to records that Regent Hall deems necessary to review in the performance of his official dutiesis neither personal nor pecuniary to Regent Hall. It is an issue on which the UT System and Regent Hall are fully aligned in the goal of making sure that the System complies with Texas law regarding Regent access to information.

2

Both Regent Hall and Chancellor McRaven are litigating this legal issue in their official capacities as representatives of the UT System. There is no basis for concluding that one representative of the UT System has a right to private attorney-client consultations with a portion of the Board to the exclusion of the other System representative; there is no basis for the Board to choose sides; and there is no basis for the lawyers for one of the System representatives to advise the Board to the exclusion of lawyers for the other System representative.

Moreover, even if Regent Hall did have some sort of conflict of interest on the subject of the lawsuit, the Regents Rules contain no provision for excluding him from the executive session or any vote against his will. Roberts Rules of Order, which per Regent Rule 10401, section 6, govern in the absence of an on-point Regent Rule, specifically provide that no member of the Board can be compelled to refrain from voting on an issue due to a perceived conflict of interest. See http://www.robertsrules.com/faq.html#9. And of course, if Regent Hall cannot be compelled to refrain from voting, he logically cannot be excluded from discussions that inform the vote.

For all of these reasons, Regent Hall respectfully demands the right to full participation in all aspects of the July 8, 2015 Board meeting.

In addition, Regent Hall requests that the entire meeting, specifically including executive session, be recorded so that we have a full and accurate record of what transpired.

Sincerely,

Joseph R. Knight

cc: Pat Lochridge MCGINNIS LOCHRIDGE 600 Congress Ave., Suite 2100 Austin, Texas 78701