Chairperson Gale convened a meeting of the Nebraska Real Estate Commission at 9:06 a.m. on January 25, 2007, in the Plaza Room of the Villager Courtyard & Gardens, located at 5200 A O@ Street in Lincoln, Nebraska. All of the members of the Real Estate Commission were present, with the exception of Commissioner Bohrer, who was absent and excused. Also present were Director Les Tyrrell, Deputy Director for Education and Licensing Teresa Hoffman, Deputy Director for Enforcement Terry Mayrose, and Administrative Assistant Monica Wade.

Director Tyrrell presented a public notice and proofs of publication thereof relating to this meeting, all of which are attached to and made a part of these minutes. Chairperson Gale reported that all Commissioners had been notified of the meeting simultaneously, in writing, and that a proposed tentative agenda accompanied the notification.

Chairperson Gale pointed out to those in attendance that a public copy of the materials being used during the meeting and a copy of the Open Meetings Act were available to the public on the counsel table in the meeting room, and that the procedures followed were in accordance with the Open Meetings Act. Chairperson Gale asked that guests sign the guest list.

Director Tyrrell noted that agenda items 10b, 15d, 15e and 16b had been added since the tentative agenda was mailed to the Commissioners.

The minutes of the Commission meeting held on December 14, 2006, were considered.

Director Tyrrell presented the Receipts and Expenditures Report for December. A copy of said report is attached to and made a part of these minutes. Director Tyrrell noted that an explanation page was included on the report.

The cash fund balance as of December 31, 2006, was $971,554.23, which compared to a cash fund balance of $1,087,668.03 on December 31, 2005.

Director Tyrrell also noted that 515500 Health Insurance Expense would be less than the budgeted amount for the remainder of this fiscal year due to the reduction in the cost of health insurance. Chairperson Gale noted that 475220 Promotional Land Registrations Receipts were less than budgeted as well. Director Tyrrell indicated that some of the time-share projects have sold out and did not renew for 2007, which was unanticipated. Commissioner Griess noted that 541500 Legal Services Expense was up from last year by $10,000.00 and asked if that amount reflected the new contracted rates. Director Tyrrell indicated that the amount did not include the new contracted rates but did reflect more hearings than the previous year as well as two appeals. Commissioner Poskochil noted that 521100 Postage and Publications Expense was more than the prior year. Director Tyrrell indicated that the Trust Account Manual Updates and License Law Manual Updates were printed and mailed which is not done every year. Commissioner Griess asked why the updates were not mailed out when changes are made. Director Tyrrell explained that the mailing would depend on the type of change that was made.

Director Tyrrell presented the Renewal Report. Copy of said report is attached to and made a part of these minutes. Commissioner Poskochil pointed out that the Exhibit for this Agenda Item was incorrect. The date of the 2007 comparison was set forth as A 1/17/06" when, in fact, the date should have been A 1/17/07". The Exhibit was corrected for attachment to these minutes.

No action was necessary on this report.

Specialized Registrations - none

Deputy Director Hoffman presented for ratification the Non-Resident Licenses and Resident Licenses Issued to Persons Holding Licenses in Other Jurisdictions Report, a copy of which is attached to and made a part of these minutes.

Commissioner Griess asked if the licensees reported had met the standard for the required three-hour education course. Deputy Director Hoffman indicated all new non-resident licensees had met the requirement so far and explained the process for monitoring compliance. Director Tyrrell indicated that by statute if the requirement was not met, the licensees would have to appear before the Commission.

Commissioner Grady asked how trust account examinations were conducted on trust accounts held by brokers from other jurisdictions. Deputy Director Mayrose indicated that examinations were conducted by mail and reviewed in the Commission Office.

Motion carried with Grady, Griess, Leisey, Poskochil, Shepard and Gale voting aye, with Bohrer not participating or voting, being absent and excused.

Deputy Director Hoffman presented for ratification the December Examination Report, a copy of which is attached to and made a part of these minutes.

Commissioner Griess asked if staff monitored any differences in the success rate of broker candidates who qualified for the examination through both education and experience and those who qualified through education only. Deputy Director Hoffman indicated that staff did not, but that she would look into collecting this data in the future.

Deputy Director Hoffman presented for ratification the Pre-License Education Instructor Approval Report, a copy of which is attached to and made a part of these minutes.

Deputy Director Hoffman presented for ratification the Continuing Education Activity Approval Report, a copy of which is attached to and made a part of these minutes.

Deputy Director Hoffman presented for ratification the Continuing Education Instructor Approval Report, a copy of which is attached to and made a part of these minutes.

Chairperson Gale expressed concerns with online lending practices and inquired as to what courses were available to educate licensees on this issue. Deputy Director Hoffman indicated that there were some courses available on mortgage fraud, education provider Mark Wehner in Omaha provided one course, the Nebraska REALTORS7 Association offered a course at its conference, and all education providers have been encouraged to educate on this matter. Commissioner Shepard indicated that most brokers spend time with their affiliated licensees to educate or advise them on this issue. Commissioner Griess indicated that the lending industry standards had changed. The current A acceptable@ form of lending is much different from ten years ago. Commissioner Leisey noted that some lenders charge outrageous fees. He also said that sometimes agents know of better rates but the clients may not want to give out financial information and the licensee just receives a pre-approval letter. Director Tyrrell indicated that if a licensee suspects lending fraud, he or she should contact the State of Nebraska, Department of Banking and Finance, to report the matter. Director Tyrrell explained that the Department of Banking and Finance could start an investigation which may include an audit, however, its procedures could take time. Commissioner Poskochil suggested putting an article in the Commission Comment Newsletter. Deputy Director Hoffman indicated that there had been articles in the newsletter in the past and will plan to run more mortgage fraud articles. Commissioner Leisey felt local lenders as a general rule do a much better job than out-of-town lenders or online lenders. Commissioner Poskochil agreed that many buyers get a much better deal with local lenders than online lenders. He expressed concern that foreclosure rates have sky rocketed. Commissioner Leisey noted that banks are getting tighter on lending.

After review, a motion was made by Poskochil and seconded by Leisey to ratify the three reports. Motion carried with Grady, Griess, Leisey, Poskochil, Shepard and Gale voting aye, with Bohrer not participating or voting, being absent and excused.

Director Tyrrell presented a summary report of the pending complaints, which included a list of licensees presently under disciplinary action or on appeal. A copy of said report is attached to and made a part of these minutes.

No action was necessary on this report.

The following sworn complaints and investigative matters were presented to the Commission:

Deputy Director Mayrose presented a Stipulation and Consent Order in the matter of Complaint 2006-055, Henry A. and Maxine M. Polak vs. Michael Steven Fox. A copy of said Order is attached to and made a part of these minutes.

Deputy Director Mayrose reviewed the circumstances involved and noted the provisions of the Order, which had been signed by Mr. Fox. The Order specified a censure plus the completion of nine hours of additional continuing education with three hours being in the area of license law, three hours in the area of agency, and three hours in the area of ethics.

The issue of a stiffer penalty was discussed. Commissioner Poskochil asked for clarification on what different punishments could be enforced. Deputy Director Mayrose indicated that there could be censure, suspension, probation or revocation. Chairperson Gale noted that the licensee put himself and the buyer in jeopardy. Commissioner Grady also felt the punishment was too light, and felt the continuing education courses should be taken in the classroom since there is no accountability for licensees being there if the course was taken by correspondence or online. Commissioner Grady also felt that a test should be given on the courses they take. Commissioner Poskochil asked if the additional continuing education courses were serving the disciplinary purpose. Commissioner Griess explained that perhaps the licensees do not know the law and are enlightened by the course requirements. Director Tyrrell indicated that the Commission could require a test for the continuing education courses. Director Tyrrell indicated that the A in class@ requirement would impact licensees in different areas of the State in different ways. Commissioner Griess agreed the requirement was not equitable across the board. Commissioner Leisey also agreed that correspondence courses should require a test. Deputy Director Hoffman indicated that distance education requires interactivity and licensees must answer questions.

Deputy Director Mayrose presented a Stipulation and Consent Order in the matter of Complaint 2006-052, Mark Resseguie, Innovative Homes and Design, Inc. vs. Nada Resnik-McNenny. A copy of said Order is attached to and made a part of these minutes.

Deputy Director Mayrose reviewed the circumstances involved and noted the provisions of the Order, which had been signed by Ms. Resnik-McNenny. The Order specified a thirty-day suspension, plus 9 hours of additional continuing education with three hours being in the area of agency, three hours in the area of license law, and three hours in the area of ethics.

Director Tyrrell presented an exhibit which included correspondence regarding Ms. Bussey= s special appearance and information regarding Ms. Bussey= s previous special appearance. A copy of said exhibit is attached to and made a part of these minutes. Ms. Bussey was present.

Chairperson Gale reviewed the procedure for informal special appearances.

Ms. Bussey indicated that her pre-license education courses were finished and a designated broker was interested in employing her and she hoped she could take the examination. Ms. Bussey also showed the Commissioners a letter she received from the interested employing broker. Chairperson Gale asked Ms. Bussey if she had any more criminal problems. Ms. Bussey indicated that she did not. Chairperson Gale asked if Ms. Bussey was attending any programs or classes. Ms. Bussey indicated that she had been voluntarily attending Narcotics Anonymous. Commissioner Poskochil asked if Ms. Bussey had any other criminal history. Ms. Bussey replied no. Commissioner Poskochil asked if she was currently employed. Ms. Bussey indicated that she was not employed since she has a baby and is staying at home. Chairperson Gale recalled that she previously worked with her mother-in-law. Ms. Bussey indicated that it is too cold to work right now. Chairperson Gale explained to Ms. Bussey that she could have to notify the Commission if additional problems occur, such as misdemeanors or felonies, for a year or two and also felt that the interested employing broker be aware of her previous conviction. Chairperson Gale noted that Ms. Bussey had completed sentencing and only had one conviction on record and was willing to comply. Commissioner Shepard noticed that Ms. Bussey had stayed on the straight and narrow, she had focused on her goal, had the right attitude and encouraged her to continue with Narcotics Anonymous.

Director Tyrrell presented an exhibit which included correspondence regarding Mr. Hanna= s special appearance, correspondence from the South Carolina Department of Probation, Parole and Pardon Services; additional answers to questions on the salesperson application form; Mr. Hanna= s criminal history report; and his salesperson application form. A copy of said exhibit is attached to and made a part of these minutes. Mr. Hanna was present. Mr. Hanna distributed a character reference letter. A copy of said letter is attached to and made a part of these minutes, denoted as Exhibit 12b1.

Chairperson Gale reviewed the procedure for informal special appearances.

Mr. Hanna noted that he grew up in Michigan and moved to Georgia. When he came back to Michigan he worked at Kellogg= s as a temporary employee. Mr. Hanna heard Kellogg= s was hiring in Omaha so he moved with his family to Omaha. Mr. Hanna indicated that he noticed there was a booming housing industry and was interested in buying and owning some real estate and also selling it. Mr. Thomas, who wrote the character reference letter, had real estate properties and been a mentor for Mr. Hanna.

Commissioner Shepard thanked Mr. Hanna for appearing before the Commission and asked Mr. Hanna if he had any other violations since 1998. Mr. Hanna indicated that he had no other violations. Commissioner Shepard asked Mr. Hanna to confirm that he was no longer drinking. Mr. Hanna indicated that he was no longer drinking. Commissioner Shepard asked Mr. Hanna if he was on probation. Mr. Hanna indicated that he was not on probation. Chairperson Gale expressed concern of Mr. Hanna= s honesty since he had not disclosed, on his application form, that he had previous convictions and asked Mr. Hanna to explain why he omitted the convictions.

Mr. Hanna indicated that the felony happened 25 years ago and did not think it would appear on his record anymore, and he thought the other two convictions were totally cleared up, including the serious one which was in his youth. Chairperson Gale indicated that it appeared Mr. Hanna had a clean record since 1998 and wanted to make sure Mr. Hanna was no longer drinking. Mr. Hanna explained that when he was convicted of DUI, the judge indicated that if he continued to drink and drive he would go to prison and Mr. Hanna indicated he did not want to go to prison. Commissioner Poskochil asked Mr. Hanna where he was currently employed and if he had family. Mr. Hanna indicated that he worked at Kellogg= s and had a wife, a child and cared for his nephew.

Deputy Director Hoffman presented proposals received in response to the Real Estate Licensing Examination Request for Proposal (RFP) 07-001. There were two proposals from Applied Measurement Professionals (AMP) and one from Prometric, and additional exhibits to assist in the review of the proposals. These additional exhibits, along with the Proposals, were mailed to the Commissioners earlier in January so that they would have ample time to review and evaluate the proposals. Ms. Hoffman identified and supplied two new exhibits received since that mailing, one being a reference survey regarding Prometric= s examination development services in Oklahoma, which Ms. Hoffman pointed out covered examination development while Nebraska= s RFP was for development and administration services; and the other being the results of surveys regarding Prometric= s insurance examination sites in Nebraska. Ms. Hoffman also pointed out a typographical error in the mailed exhibit. Deputy Director Hoffman noted that AMP and Prometric had both sent live examination forms marked as A proprietary@ along with their proposals. She explained that she had not copied or mailed these as that would not be appropriate and if reviewed, this would have to be done in a secure setting such as the meeting room and that after the meeting the examinations would be secured in a vault at the Commission Office. The mailed exhibit and the two new exhibits are attached to and made a part of these Minutes. The proposal notebooks from the examination companies are not attached but are available for review at the Commission Office.

Chairperson Gale reviewed the materials and outlined the importance of the process that should be followed to award the contract. He indicated that, while there had been a lot of material to review, a decision should be made today to remain on track for the contract to begin in July.

Commissioner Griess asked what the difference was between the questions submitted in the AMP proposal and those in the sealed envelopes. Deputy Director Hoffman indicated that those in the proposal were samples of questions that had likely been retired recently while those in the envelopes were currently being utilized. Commissioner Leisey indicated he had not scored questions yet and would seek guidance on how to evaluate them. Deputy Director Hoffman indicated that as important as question accuracy is question structure and whether they are written clearly, are understandable and measure a variety of skills such as recall, definition, application, analysis and so forth.

Director Tyrrell indicated that the Commission RFP invited submissions for two proposals. One proposal was for computerized multiple-choice only examinations for both salespersons and brokers while the other proposal was, in addition to a multiple-choice salesperson examination, to make the broker examination a computerized combination multiple-choice/simulation question examination. The Commission had received Proposals from AMP and Prometric for the multiple-choice only examinations and one proposal from AMP for the multiple-choice/simulation examination. Director Tyrrell indicated that if the Commission was inclined to go with the examination that included the multiple-choice/simulation examination they could, according to the Department of Administrative Services (DAS) Materiel Division, go ahead and decide to contract with the only vendor who had submitted a proposal. In this case, the evaluation tool is unnecessary as there were not multiple proposals to compare. Director Tyrrell also indicated that if the Commission was inclined to go with multiple-choice only examinations, then the Commissioners would need to utilize the evaluation tool in considering these proposals. Commissioner Poskochil sought confirmation that the second proposal option sought a combination multiple-choice/simulation examination for brokers only while the salesperson examination would remain a multiple-choice examination. Deputy Director Hoffman confirmed his understanding. Commissioner Griess sought confirmation that if the Commission pursued the multiple-choice/simulation examination proposal there would be no need to utilize the evaluation tool. Director Tyrrell confirmed her understanding.

Commissioner Griess indicated that she felt that AMP was superior on all scores and that she favored the multiple-choice/simulation examination proposal. Commissioner Poskochil agreed and asked where the simulations were being utilized. Deputy Director Hoffman responded that these had been developed and utilized in Georgia for the longest period. Director Tyrrell indicated that one or two more jurisdictions had either started to use or had committed to using the simulation examination as well. Commissioner Poskochil asked what the pass/fail rate was with this examination, Deputy Director Hoffman indicated that Dr. Fabrey, from AMP, had reported that the rates had remained consistent and, if anything, may have improved the passing percentage on occasion. She reported further that students and instructors had been favorably impressed with the examination.

Commissioner Poskochil asked how soon the multiple-choice/simulation examination could be utilized in Nebraska. Deputy Director Hoffman indicated that the contract, under this RFP, would begin July 1, 2007. Commissioner Poskochil asked if the Commission chose AMP as the vendor did they have to choose the multiple-choice/simulation examination. Deputy Director Hoffman responded that AMP had sent in a proposal for both the multiple-choice/simulation format and the multiple-choice only format and that the Commission needed to decide which format they wanted for the examinations. Commissioner Poskochil asked what the cost of the multiple-choice/simulation examination option would be. Director Tyrrell indicated that it would be $65 for the salesperson examination and $75 for the broker examination. He also pointed out that the multiple-choice only examinations could be delivered at $63 each through Prometric or $65 each through AMP.

Chairperson Gale sought clarification regarding the multiple-choice/simulation proposal and wondered whether the Commission should look at awarding the contract separately for the salesperson and the broker examinations when the multiple-choice/simulation format was being considered. Director Tyrrell indicated that the RFP specifically called for proposals to be configured with the intention of contracting for both the salesperson and the broker examinations. Chairperson Gale asked if this may have been misunderstood. Director Tyrrell indicated that he believed, the RFP was clear. He thought Prometric did not submit a multiple-choice/simulation proposal because they have not fully developed such an examination.

Commissioner Poskochil asked how many companies provided real estate examination services. Deputy Director Hoffman indicated that there were four providers in the United States and one in Canada and that RFPs were sent to all five. Director Tyrrell also noted that the Department of Administrative Services= Materiel Division website also promoted the RFP, so there was public notice to all potential bidders. Commissioner Poskochil asked if any other companies used the simulations. Deputy Director Hoffman indicated that one other company had made some reference to simulations in its publicity but that there did not seem to be any other real estate simulation examinations being utilized. Commissioner Poskochil conjectured that this may have discouraged other proposals. Deputy Director Hoffman reported that she had not been given that impression. In fact, one other company had sent an e-mail explaining that while they could supply the fine quality of examination services our current contractor supplied, they could not do so for a competitive price. She further reported that the fourth U.S. company had never chosen to submit a proposal and had said that it was because our examination volume was not high enough.

Commissioner Poskochil recalled Dr. Fabrey saying that other professions were using the simulation examination, and asked what these were. Deputy Director Hoffman indicated that, while there may be others, she knew that AMP had been administering simulation examinations to respiratory care therapists for over 18 years.

Chairperson Gale indicated that he was uncomfortable with further discussion without a motion on the table. He indicated that the Commission needed to decide to go with either the multiple-choice/simulation or multiple-choice only examinations. Commissioner Grady suggested that if the contract was awarded to AMP on multiple-choice only examinations then the Commission could work with them to change the format to simulations in the future. Director Tyrrell agreed and also indicated that if the evaluation process concluded that the multiple-choice only examination contract should be awarded to Prometric and later Prometric developed a simulation examination, the format could change in that case as well.

A motion was made by Griess and seconded by Poskochil to select the multiple-choice/simulation examination proposal and award the contract to AMP.

Commissioner Griess asked if there was any information on how the transition from the multiple-choice only examination to the multiple-choice/simulation examination had gone in Georgia. Deputy Director Hoffman pointed out that the reference survey from Georgia in the exhibits indicated a very high level of satisfaction with the service. Director Tyrrell also conveyed that in conversations with Charles Clark, Georgia= s Director, that Mr. Clark had indicated that he was very impressed with the whole process.

Commissioner Leisey, explained that he had not seen previous demonstrations, and asked how simulation questions varied from multiple-choice questions. Deputy Director Hoffman described them as setting-up scenarios in which candidates utilize information-gathering and decision-making skills in proceeding through the scenario. It was noted that progress through the exercise was affected by consequences of earlier responses and that it was felt that this type of exercise held broker candidates to a higher standard and required them to demonstrate skills important as a broker.

Commissioner Griess asked if education classes were prepared for this type of testing. Deputy Director Hoffman reported that since the subject matter outline of the examination remained the same, preparation for different question styles may be necessary but course content need not change. Commissioner Leisey indicated that this type of examination made sense to him and that he had felt that AMP had the better multiple-choice only proposal as well. Commissioner Shepard indicated that he wanted to speak for the motion, he felt that measuring additional skills in brokers was necessary and he felt the Commission should take this opportunity to contract for simulations. He indicated that he, too, had a higher score for AMP anyway.

Chairperson Gale indicated that it seemed that the Commissioners had, individually, scored AMP higher. However, he was uncomfortable not using the scoring tool fully and felt the Commission should compare the two multiple-choice only examination proposals and total that score and then make the decision on examination format, multiple-choice only or multiple-choice/simulation. Again, he sought confirmation that the vendors knew that the two proposal requests were separate. Director Tyrrell indicated that the RFP was clear and he was confident vendors understood. He indicated that DAS Materiel Division and its legal counsel had approved this RFP and were aware that there would likely be only one vendor who could submit a proposal for multiple-choice/simulation examinations similar to a sole source situation. Director Tyrrell explained that if the decision had been made when developing the RFP that the Commissioners wanted to go with multiple-choice/simulation examinations, the RFP could have been written seeking that proposal only. This RFP, however, left the door open for the Commission to make a format decision at this time and either proposal choice is perfectly legitimate. With respect to a multiple-choice only examination there were two proposals and scoring would need to take place. With respect to a multiple-choice/simulation examination there was one qualified proposal. Chairperson Gale again expressed concern that no vendor misunderstood the RFP.

Commissioner Grady spoke in favor of the pending motion. He had completed his evaluation and agreed with the other Commissioners that AMP scored higher so he thought that it could not be construed that the examination format decision was the one factor in ruling out Prometric as the vendor.

Chairperson Gale explained that he was concerned about a challenge by Prometric if the Commission did not do everything in the process completely. He wanted to be absolutely certain that Prometric understood the bidding options thoroughly and did not think that under Proposal #2 they could get the contract for the salesperson examination even if they did not have a simulation examination for brokers. Director Tyrrell said that he felt sure that Prometric was not under the wrong impression. He pointed out that in the real estate examination industry he knew of no jurisdiction that split its examinations between vendors. He said that one of the major reasons that only two out of four or five examination companies submitted a proposal was because of Nebraska= s low volume of examinations. He did not feel that Prometric would seek to contract for only a portion of our examinations and their pricing appeared to be based on the total number of examinations as did the proposal from AMP.

Commissioner Leisey asked if going through the comparison scoring and then determining the collective total would provide protection to the Commission. Director Tyrrell indicated that according to DAS, the RFP sets up two avenues in determining the contract. Either proceeding with contracting for a multiple-choice only examination or proceeding with a multiple-choice/simulation examination. He did not think it was necessary to go through the evaluation tool for the multiple-choice only alternative if the decision was to go with the multiple-choice/simulation examination. Chairperson Gale said that he thought the evaluation process ought to be completed prior to voting on the examination format. He thought the Commission should discuss their evaluation forms and make any changes and complete them and determine the collective total. He felt this would protect the Commission by showing fair consideration was given to all.

Commissioner Shepard respectfully disagreed. He thought there was particular value to having completed the evaluation tool independently and if the evaluations were adjusted as a result of discussion they would no longer be independent and could appear to have been manipulated. He thought it made more sense to turn them in as they were without discussion.

Commissioner Poskochil explored the necessity of filling out an evaluation on Proposal #2 since there is no comparison. Deputy Director Hoffman said that, if anything, the scores for AMP would be consistent with their scores on the Proposal #1 evaluation form. Director Tyrrell indicated that he thought utilizing the form for Proposal #2 was unnecessary since there is only one proposal and nothing to compare.

Commissioner Grady asked for a point of order; should the motion be tabled until the evaluation tools had been completed and the collective total had been determined. Director Tyrrell indicated that if the vote on the motion was to go with multiple-choice/simulation examinations, the scoring process would be unnecessary. Chairperson Gale indicated that he thought the scoring could help in determining the preferred vendor and that this, then, would indicate if the option to go with the multiple-choice/simulation examination was still a viable option. Director Tyrrell pointed out that the outcome of the comparison for Proposal #1, the multiple-choice only examination, was not implicit in the determination to accept Proposal #2, the multiple-choice/simulation examination. Proposal #2 stood on its on merit having been offered by a qualified vendor.

Chairperson Gale expressed concern that all vendors know that the Commission analyzed with care. Deputy Director Hoffman suggested that perhaps the Commission could move forward by addressing any questions that had arisen during their evaluation process. Commissioner Leisey indicated that he had completed his evaluation and had no questions except for part 3 which was impossible to complete without reviewing the proprietary examination forms brought today. Commissioner Grady said that he felt he had a good knowledge of the way these examination companies did things and that he was prepared to skip review of the actual questions, not scoring either. Commissioner Poskochil agreed that reviewing the questions would not be a determining factor and that he had no need to evaluate further. The Commissioners agreed that reviewing the actual examination forms would be unnecessary. Chairperson Gale suggested that since there were no further questions, the individually completed evaluation tools be collected and given to Deputy Director Hoffman to determine the collective score prior to voting on the motion.

Director Tyrrell cautioned that tallying the evaluation tools and then voting to award the contract under Proposal #2, the multiple-choice/simulation examination could, depending on the tallying, be a problem in the awarding process. Chairperson Gale felt the Commission was obligated to utilize the evaluation tools. Deputy Director Hoffman assured him that the individual evaluations would be collected and become a part of the preserved file to prove that Commissioners had done their homework had the multiple-choice only format been the proposal chosen.

Commissioner Poskochil clarified that the motion was for the multiple-choice/simulation examination proposal and that he had no further questions. Commissioner Grady stated he was ready to vote on the motion without the evaluation tool being collectively scored. Commissioner Shepard said he was comfortable in voting since the RFP was clear to all companies. Chairperson Gale confirmed that the motion was to award the contract for examinations under Proposal #2, the multiple-choice/simulation proposal, submitted by AMP. Motion carried with Grady, Griess, Leisey, Poskochil, Shepard and Gale voting aye, with Bohrer not participating or voting, being absent and excused.

Director Tyrrell presented a reference copy of the Commission= s Approved Procedures and Cycle for Trust Account Examinations. A copy of said exhibit is attached to and made a part of these minutes.

Director Tyrrell reviewed the exhibit and indicated that the first sentence in paragraph two was proposed for deletion and paragraph three was proposed new language. Director Tyrrell noted that the overall cycle length would stay the same. The proposed new language would include large property management companies in the twice-a-year examination cycle just like what was currently done with large brokerage companies. Commissioner Shepard asked for clarification on the proposed change to A ...100 or more residential properties...@ . Was a 100-plex condominium was considered as one property or 100 properties? Deputy Director Mayrose indicated that it would be considered one property. Commissioner Poskochil asked if it would apply to in-state brokers and out-of-state brokers. Deputy Director Mayrose indicated that it was intended to apply to both in-state and out-of-state brokers on the Nebraska properties they manage. Commissioner Shepard asked if brokers would be notified of the new cycle. Deputy Director Mayrose indicated that all examinations were done without prior notification.

Commissioner Leisey asked why the guidelines for sample size in (a) and (c) are approximately 10% and in (b) it is much less. Deputy Director Mayrose indicated that the sample size could be changed. Commissioner Leisey indicated that it would make sense to change them all to 10%. Commissioner Grady felt that changing the sample size to 10% would be a reasonable request. Director Tyrrell indicated that the Commission could change all three sample sizes to be 10-15% and leave out the specific number of files to pull. Director Tyrrell reviewed the new language as suggested. Commissioner Shepard suggested changing (b) to read A 10-50" files.

After discussion, a motion was made by Leisey and seconded by Grady to amend (b) to read 10-50 files and approve the other proposed amendments to the document. Motion carried with Grady, Griess, Leisey, Poskochil, Shepard and Gale voting aye, and with Bohrer not participating or voting, being absent and excused.

Director Tyrrell presented exhibits consisting of legislative bills introduced in the 2007 Legislature. Director Tyrrell reviewed legislation of interest to the Commission.

LB 26 - Director Tyrrell reported that the Commission= s bill would repeal advance fee publications language. The bill was moving quickly and would shortly be on Final Reading. Commissioner Griess asked which court decision set precedence for this language. Director Tyrrell explained that a forsalebyowner.com case in California was the major decision but that there were other cases which had been concluded which led legal counsel to make the recommendation to repeal the language.

Commissioner Leisey asked Director Tyrrell to explain why a person who is constructing a building cannot give a commission check to a licensee until the transaction is terminated. Director Tyrrell explained that it is because the statute does not allow payment until closing had occurred or the transaction was terminated.

LB 104 - Director Tyrrell reported that this bill, to Change Age of Majority, was the same as the bill introduced in the last Legislative Session. It would change the License Act to allow persons to acquire a license at the age of 18 instead of 19. He indicated he would continue to monitor the bill.

LB 321 - Director Tyrrell reported that this was the Governor= s budget recommendation for the 2007-2009 Biennium Budget. The recommended amount was less than the request. The Budget Office A rebased@ the request due to having not spent all appropriated funds in past budgets.

LB 386 - Director Tyrrell reported that this bill proposed the adoption of the Nebraska Security Instrument Satisfaction Act. It did not appear to affect the Real Estate Commission directly but could affect licensees.

LB 622 - Director Tyrrell reported that this bill would require the Commissioners and staff to attend training courses on the Public Records Act and Open Meetings Act. He indicated he would monitor this legislation.

No additional action was necessary with regard to these matters.

Director Tyrrell presented an exhibit regarding the ARELLO Mid-Year Meeting, which will be held April 26-28 in Banff, Alberta, Canada. A copy of said exhibit is attached to and made a part of these minutes.

Director Tyrrell asked that Commissioners planning to attend complete the registration form and send it to the Commission office by March 1, 2007, with a check or credit card information for the guest registration, if applicable. Director Tyrrell reported that the deadline for hotel reservations was March 25, 2007.

Four Commissioners indicated that they may attend the meeting.

No action was necessary on this report.

Director Tyrrell noted that the amendments to Title 299, Chapter 5, Subsection 18 were approved by the Attorney General= s office on January 19, 2007. The amendments had been sent to the Governor for approval.

No action was necessary on this report.

February 20-21, 2007 - Staybridge Suites, Lincoln
March 29-30, 2007 - Staybridge Suites, Lincoln
May 24-25, 2007 - Staybridge Suites, Lincoln
June 28-29, 2007 - Settle Inn & Suites, Lincoln
August 23-24, 2007 - Staybridge Suites, Lincoln

Recesses and Adjournment

At 10:10 a.m. Chairperson Gale declared a brief recess, and reconvened the meeting at 10:20 p.m.

At 12:00 p.m., Chairperson Gale declared a brief recess, and reconvened the meeting at 12:15 p.m.

I, Les Tyrrell, Director of the Nebraska Real Estate Commission, do hereby certify that the foregoing minutes of the January 25, 2007, meeting of the Nebraska Real Estate Commission were available for inspection on February 1, 2007, in compliance with Section 84-1413(5) R.R.S. 1943, of Nebraska.

Respectfully submitted,
Les Tyrrell
Director

Bob Ryan, Home Real Estate, Lincoln
Janis Faller, Woods Bros Realty, Lincoln
Mike Matukewicz, Dan Bohm Home Finders Real Estate, Omaha
Beth Lube, Re/Max Real Estate Group, Omaha