Repository: UIHistories Project: Board of Trustees Minutes - 1944 [PAGE 278]

EXTRACTED TEXT FROM PAGE:

1943]

UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS

275

PAYMENT OF SALARIES O F J O H N S O N A N D HODGES (18) T h e following report of a meeting of the Executive Committee: At the call of Dr. Karl A. Meyer, Chairman, the Executive Committee met at 2 p.m. January 23, 1943, in the Chicago Illini Union Building. Present were Dr. Meyer, Mr. Adams, and Mr. Fornof, members of the Committee; also Mr. Davis, member of the Board of Trustees, and Mr. Morey, Comptroller, who acted as Clerk. The Committee discussed matters relating to the recent Supreme Court decision dealing with the powers of the Board of Trustees and limitations on payment for services, especially vouchers for Judge Sveinbjorn Johnson, University Counsel, and Norval D. Hodges, Assistant to University Counsel. T h e Committee voted: 1. T o instruct the Comptroller to certify all payroll vouchers for January, 1043, and thereafter, including those for Messrs. Johnson and Hodges, under appropriate classifications set forth in the University appropriation bill for the current biennium (see Board Minutes of August 5, 1941, page 428). 2. T o request President Willard to supply further information and suggestions concerning the payment of salaries due Messrs. Johnson and Hodges from May through December, 1942, total $6,600, for the purpose of further consideration by the Committee.

LI.OYD MOREY KARL A. MEYER, J O H N R. FORNOF Chairman

Acting

Clerk

HOMER M A T ADAMS

In this connection, President W i l l a r d read the following letter w h i c h h e h a d w r i t t e n t o t h e m e m b e r s of t h e E x e c u t i v e C o m m i t t e e : February 15, 1943

GENTLEMEN:

At the meeting of your Committee on January 23, concerning the payment of salaries of Judge Johnson and Mr. Hodges, which matter was referred to you by the Board of Trustees, you requested that I furnish suggestions on this subject for your further consideration. I have discussed this matter with Messrs. Johnson, Harno, and Morey, and I enclose copies of their letters. W e also asked Attorneys Sears and Short, who represented the Board of Trustees in the presentation of the case to the Supreme Court, for their suggestions, and I enclose a copy of their letter of February 5. On the basis of these discussions, I now offer these comments and recommendations: Principles to be Observed— 1. T h e solution must, of course, both recognize and conform fully to the Court's judgment. 2. T h e solution must appeal to the public as fair, open, and aboveboard. 3. The solution must satisfy the State Auditor and receive his approval. 4. T h e solution must be technically and legally sound. 5. T h e solution must secure full pay for Judge Johnson and protect the Board of Trustees, who promised full pay. Important Considerations to be Observed— 1. T h e Board has now, and has always had, the right to employ legal counsel, professors, etc., and other necessary officers as determined by the Board. (See Court decision.) 2. In all appropriation bills prior to the present biennium, no categories of employment or separate titles were listed, but those bills covered all classes of employees under the general item "salaries and wages." T h e University (legal) Counsel was one of these and he was so paid for many years. (This former practice, however, has no legal status or bearing on the present decision. It merely shows that the Board has had such an officer for many years, and has given him a contract under this title for the present biennium the same as in the past.) 3. At the request of the Senate Appropriations Committee of the 62nd General Assembly, a detailed classification by categories of position titles and salary