| |
| |
Caption: Board of Trustees Minutes - 1994
This is a reduced-resolution page image for fast online browsing.
EXTRACTED TEXT FROM PAGE:
1995] UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS 207 BOARD MEETING RECONVENED When the board reconvened at 7:45 p.m., the members of the board listed as present at the beginning of the day were still in attendance. For this segment of the meeting, Mr. Lamont led a discussion of the characteristics of each of the three candidates interviewed on February 16 and 19. Each board member stated personal impressions. Also, Professor Bahr was asked to summarize again the consultative committee members' opinions of these three candidates. BOARD MEETING RECESSED The board concluded that there was a need to discuss all three candidates further and agreed to continue this discussion after a recess of two days. The meeting was scheduled to reconvene at 1:30 p.m., February 22, 1995. BOARD MEETING, WEDNESDAY, FEBRUARY 22, 1995 When the board reconvened at 1:50 p.m. in executive session, the following members of the board were present: Mrs. Judith Ann Calder, Mr. William D. Engelbrecht, Dr. Jeffrey Gindorf, Mrs. Susan L. Gravenhorst, Mr. Thomas R. Lamont, Ms. Ada N. Lopez, Mrs. Martha R. O'Malley, Ms. Judith R. Reese. The following members of the board were absent: Dr. Gloria Jackson Bacon, Governor Jim Edgar. The following nonvoting student trustees were present: Mr. Christopher Didato-Castillo, Chicago campus; Mr. Chapin Rose, Urbana-Champaign campus. Also present were Professor Janice M. Bahr, chair of the Consultative Committee to Assist in the Selection a President, and Dr. Michele M. Thompson, secretary of the board. REMARKS FROM THE CHAIR OF THE BOARD Mr. Lamont commented on the momentous decision that the board was called upon to make on this day. He then reviewed some of the recent history of the University occurring during President Ikenberry's tenure and noted several new matters that loomed at present which would require deft leadership to manage. He then presented several characteristics that he suggested the board might ponder in the next few hours as they discussed the three candidates most recently interviewed. These were presented as characteristics needed in a new president and included: 1. A vision for the University. 2. The ability to meet the management challenges facing the University, particularly the need to make the internal systems more efficient and effective. 3. The strength to bring the total University together and
| |
