Repository: UIHistories Project: Board of Trustees Minutes - 1982 [PAGE 426]

EXTRACTED TEXT FROM PAGE:

1981]

UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS

415

ference, and by many other groups and individuals within the University of Illinois. 1 T h e Board of Trustees, acting as a Committee of the Whole, has received testimony, written and oral, from all who have indicated an interest in presenting their views. As president, I have heard this testimony and also I have sought out the views of specific groups and individuals. Following these steps and at the October 1981 meeting of the Board of Trustees I shared with the board my views. After listening carefully to the debate and pondering the question for several months, I have come to the view that the long-term best interests of the University of Illinois, and the long-term best interests of our Chicago programs, would be best served if the two Chicago campuses were united under the leadership of a single chancellor. I want to explain why I have come to hold this view. First, I believe that over the long term, uniting our Chicago campuses under a single chancellor would strengthen our ability to gain support. I refer not merely to the ability to gain support from members of the General Assembly, but to support from the corporate world and from foundations having their headquarters in or special interests in Chicago. Beyond this, however, I refer to the broad base of general support essential to the very life blood of a great public university. Second, it is my belief that a united front in Chicago would improve our ability to function in the Chicago academic arena. Many other distinguished universities and colleges offer programs in the Chicago area. It will continue to be our policy to work positively and constructively with our sister universities; at the same time, we must position ourselves to function on an equal footing as an academic peer. Third, unification of the Chicago campuses, in my judgment, would strengthen the role of the chancellor as he represents the Chicago-based programs within the University governance structure and externally at the local, state, and national levels. Just as the chancellor at the Urbana-Champaign campus is in a position to speak on behalf of the broad spectrum of University of Illinois programs offered at Urbana-Champaign, so also a chancellor of the University of Illinois at Chicago would be in a better position to speak for the broad range of programs at that location. This is important as we represent ourselves before the General Assembly, the Illinois Board of Higher Education, the Governor, in corporate board rooms, to the press, and in internal governance councils. Fourth, unification of the Chicago campuses under the leadership of a single chancellor would, in my judgment, improve the administrative effectiveness and sharpen the lines of accountability and responsibility. The Chicago campuses currently are served in common by several administrative services, including the physical plant, security, personnel, business operations, and others. Lines of accountability and responsibility are blurred. Repeated testimony of faculty members from both campuses suggested that many of these services do not function effectively. The first priority should be to improve the accountability, the effectiveness, and the efficiency with which common services are provided. Fifth, over the long term — looking ahead five, ten, or twenty years — I am persuaded that the joining of the Chicago campuses will open up new academic options and opportunities for undergraduate programs and for graduate and research programs. The responsibility will rest with members of the faculty and academic administrators to identify and take advantage of these opportunities, but I believe this will occur more easily under a united administrative structure. If we improve our ability to attract support, our ability to compete in the academic arena, gain a stronger role for the chancellor, improve Current opera1 The President held a series of lengthy meetings with the University Senates Conference. At the concluding meeting, the advice expressed was inconclusive, divided between those who felt that organization under a single chancellor represented a step in the best long-range interest of the University and those who were not persuaded of this view. The texts of the actions of the three campus senates are filed with the secretary.