Repository: UIHistories Project: Board of Trustees Minutes - 1944 [PAGE 869]

EXTRACTED TEXT FROM PAGE:

866

BOARD OF TRUSTEES

[February 24

TRUST F U N D FOR FACULTY-GRADUATE STUDENT CENTER (9) At its meeting on January 26, 1944 (Minutes, page 842), the Board made an appropriation, matching a contribution by the University Club of Urbana to a trust fund to finance a new faculty-graduate student center at the University. This appropriation was made subject to the legal right of the Board to appropriate moneys to a trust fund to be used for expenditures beyond the current biennium. T h e appropriation was in pursuance of an agreement between the University Club and the Board of Trustees as part of a plan which included the acquisition of the Club's property by the University. Since Judge Sveinbjorn Johnson examined and advised University officials in the negotiations and proceedings which resulted in the acquisition of the University Club property and approval by the Board of Trustees of the plan for financing a faculty-graduate student center, he has been consulted about the question raised and has advised as follows: "While no question was raised by anyone at the time the negotiations were in progress or when the arrangements were perfected and the agreement reached, when the matter was referred to me I gave consideration on my own initiative to this important aspect of the situation. I came to the conclusion, and I am of the opinion now that the Board may legally and properly make the appropriation described in your memorandum and such others as may be necessary in order to conform with the contract made with the University Club. "In Sec. 7 of the original charter of the University, as approved February 28, 1867, and still in force, the governing board is given the power to provide necessary buildings for the University. That the Board may use any accepted business methods not forbidden by the legislature in executing this legislative power I believe is a sound legal proposition. F r o m this premise I think it follows, without elaborating the argument, that if the Board in its discretion concludes that in order to provide a necessary building for the University the method and procedure outlined in the agreement with the University Club should be followed. it may do so under its charter. "I suggest, however, that consideration might be given, sometime before the end of the current biennium, to the keeping of the fund thus created through a joint contribution from the University Club and the University. The arrangement created and intended has the characteristics of a trust, and it would seem, therefore, wise, in order to guard against any questions arising under constitutional provisions for the lapsing of appropriations to the University, or through changes in the form of our appropriation bill at some later date, to put the joint contributions into a trust fund in the custody of a trustee, possibly the University of Illinois Foundation. Under suitable safeguards and a proper agreement, the trust fund could be returned to the contributors in case the contract should be modified, rescinded, or cease to be operative for lapse of time."

On motion of Mr. Davis, this matter was referred to the special committee on the Foundation for consideration and recommendation.

QUIT CLAIM DEED TO TEXAS PROPERTY IN BOOTH ESTATE (10) At its meeting on January 26, 1944 (Minutes, page 842), the Board adopted a resolution authorizing a deed of quit claim to Elizabeth Nelson for the property in T e x a s bequeathed to the University by the late Mr. Charles H. Booth of Galesburg. T h e question was raised about the legal right of the University to do business involving real estate transactions outside of the State of Illinois. Judge Sveinbjorn Johnson, who was authorized and directed by the Board of Trustees to handle all legal matters relating to the Booth Estate and the negotiations with the Executor of said Estate, has advised as follows on the question raised: "There can be no question about the propriety of the request or the power of the Board to comply with it and execute the quit claim deed. First, the University is not doing business in any sense of the w o r d ; second, it really has no interest in this property, and the request for the quit claim deed is a precautionary measure suggested by Texas counsel; and third, were the title in fee in the University, there would be no question about the propriety of making the