Repository: UIHistories Project: Board of Trustees Minutes - 1972 [PAGE 67]

EXTRACTED TEXT FROM PAGE:

1970]

UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS

57

integrity and intellectual competence, and we depend upon a most searching and candid discussion of public issues conducted in an atmosphere of free inquiry and diversity of viewpoints. The purpose of our endowment is to help the University preserve these values. In order to maintain them, no single body within the University can speak for the entire institution on social policy matters. You have proposed that proxies on University securities be made over to the Student Senate, which would then develop a plan for voting the same in response to corporate activities. In our view, such a delegation would be inappropriate and inconsistent with our public responsibilities. The Trustees have been elected to direct and control all phases of University affairs, including the establishment of policies for voting shares of stock. Our general policy is to vote proxies to agree with management recommendations. If the exceptions to management policy are numerous and/or onerous, the alternative is to sell the security.

On motion of Mr. Steger, this statement was adopted. REPORTS OF THE GENERAL POLICY COMMITTEE Mr. Swain, for the General Policy Committee, presented the following reports and recommendations:

RULES O F C O N D U C T APPLICABLE TO ALL STUDENTS C O N C E R N I N G DISRUPTIVE OR COERCIVE ACTION

(2) At its meeting on August 12, 1970, the Board of Trustees further interpreted the term "disruptive and coercive action" and designated its interpretations as "Rules of Conduct Applicable to All Students Concerning Disruptive or Coercive Action." The Board also directed its Committee on General Policy to offer an amendment at this meeting rephrasing and clarifying the paragraph numbered 7 and amplifying the paragraph numbered 8 of the August, 1970, action. Accordingly, the Committee on General Policy now recommends that paragraphs numbered 7 and 8 of said "Rules of Conduct Applicable to All Students Concerning Disruptive or Coercive Action" be modified to read as follows (new matter italicized): "7. Failure to comply with directions of a member or agent of the University acting in the performance of his duty in connection with a potential or actual disorder. "8. Any conduct which substantially threatens or interferes with the maintenance of appropriate order and discipline in the operation of the University, or any conduct on University property or in connection with a University activity which invades the rights of others. Without excluding other situations, examples include shouting, noise-making, obstruction, and other disruptive actions designed or intended to interfere with or prevent meetings, assemblies, classes, or other scheduled or routine University operations or activities." O n motion of M r . Swain, this report was adopted and the recommendation of the Committee was approved.

S T U D E N T FEE SUPPORT FOR A LEGAL RIGHTS COMMISSION (3) To THE MEMBERS OF THE GENERAL POLICY COMMITTEE, BOARD OF TRUSTEES :

At the May, 1970, meeting of the General Policy Committee, you referred to me for study and recommendation a proposal from Mr. Kevin W. Cronin, a member of the Student Government at the Chicago Circle campus, on the subject of student fee support for a Legal Rights Commission. The proposal, as conceived by Mr. Cronin and his associates, is set forth in document under date of March 3, 1970, addressed to James Alexander, Assistant to the Chancellor. On April 30, Chancellor Norman Parker wrote to the Chairman of the Committee on Student Affairs, Dr. Greenwald, denying the petition and giving reasons for his action. The appearance of Mr. Cronin at the May meeting was essentially to appeal from the decision of the Chancellor. Following your instruction, I asked the following to serve as a Committee to review the plan and the appeal. The following Committee members^ were appointed: Vice President Eldon L. Johnson, Mr. James Costello, University Counsel, and