Repository: UIHistories Project: Board of Trustees Minutes - 1968 [PAGE 417]

EXTRACTED TEXT FROM PAGE:

1967]

U N I V E R S I T Y OF I L L I N O I S

365

The current biennial budget is approximately $214 million, and the request for increases submitted to the State Board totaled approximately $67 million. As you know, the requests from the various governing boards go to the staff of the State Board for examination, comment, and recommendations before submission for approval by the State Board. The institution's only opportunity to discuss changes recommended by its own staff and Board with the State Board occurs at the same time the State Board makes its decision on the proposed budget. I have to report to you in all honesty that in some areas of the University of Illinois budget there was bitter disappointment to all of us. There were certain items not approved in the budget which I thought were fully justified and fully documented. I think the fact that they were not approved over the recommendations of the staff of the State Board, after our staff people had made fully adequate responses to these recommendations, indicates in part, at least, that some of the procedures being followed are not actually in the best interests of the State. Since the establishment of the State Board, we have been very cooperative and have leaned over backwards, in effect, to work with the State Board. But, I think we have reached a point where we have to say that the University now can not condone certain procedures vitally affecting the future of the University and higher education in this State. I point specifically to the lack of communication that often exists between members of the State Board and its staff, as well as between its staff and the individual institutions or systems. I refer specifically to the University of Illinois, with which I am most familiar. I believe further that members of the State Board are handicapped in decisionmaking by the lack of a full opportunity for discussion and deliberation related to presentations of our position as a governing board and even presentations of the staff to the State Board. T o be more specific, yesterday the meeting was opened by the chairman with a statement which in effect indicated that he would look adversely upon and greatly disapprove any variations which the Board might make from staff recommendations on the operational budgets. Since a major part of the purpose of the meeting yesterday was to listen to and to consider the presentations of the state universities in response to recommendations made by the State Board staff, I viewed this as a restriction which greatlyreduced the value of yesterday's meeting. This view was shared by a number of other board members with whom I spoke, both institutional representatives and "public" members of the State Board. Presentations by the universities deserve more consideration than was given to the points at issue between the institutions and the staff. I think the request for additional funds for Research and Education Hospitals at the Medical Center is a case in point. The request was for something over a million dollars for increased operational costs, largely as a "catch up," but also for improvements in services. The record is clear that the hospitals have been falling behind because of significant increases in the costs of operations. Sources I consider authoritative indicate that the increase in hospital costs in the Chicago area this year will be approximately 20 per cent. The overriding facts in my mind on this point were the statements made by our own staff that more than the amount requested would be recovered in income from operations of the hospitals through Medicare and Medicaid and by improved services of the hospitals. The request would not, in effect, cost the State any real dollars for the investment of these funds, yet I could not even raise a second for my motion in this meeting to approve the increase over the recommendation of the Board Staff. I think, as I said yesterday, one of the great dangers in a Board of this kind is that there is a tendency to move toward uniformity in dealing with various interests of the State. It is much easier to give everyone comparable amounts than it is to make distinctions based on institutional differences and eminence. This, I think, was a factor that came into consideration when the subject of salary increases for the University of Illinois faculties was discussed. We had asked for an additional sum beyond the Board formula, on the grounds that we have been comparing ourselves with a group of other nationally known institutions with which we compete for faculty, and that without additional funds we would not be moving forward and possibly would be falling behind. Our goal has been to reach a mid-point in salary levels with these comparable universities, and we have