Repository: UIHistories Project: Board of Trustees Minutes - 1964 [PAGE 1224]

EXTRACTED TEXT FROM PAGE:

1964]

UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS

1179

and for furnishing a channel for direct and concerted communication with administrative officers of the University, its colleges, schools, institutes, divisions, and other administrative units on matters of interest or concern to the academic staff or any member of it." The fact that consultation with the Faculty Advisory Committee will be available both to members of the academic staff and to administrative officers is regarded as a significant clarification of the appropriate channels for such communication. Also, it is noted that the Senate's existing Committee on Academic Freedom will be renamed as a "Committee on Academic Freedom and Tenure." In a dismissal situation, the President would be required to consult with the Faculty Advisory Committee of the appropriate campus before filing charges, but the determination of whether or not proceedings are to be instituted after such consultation is left with the President. If proceedings are instituted, charges are filed with the Senate, and the appointee is privileged to request a preliminary hearing on them before the Senate Committee on Academic Freedom and Tenure. This Senate Committee will receive evidence, hear arguments, and make findings, conclusions, and recommendations. Thereafter, the case may be closed, or the President may proceed to file the charges with the Board of Trustees. The appointee may also request a hearing before the Board, at which a member of the Senate Committee on Academic Freedom and Tenure may be in attendance and is to be given an opportunity to make a statement. The record made at the previous hearing before the Senate Committee will be submitted to the Board, additional evidence may be taken and, under Section 38 (e) (7), "the Board will give due consideration to the findings, conclusions, and recommendations of the Committee on Academic Freedom and Tenure, and the remainder of the record before said Committee . . ." The modifications proposed by the Board of Trustees on April IS, 1964, included the addition of the italicized portion of the above phrase as a technical clarification of matters appropriately considered by the Board in a dismissal proceeding. The ultimate findings of fact and the final decision as to the appointee's dismissal or retention will be made by the Board, as is the case under the existing University Statutes. Public statements about a case under consideration are to be avoided so far as possible. In designating the effective date of any dismissal or request for resignation, the Board is to give "due consideration to all relevant factors including, without limitation, the gravity of the appointee's conduct in question, the services to be rendered to the University by the appointee during any intervening period, and to the time reasonably required for the adjustment of the appointee's personal affairs." President Henry has stated to your Committee that he views time to adjust personal affairs as one of many factors to be considered in designating the effective date of a dismissal or requested resignation, and that the character of the appointee's conduct would also appear to be relevant to this point. T h e Legal Counsel has stated that under existing Illinois law state appropriations for personal services may not be used to pay salary unless services are, in fact, performed. Accordingly, the modifications in Section 38 (e) (7) proposed by the Board of Trustees at its April 15, 1964, meeting added the italicized portion of the above phrase as being a further definition of the factors to which the Board will give due consideration in designating the effective date of a dismissal or requested resignation. In large measure, the Senate Coordinating Council's procedural suggestions tentatively approved by the Board of Trustees on April IS, 1964, follow existing administrative practice in dismissal cases, but considerably more detail is furnished than is found in the present University Statutes. The major procedural innovations which will now be formalized are (1) the necessity of the President's consultation with the Faculty Advisory Committee as a condition precedent to the filing of charges for dismissal, and (2) the establishment of detailed requirements of notice and procedures for the hearing before the Senate Committee on Academic Freedom and Tenure. Consultation with the Faculty Advisory Committee will furnish an opportunity for the President to have direct communication with a formally designated faculty group before preferring charges, but he would not be prevented from also conferring with the appropriate college or department as he has done in the past. All parties concerned would appear to be benefited by the new procedural details for the preliminary hearing before the Senate Committee on Academic Freedom and Tenure. That Committee has the opportunity to consider the ap-