Repository: UIHistories Project: Board of Trustees Minutes - 1958 [PAGE 25]

EXTRACTED TEXT FROM PAGE:

22

BOARD OF TRUSTEES

[ J u l y 2$

for servicing both institutions, and if the University acquired a new laundry it could serve the Psychiatric Institute State Hospital, if found to be legally possible. T h e estimated requirement for a new University Laundry is 2,740,000 pounds a year. T h e requirements of the Psychiatric Institute State Hospital will amount to approximately 650,000 pounds a year. T h e total requirements, if the University were to furnish laundry service to the Psychiatric Institute State Hospital, would be 3,390,000 pounds a year. A new laundry should be designed for a potential capacity sufficient to handle the laundry needs for approximately 1,200 hospital beds. T h e capital cost of a new laundry is estimated at $745,000, including equipment owned by the University and land in the Medical Center District valued at $85,000. T h e remainder of the cost, $660,000, would have to be borrowed or provided by a state appropriation. T h e present annual operating cost of laundry service, including that done by commercial laundries, is $183,000. If all of the laundry were done by a commercial laundry, it is estimated that the annual cost would be $193,200. If a new laundry is constructed, the same volume of laundry could be processed at an estimated annual cost of $143,200, or a saving of $50,000. T h e laundry operations must be discontinued in the present location, since this space is not only inadequate for this purpose but is needed for hospital use. In view of the savings possible through the operation of a Universityowned laundry, possibilities of financing its construction, probably through the cooperation of the University of Illinois Foundation, should be explored. In addition to savings in costs, there would be operating advantages in having such a facility: smaller inventory of linens, greater flexibility in methods of distributing linens to hospital floors, less storage space required, and an estimated longer life for linens. The Medical Director of the Hospitals, the Vice-President in Charge of the Chicago Professional Colleges, the Director of the Physical Plant, and the Comptroller recommend approval in principle of the construction of a laundry at the Chicago Professional Colleges campus and that further studies be made of the possibility of financing such a facility. I concur and recommend that the Comptroller be authorized to investigate the possibility of securing the necessary financing and to employ the law firm of Chapman and Cutler, Chicago, as special counsel. O n m o t i o n of M r s . W a t k i n s , t h i s r e c o m m e n d a t i o n w a s a p p r o v e d . INCREASE IN PETTY CASH F U N D AT CHICAGO UNDERGRADUATE DIVISION (10) The Comptroller recommends that the petty cash fund available for the use of the Business Manager at the Chicago Undergraduate Division be increased from the present maximum of $12,000 to $15,000, by assignment of an additional $3,000 from the balances of indirect cost funds now held by the University Treasurer, T h e petty cash fund at the Chicago Undergraduate Division was authorized by the Board of Trustees on April 24, 1952, and $12,000 is not now adequate to service the Undergraduate Division. I concur. O n m o t i o n of M r . L i v i n g s t o n , t h i s r e c o m m e n d a t i o n w a s a p p r o v e d by the following vote: A y e , M r s . Holt, M r . Johnston, M r . Livingston, M r . M e g r a n , M r . S w a i n , M r s . W a t k i n s ; no, n o n e ; absent, M r . Bissell, M r . Herrick, M r . Nickell, M r . Stratton, M r . Williamson. APPROPRIATION FOR LEGAL SERVICES (11) Mr. Albert E. Jenner, Jr., of the firm of Johnston, Thompson, Raymond, and Mayer, Chicago, was engaged as special counsel in the mandamus proceedings instituted against the University by Miss Patricia Bluett. T h e Appellate Court for the First District recently affirmed the order dismissing Miss Bluett's mandamus suit against the University. Mr. Jenner has presented a statement showing that there is due his firm a fee for its services to the University in this matter from May 13, 1955, to date in the sum of $2,500 plus advancements made by it in behalf of the Univer-