|
|
Minutes of the
NIU FINANCE, FACILITIES
AND OPERATIONS COMMITTEE
November 17, 1997
CALL TO ORDER AND ROLL CALL
The meeting was called to order by Chair David Raymond at 10:12 a.m. in the Clara Sperling Sky Room of Holmes Student Center at Northern Illinois University. Recording Secretary Sharon Mimms conducted a roll call of Trustees. Members present were Trustees Susan Grans, George Moser and Chair Raymond. Not present was Trustee Myron Siegel. Also present were Board Chair Robert Boey, Student Trustee Steven Kovacs, Committee Liaison Eddie Willliams and Board Parliamentarian Kenneth Davidson. Having noted the presence of a quorum, the meeting proceeded.
VERIFICATION OF APPROPRIATE NOTICE OF PUBLIC MEETING
Confirmation of Open Meetings Act notification compliance was given by Board Parliamentarian Ken Davidson.
MEETING AGENDA APPROVAL
Trustee Moser made a motion to approve the agenda and was seconded by Trustee Grans. The motion was approved.
REVIEW AND APPROVAL OF MINUTES
A motion was made by Trustee Grans and seconded by Trustee Moser to approve the minutes of September 15, 1997. The motion was approved.
CHAIR'S COMMENTS
Chair Raymond welcomed everyone to the meeting and acknowledged the presence of Board Chair Robert Boey and Student Trustee Steven Kovacs. The Chair said it looked like everything they were acting on was going to be good news. He said the Committee would be considering supplemental funding requests for additional improvements to Stevenson Towers renovation project, recommendations for tuition increases for graduate courses, the law school and summer session in line with past actions and some adjustments to the tuition schedule approved at a previous Board meeting. The Committee was also to hear informational reports and presentations on university investments and capital improvements.
UNIVERSITY RECOMMENDATIONS
Agenda Item 6.a. – Stevenson Towers Renovation – Phase I Dr. Williams reported on the Stevenson Towers renovation, which is a part of the university bond refinance monies generated in FY97. These funds are to be used for the total renovation of Steven Towers and other projects. He said that bid results came in well within the budget established by the Board. Today, Dr. Williams said, he wanted to discuss the idea of expanding the scope of the work in order to have the maximum amount of improvements done at this time. To make sure the project scope fit the allocated budget, several key priorities were moved down so that the budget could be met. These priorities were then considered as possible items that could be added to the budget if successful bids were received. Since the bids were successful, it will allow the university a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity to maximize the scope of the project and put in all the improvements that can be afforded at this time.
Dr. Williams then asked Jim Bryant of the Architectural and Engineering staff to give an overview of the improvements they would like to add to the scope of the project. To update the floors, Mr. Bryant said they planned to give more of a mix to accommodate the different lifestyles that are prevalent now rather than when the building was designed. He explained a diagram of the proposed plan. There was a mix of singles, doubles and suites: each corner held a suite, with a living room and two bedrooms; two suites will be configured with restrooms in them; and another area showed a new handicapped toilet and shower configuration. There will be smoke doors in two areas on the floor to separate corridors. Mr. Bryant said the base will allow them to take the first alternate plan, which would allow three more floors in the towers to be completed. Of the additionally requested monies, $1.6 million, approximately $1 million will be for finishing the floors, at about $65,000 per floor. In addition to that, improvements will be made in the central area of the building.
Other extras that would be picked up were explained by Mr. Bryant. There will be a canopy over the serving area and streetlights along the entire length of the street. One alternate that will not be done is the clerestory; instead skylights will be installed for natural lighting in the dining and serving areas. The main entrance vestibule will be expanded under a mansard roof to give some definition to where visitors to the Stevenson complex would enter.
Chair Raymond asked Mr. Bryant if he could further clarify the floor plan currently proposed for every floor of Stevenson Hall.
Referring to his drawing, Mr. Bryant said there would be two suites with baths (formerly six rooms across the bottom of the drawing); there would be a living area in the middle with a bedroom on either side, and a private restroom for each of these suites. He said that the plumbing was the most expensive portion of the improvements. In addition to that, plumbing improvement was made for an ADA accessible restroom for the entire floor, rather than modifying one of the existing restrooms, which would be more expensive. There is a suite on one corner with a living room and an identical configuration on the other side; a straight line suite without a bathroom, similar to a Lincoln Hall configuration now being used, with a living room in the middle and two bedrooms on either side; and a combination of single and double rooms around the sides. Three existing rooms, an area of about 175 square feet, will be opened to make two larger doubles that would give each of the residents more flexibility. For flexibility, all of the fixed equipment is being taken out and replaced with more movable equipment. There are smoke doors to provide more safety and a larger ADA-compliant door to the lounge. The area just outside the elevators is being changed to give a more open feeling.
Board Chair Boey asked if a student survey had been done to learn their preferences and whether or not suites were preferable in most cases. Mr. Bryant said that suites with baths were the most preferred accommodation because it was not an option available on the campus until now. Dr. Williams stated that the entire program for the residence hall space was generated through the results of studies within the housing area conducted by the Director of Housing and working with the student Residence Hall Association so that the students and the residence hall professionals were a central part of every step of the design and the final configurations.
Chair Raymond said the university is able to make these additional improvements through savings as a result of the cancellation of the Recycling Center project and the savings realized due to some of the residence halls being closed this semester. These things made it possible to utilize some of these savings to make improvements to Stevenson Hall that were not contemplated when the bids went out. Chair Raymond commended Dr. Williams, Mr. Bryant and the staff for being able to do that. Trustee Moser moved to endorse approval of the proposed $1.625 million increase in the project budget for Phase I of the Stevenson Towers Renovation and was seconded by Trustee Grans. The motion was approved.
Agenda Item 6.b. – FY99 Tuition Recommendation
Dr. Williams stated that the university had presented recommendations for undergraduate tuition for FY99 at previous meetings. The Board of Trustees approved an approximate average increase of 3.2% in undergraduate tuition. Not resolved were the graduate tuition for FY99, tuition for the College of Law, and summer tuition. One other item that had been under discussion was the implementation of the 3.2% average undergraduate tuition increase. There had been concerns raised about the fair distribution of that increase. Specifically, there was concern that students taking fewer hours would be unfairly burdened with the specific distribution under discussion when the tuition increase was brought to the Board. As a result, President La Tourette felt it was necessary to review that whole distribution process and plan. He met with several key people on campus to obtain further input concerning the distribution. As a result, the university recommended an increase of $10 per credit hour for graduate tuition and an 8.2% increase for the College of Law. These increases are a result of several things, including the need for additional resources and a comparison of NIU tuition rates to other institution rates in the marketplace. NIU's tuition has been well under the rates charged at other public institutions as well as the privates. This, then, gives us the opportunity to adjust our rates to be more in line with the rates that are being charged, Dr. Williams said, and to generate needed resources to help support the institution and its programs. For summer tuition rates, flat rates of $105 per credit hour for undergraduate studies and $116 per credit hour for graduate summer studies are recommended. He then explained a revised distribution plan for the FY99 undergraduate tuition, which follows up Board action approving the 3.2% undergraduate tuition increase. This distribution plan addresses the distribution in a more equitable manner so that students taking fewer hours are not adversely affected or burdened as a result of the increase.
To answer a question from Trustee Moser, Dr. Williams said that the Board approved the average increase. However, the actual implementation of that increase was an issue that the President felt needed to be readdressed, so the plan itself was not approved. He explained that the table on page 16 of the information materials gave an idea of what the original distribution plan was compared to what is now being recommended. The original rate was $116 per credit hour for students taking one credit hour. That was significantly reduced to $108. The new plan uses a more graduated increase on level plains, whereas, in the other system, rates were stepped up more dramatically.
The comment was made by Dr. Larson this was a good example of a win-win situation. It was unfortunate, that there was a disruption at the earlier Board meeting, Dr. Larson said, otherwise, we could have discussed the various issues and concerns of parents and students who are parents that cannot take a number of courses all at once. He thanked Beth Hull from the Student Association and Jody Ryan from the Faculty Senate Academic Affairs Committee for talking the issues out with the President. He also thanked President La Tourette for his willingness to reopen the issue. He said this is a similar plan, but the slope of the rates is just slightly different where everybody comes out as a winner. It was a good job of everybody working together, Dr. Larson said, and coming up with a much more attractive plan that still meets the purpose of encouraging students to take more than 12 hours in order to complete their degree in four years.
Chair Raymond also commended the administration for keeping an open mind and listening to the comments that came in after the Board's action at the last meeting to making these adjustments. Student Trustee Kovacs said that this plan is a lot easier to accept on the students' behalf. There were quite a few problems and questions raised when he first presented the plan to the Student Association, but this new plan definitely seemed to be a compromise in their eyes. The students' biggest problem was in the great gap between the cost of one hour and 16 hours on the old plan. The new plan, he said, kind of leveled out that field and was a lot easier for them to accept than the old plan.
Chair Raymond said the College of Law received an above average increase last year and another was being approved for this year in order to fund the Law Library and computer support services. He asked Law Dean LeRoy Pernell to give a report on what is being done with the additional funds.
Dean Pernell said the additional funds had been applied to the areas the Chair mentioned. He said the student computer lab within the Law School had just been revamped with the addition of eight to ten new machines to upgrade the library. We are continuing to upgrade a number of other equipment items and networking capacity, he said, to meet the emerging technology in legal education. A number of improvements remain to which the Law School has begun to apply funds generated last year. The increase approved by the Board last year was part of a four-year plan that would allow for an increase, Dean Pernell said, while at the same time keeping the tuition of the Law School extremely competitive with similar institutions around the state and the country. Even with an increase, he said, NIU's Law School tuition is probably half what students might anticipate at some other institutions of similar quality.
The dean listed a number of items that remain to be addressed and are currently being addressed through lapsed funding. Those items include library student help augmentation and adjunct faculty and support. We are facing a situation, Dean Pernell said, where changes in the profession require the offering of additional courses. Many of those small section courses are necessitated by new bar passage requirements, as well as the anticipation by employers and others in the profession that all students will have had this exposure. Currently those needs are being met through short-term available lapsed funds, but an increase will allow the Law School to meet this requirement and student requests in a more permanent manner. Law review publications are also a cost item that is currently underfunded; additional equipment and networking needs are being necessitated by changes in the library system; and the admissions and recruiting areas are in need of supplementation. Dean Pernell said that he had the opportunity the previous week to accept, on behalf of the university, an award from the Illinois State Bar Association for the NIU Law School's efforts in diversity. In order to continue being competitive in that area, he said, we have to supplement our admissions and recruiting efforts, particularly as they relate to recruiting more women into the Law School and maintaining diversity in other areas. The dean said this is also necessitated by what is anticipated to be an 11% drop nationally in the recruitment pool this year. This total package was estimated at approximately $65,000, which is what should be generated by the requested Law School tuition increase. Again, Dean Pernell said, this would still put the Law School's overall tuition, in many instances, at about half what competitive institutions are charging.
Chair Raymond thanked Dean Pernell for his report and congratulated him on the progress being made since much of what he had reported on was started before he arrived. As a member of the Board of Visitors at the Law School before joining the Board of Trustees, the Chair said he had the opportunity to talk to members of the ABA accreditation team that came through the university a couple of years ago, and many of the comments were that the Law School at NIU was accomplishing quite a bit with very little. It was clear there was a sense that the Law School was not receiving all the resources they needed, Chair Raymond said, so I am glad to be part of the Board of Trustees that is now trying to provide more resources and still remain very competitive with our rates. Chair Raymond then asked for a motion to endorse approval of the tuition recommendations. Trustee Moser so moved, seconded by Trustee Grans. The motion was approved.
UNIVERSITY REPORTS
Agenda Item 7.a. – Report on Investments Dr. Williams recognized Kathe Shinham, Associate Vice President, Finance and Facilities, who is in charge of the cash management area, and Tammy Farley, Director of Cash Management. He then asked Mrs. Shinham to make a report on investments. In FY97, the university earned over $3.3 million on investments. There are four primary investment goals: preservation of principal; compliance with state laws, rules, regulations, debt covenants and Board of Trustees policy; meeting the university's cash flow needs; and earning a yield that would be considered acceptable to conservative investment managers. State statute defines what funds can be invested. Mrs. Shinham said that for the university this means, basically, all funds, with the exception of the general fund appropriation. Statute also dictates which investments are allowable. Basically, this includes securities that are secured by the full faith and credit of the U.S. Government; obligations of federal agencies, interest bearing accounts as defined by the Illinois Banking Act; short-term obligations of corporations. There are several limitations on corporate securities. The corporations must have assets exceeding $500 million, university investments cannot exceed 180 days, the university cannot hold more than 10% of that corporation's outstanding debt, and the debt must be rated in one of the three top categories by at least two rating companies. Finally, the university can invest in selected money market mutual funds.
Bond covenants can further restrict allowable investments. In general, the investment of bond funds must comply with the Illinois Public Investment Act. The only investment allowed for the 1985 bond issue was U.S. Treasury securities with a term not to exceed 10 years. For 1992 and 1996 bonds, the university was allowed to invest in U.S. Government obligations, such as Treasury Bills, Notes or Bonds, commercial paper, bankers' acceptances, certificates of deposit and bank deposits. But all deposits must be covered by either FDIC Insurance or fully collateralized. Investments can also be made in instruments issued by federal agencies; investment pools created under the State Treasurer's Act, such as IPTIP; Illinois funds; and selected money market mutual funds. There are many things the university cannot invest in such as nongovernmental investment pools, international stocks and bonds, domestic stocks and bonds, limited partnerships or mutual funds which invest in any of these nonpermissible investments. Mrs. Shinham said that these securities are not held here on campus, but with three custodial banks. First of America in Springfield is the primary custodial bank; Bank of America holds some investments for revenue bond entities, as well as the university's 1985 debt reserve; and National Bank and Trust holds the university certificates of deposit, as well as its savings account. All the securities are in the name of Northern Illinois University. The bulk of our funds, 63%, Mrs. Shinham reported, are invested in either U.S. Government securities or agencies of the federal government; 25% is in IPTIP, a liquid source at a reasonable earnings rate; 8% is in commercial paper; and the remainder is in certificates of deposit, a savings account and a few NIU bonds. These bonds were issued in 1957 and 1960 and defeased in 1985. The university was able to purchase them at a very good rate in 1987.
During the year, 5.4% was earned on university investment funds. This considered to be a reasonably good rate of return. The bulk of funds, over 70%, are invested in short-term instruments, approximately 22% of which are two to five years in duration and the remaining 7% is over five years. Mrs. Shinham said the university did a comparison of its investments versus other available investments. It was found that the Pacific Horizon and Dreyfuss funds are both invested only in U.S. Treasury securities, which is an allowable investment and one alternative that could be used by the university. Three-month Treasury bills are at 5.17% and the university earnings were better than that. It was found that the bulk of the funds should be kept in short-term investments just to meet the liquidity needs of the university. Long-term funds at 5.97% yielded better than the six-month Treasury bill rate and a little less than the two-year Treasury note rate.
Mrs. Shinham said that the funds received as a result of the bonds issued a year ago earned over a million dollars in interest during FY97 and only $800,000 was spent during that fiscal year. The bulk of these funds are invested in U.S. Government securities, as well as federal agencies, and they were earning a reasonable rate for the year. Limited amounts are kept in IPTIP to provide for liquidity and some are invested in commercial paper. Mrs. Shinham thanked Tammy Farley, Director of Cash Management, and Paula Lofgren, a student employee who put this presentation together.
Agenda Item 7.b. - Periodic Status Report on Capital Projects in Excess of $250,000
Board of Trustees Regulations, require this periodic progress update. Dr. Williams commented on the Faraday project saying there have been problems with the Capital Development Board in trying to realize the full completion of the project. The general contractor went bankrupt during the construction phase of this project. Through quick action, the university was able to secure another construction firm, Pepper Construction, to step in and undertake the work, and get that company approved by the CDB and the surety company. They took over the project and were able to complete most of it. There are several outstanding matters that remain to be resolved. They were both punch list items and unfinished work, including the installation of compact shelving in Faraday I. The matter had to be turned over to our attorneys to decide who was responsible for what and who should finish the remaining parts of the work. Dr. Williams asked Jim Bryant to give an update on some of the progress that has been made on the Faraday project to date.
Mr. Bryant reported that after three days of mediation at the CDB office in Springfield, between the CDB, the surety bond group for the contractors, the contractors themselves, and NIU, an agreement was worked out that would allow the university to clear a number of big items off the table and some little items at the same time. First and foremost, Mr. Bryant said, was acquisition of the compact shelving which will complete the Faraday Library. The base bid of $60,000, which was originally part of the program, has been approved at today's dollars, $85,000 to cover the escalation of cost since that time. In addition, $25,000 to acquire a new ten-ton air-conditioning unit and another $16,000 worth of sound improvements for the P.A. system in the auditoriums of the facility have been approved. Primary among the large punch list items awaiting completion was the balancing of the mechanical systems. It has been almost impossible to maintain temperature and humidity throughout the building the last few years, because the system was never properly balanced. Plaster and repairs on the inside of the facility will be addressed as well. Contractors were on-site at the building and beginning to perform work. Some exterior work will have to wait until better weather, but movement was anticipated in the near future. In answer to an inquiry from Chair Raymond, Mr. Bryant said that as far as he knew, this should resolve all outstanding construction completion issues on Faraday. Anything dealing with the architects and engineers and design issues will be resolved at a later date, he said.
Chair Raymond asked Kathy Swanson to give a report on what was happening with Altgeld Hall in the legislature. Ms. Swanson said we were very close to receiving funding for Altgeld Hall during this Veto Session, but the House adjourned prior to taking the vote. However, all four legislative leaders have approved the project in concept, she said, and expect no opposition to occur in the legislature between now and then. It should be placed in the Spring 1998 funding schedule. Ms. Swanson added that it was the entire bond bill that was held up, not just the Altgeld Hall project.
Agenda Item 7.c. – Americans with Disabilities Act – NIU Compliance Program Summary
Dr. Williams stated that NIU has, over the years, made a commitment to address access for the handicapped and the disabled. This commitment precedes the enactment of the federal ADA, but certainly has been further focused and motivated given the fact that such an act was passed.
Jim Bryant reported that there had been some progress since the report was put together for the committee. Mr. Bryant said that he and Dr. Williams had many long meetings with the members of the CDB who were managing the three projects being administered by CDB. He said their first focus after those discussions was to try to put a bid package together that would allow installation of interior signage and modification to some building entrances. The hold-up at the CDB level revolved around asbestos abatement in those areas of the buildings that would be impacted by the construction or renovation necessary for the ADA compliance. As a result, it was decided to the things that could be done without impacting asbestos. Toward that end, Mr. Bryant said, the architect has sent a plan of all the signage on campus for our review. There are approximately 2,500 signs that will be going up in 20 campus buildings with most in the center academic core of the campus. Staff was reviewing those in order to send them back to the architects for revision and there would be one more review on campus by university publications before they go out to bid in January. After taking bids, Mr. Bryant said those signs should begin to go up sometime late in the Spring semester. Several buildings, such as Evans Fieldhouse, the Neptune complex, Holmes Center and Gilbert Hall are revenue bond facilities and not covered in the ADA compliance plan funded by the CDB because they are not appropriated fund buildings. When asked if those buildings were ADA compliant by Chair Raymond, Mr. Bryant said that they are 80% to 90% ADA compliant. There is an ongoing program on campus to treat all of the revenue bond facilities, he said. Part of the requirement for hiring an architect whenever you renovate is to make sure everything is ADA compliant. Six elevators will be constructed to address vertical access in Cole, Anderson, Gable, Reavis, Watson and McMurry Halls, which have all had longstanding problems with vertical access. Bid documents were to be sent out for signage in January on all three ADA projects. Mr. Bryant said that the CDB now has engineers under contract who have begun asbestos testing, and construction is expected to begin in the summer of 1998.
Dr. Williams pointed out to the Committee that these projects were initially funded back in 1994 and it has taken three years to reach the point where the projects could be bid. Only the signage portion of the projects is going to be bid at this time. Numerous discussions have been held with CDB to get the funds released to move these projects along. Dr. Williams said he wanted the Board to understand the system the university is under and the constraints. When it comes to bond revenue facilities on campus that we control, he said, we have an ongoing program that is moving very effectively, but we have run into a very difficult situation with the State and are proceeding as fast as we can possibly move. Dr. Williams said that we are not alone with this problem, most of the other State universities are experiencing the same difficulty to various degrees.
Agenda Item 7.d. – Property Usage
Dr. Williams gave information to the Board relative to property that was acquired by the Board of Trustees on behalf of the institution utilizing funds generated from bond proceeds. This property is along Annie Glidden Road and Stadium Drive, formerly known as the Greek property. The university's Alumni Relations Office will be moving into that facility. This was one opportunity to meet a very important space need for the institution and to do it in a very effective manner. The building itself was in fairly good condition and only needed minor renovation. Ms. Patti Perkins headed up that project, he said, and was able to complete a very nice facility for NIU's alumni. Interim Vice President Mike Malone said that the increased visibility the Alumni Association gets with its own building on Annie Glidden will definitely provide an enhanced sense of identification with the university. It is ideally located with the stadium right in back of this building and the fieldhouse across the street in front of it. Mr. Malone said they hope to use it on a fairly regular basis so that small groups of alumni attending events on campus can gather there first and then go to their events. He said the alumni office is still in the plans for Altgeld after its renovation. However, this, Malone said, is a great location for an alumni office until the Altgeld offices are completed.
Agenda Item 8 – Legislative Report
Mr. Swanson said that deregulation legislation passed the General Assembly just before adjournment. The second major education reform package passed the Senate in the Fall and was comprised of a series of smaller taxes instead of the large package the Governor presented last Spring. The House failed to pass that piece of legislation by four votes. The last bill called was the capital and the supplemental appropriation. When that occurred, the House adjourned for Veto Session. So, the education reform package, capital issues and supplemental issues remain on the table for next Spring.
Retiree health insurance issue legislation passed the Pension Laws Committee. The state will pay health insurance for retirees with 20 years or less at five per cent per year of service up to 20 years. Employees with 20 or more years would be fully compensated at retirement. Unfortunately, legislation that would have either grandfathered in or allowed employees to make a choice under which pension plan they wanted to retire, either the previous one, with full health insurance coverage prior to the enhancements, or the enhancements with a limited health insurance coverage for those with less than 20 years, did pass Pension Laws; however the Bureau of the Budget estimated the price tag for the State at $98 million over a five-year period with a $15 million hit the first year. As a consequence, the Senate rejected the legislation when it came to the floor by a vote of 28:16:5, feeling it was much too expensive for the State to take on at that time.
Procurement reform legislation, passed both houses of the General Assembly and was awaiting the Governor's signature. Ms. Swanson said that legislation would have to be analyzed to determine the extent of impact on the university. Legislation revolving around a gift ban and campaign finance reform passed the Senate and stalled in House committee. That legislation, Ms. Swanson said, will probably be dealt with next Spring; however, it ran into some problems when the legislature tried to make it effective for all government officials statewide. Ms. Swanson said she was trying to find out whether the Board would fall under this legislation as appointed State officials. She reported that it will pass in some form next year.
The legislature will convene again on January 14, Ms. Swanson said, and hopefully, within that next week we will have many answers to some of the remaining questions about the legislation that passed. She said all these issues would be explained in more detail at the Legislation, Audit and External Affairs Committee Meeting on November 25 in Hoffman Estates. Answering a question from Chair Raymond, Ms. Swanson said she was fairly optimistic that a bond bill would be passed during the next session.
Another issue important to this Board and to the students at the university is the Student Trustee legislation. The Governor exercised his amendatory veto authority on legislation giving students full voting power on the boards of trustees across the state. Instead of acting on that amendatory veto legislation, several members of the General Assembly introduced new legislation, which basically upheld most of the Governor's amendatory veto provisions. However, it did return the selection power of the students to the individual campuses. The Governor asked in his amendatory veto that each campus select four names for his consideration and that he be given power to make those appointments. After studying this issue in many Midwestern states, Ms. Swanson said, he felt that was the way to handle the students. NIU students supported the Governor's amendatory veto; however, there were other universities that did not share that sentiment and the new legislation was introduced. While that legislation did pass the House, it was stalled in the Senate Executive Committee. Students will not have a vote on the governing boards in January as was assumed and the outcome of that particular issue remains to be seen.
OTHER MATTERS
Dr. Williams commented on an article that appeared in the November 14 issue of the Chronicle of Higher Education. It was an annual report that contained data for the state of Illinois that was generated out of Illinois State University. The report compares the budgets of various public universities between the states in our nation. The November issue compared the two-year gain in appropriations for the State of Illinois and specifically listed Northern Illinois University. It showed that Northern received a 10%+ increase over the two fiscal years considered, FY97 and FY98. This report then seems to contradict what we have indicated being our budget here at NIU over that same two-year period, Dr. Williams said. We have shown an approximate 5.9% increase and some people have asked what happened to the other 4%, which adds up to quite a bit of money. This issue was one that Dr. Williams said should be clarified for the Board. The data that appeared in the Chronicle of Higher Education included the allocations to the State Universities Retirement System (SURS). Over the years, the State of Illinois has fallen behind in its annual contributions to SURS, which is the retirement program for those of us in higher education. Our retirement fund has been underfunded for about 15 years. Approximately two years ago, it was very apparent that the retirement fund would, essentially, go broke in the year 2020 unless the State were to do something about it. There was some action taken on the part of the state legislature, where funds were taken off the top of the appropriations to higher education, Dr. Williams said, and appropriated directly to the retirement program. For Northern Illinois University over those two fiscal years, that amounted to approximately $10 million. When the calculations were made on appropriations to the universities, they included that $10 million as if it were operating dollars appropriated to the institution. They are not as they do not come to the campus. By state statute, the State is obligated to make those appropriations directly to SURS. But in the reported data, those dollars were reflected like there was a huge additional appropriation not only to Northern but to all of public higher education in the state of Illinois. This projected Illinois to be in the upper ten in the nation for higher education support when, in fact, the universities were catching up on about 20 years of underfunding.
Chair Boey said there had been some confusion about the date of the full Board of Trustees meeting and announced that it would be held on Thursday, December 11.
NEXT MEETING DATE
Committee members will be notified of the next meeting date. Chair Raymond asked for a motion to adjourn. Trustee Moser so moved, seconded by Trustee Grans. The motion was approved.
The meeting was adjourned at 11:28 a.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Sharon M. Mimms
Recording Secretary
|
