Minutes of the
NIU Board of Trustees
FINANCE, FACILITIES AND OPERATIONS COMMITTEE
April 14, 1998

Agenda Item 6.b. – Real Estate Donation 

Dr. Williams said that Northern Illinois University was the recipient of a partnership agreement with a private development company. This has been one major way, he said, for the university to address educational program delivery and service needs throughout northern Illinois in view of the limited resources available. These partnerships have been formed to provide necessary land and, in many cases, the necessary infrastructure for the university to proceed with the development of a facility to house academic and other educational services. Dr. Williams announced that NIU had entered into an affiliation agreement with Shoe Factory Road LLC, a development corporation in the Hoffman Estates area. This agreement included the donation of 20 acres of land valued at approximately $5 million to the NIU Foundation. The agreement also provides that the developer supply the necessary infrastructure, including roads, sewer and water, to the boundaries of the property.  

The background for this donation has been reviewed and discussed by the Board previously. The Hoffman Estates facility now operated by Northern Illinois University on the Sears campus is a facility of approximately 45,000 square feet. Built in 1992, Dr. Williams said, it represented one of the first initiatives by a major university in the state of Illinois to provide an educational center solely on self-supporting revenues. The university did not receive any direct state appropriations to construct the Hoffman Estates Center nor does it receive any direct state appropriations for operations. The present facility was built under a similar arrangement with the Sears Corporation, which donated 3.9 acres of its 850-acre campus to NIU and included all of the necessary infrastructure. Two years after completion of the facility in 1992, enrollment was at capacity. Enrollment has now grown to the point of limiting programs, causing the potential cancellation of academic courses because the necessary facilities are not available, and affecting the Center's ability to offer an effective conference facility during the day. With the assistance of Trustee Moser and others, Dr. Williams said they tried to work out some arrangement with Sears for additional space on the Sears campus. However, the Sears marketing area has also grown beyond their original projections and is now in the process of expanding both their building and the parking area. They are not only unable to deliver parking spaces to NIU, but are building a new parking structure for another 1,200 cars just for their staff. 

Dr. Williams said he and the developer met with the planning commission for Hoffman Estates Monday evening and were positively received. He said the Village is excited about this opportunity and reflected on what they feel are the opinions and needs of their community, which would be enhanced by an even stronger NIU presence in the Hoffman Estates area. The agreement has been signed and the university will be moving forward to assist the developer and affiliate to obtain the necessary approvals through the Village, which include such things as zoning, annexing, plat and subdivision approvals. After all those approvals and funding have been obtained, the university can move forward. The agreement requires the developer to have all of the infrastructure improvements in place no later than March 31, 1999. That means the site will be ready for development approximately a year from now.  

Vice Chair Siegel turned the gavel over to Chair Raymond, who asked Dr. Williams to continue with the Child Care Center, Agenda Item 6.c. 

Agenda Item 6.c. – Child Care Center 

The university included a project to provide a childcare service facility for the campus community as part of the bond issue. The childcare service facility project is supported by a student fee, pursuant to the West Campus Development bonds. Originally, the Child Development Lab and childcare services were to be combined into one facility; however, the architect's estimates showed that the programs are quite different and need their own areas because there is very little interplay between them. Many of the shared spaces originally planned cannot work functionally for the two programs. Given these facts and the budget estimate, the university decided to move forward with the Child Care Center to provide childcare services to the campus community. Dr. Williams said they also want to move forward to obtain bids on an addition to the Child Care building that could one day house the Child Development Lab so they will have firm numbers on what those costs would be. Construction should begin on the Child Care Center next spring. Dr. Williams said the university appreciated Trustee Grans' efforts as liaison for this project and thanked her for her help. 

Agenda Item 6.d. – Procurement Regulation Report – HB1633: An Act in Relation to the Delivery of Goods and Services 

This new legislation on regulation of procurements is something that all of us on the Board have been very concerned about, Chair Raymond said, and I know the administration at the university has been actively involved in seeing if there is anything that can be done to alleviate some of the burdens.  

Kathe Shinham, Associate Vice President for Finance and Facilities, gave a quick overview of the law and updated the Committee on the implementation status. There are several changes from the current law. It lowers the threshold for bidding from $25,000 to $10,000, with the exception of construction, which increases from $25,000 to $30,000. There is a concern that there will be a much higher volume of transactions to deal with in the procurement area. It eliminates most exemptions from the current procurement law, such as library books and periodicals, text books, food, other items for resale, professional and artistic services, data processing and telecommunication equipment, and the maintenance of equipment by a manufacturer or an agent of the manufacturer. The law says everything needs to be subject to the competitive bidding process, but provides for a few exemptions, such as contracts with governmental units, hiring employees, collective bargaining contracts, purchase of real estate and contracts to prepare for litigation. This new law is effective July 1, 1998 with the exception of a financial disclosure form, which was effective upon signing by the Governor on February 6, 1998. Ms. Shinham said the university has been working with the other state universities to develop this financial disclosure form, which is very close to being finalized. University staff went to Champaign-Urbana for a two-day meeting to resolve the disclosure form issue as well as some other aspects of implementation. 

The law requires that the university advertise a notice of all contracts awarded, give advance notice of sole-source contracts, and list all emergency purchases and invitations to bid above $10,000, including renegotiated contracts and change orders, in a procurement bulletin. The current Board Regulations establish the policy and define the authority, which this law removes from the Board of Trustees and gives to the Chief Procurement Officer (CPO). The Governor will appoint the higher education CPO. It has been recommended that Craig Bazzani, a vice president at the University of Illinois, fill the role of Chief Procurement Officer. The CPO will appoint a State Procurement Officer (SPO) at each of the universities, though it is expected that the university will recommend the person to be appointed. 

The law establishes a Procurement Policy Board consisting of five members: four selected by the legislative leaders and one by the Governor. This board's role will be to review and comment on all the procurement rules. They may also recommend rules and practices. As the higher education rules are developed, they will be submitted to the Procurement Policy Board for their review. The Procurement Policy Board also has the right to hire an executive director and up to three staff. Ms. Shinham was not sure how the staff would be funded, but creation of new central offices normally has a trickle-down effect to everyone throughout the state. A group from universities throughout the state met and talked about the procurement bulletin and what the state was doing. They then met with IBM, who is contracting with Central Management Services (CMS). IBM is designing an electronic bulletin that we in higher education decided we did not want to be part of, Ms. Shinham said, for several reasons. It is expensive at a monthly cost of $350 for each of the universities and only gives up to 10 licenses for that price. All vendors would have to pay $60 a month to subscribe. If they wanted to download any information from that system, they would be charged an additional amount. The universities decided they did not want to preclude vendors from participating in this process because of cost. The universities instead agreed to work together to develop a web-based higher education bulletin that will be published daily, which will eliminate time delays and the universities will be able to control the content. All bidders will have access to information at no cost. It will allow the universities to publish rules and other appropriate information. Personnel at the University of Illinois are taking the lead in doing the programming. This, again, has a cost, Ms. Shinham said. The UI estimate of $390,000 includes the network hardware, software, consulting and other equipment, but does not include any nonrecurring personnel costs currently being incurred not just by the UI but by all universities throughout the state. NIU's portion of that bill is $30,000. 

The universities are also working on the rule making process. One good thing, Ms. Shinham said, is the fact that the universities are two steps behind CMS, which has had a few things included in their rules at this point that university staff never thought were possible. One example is the CMS financial disclosure form that they believe will be approved, which exempts sole source procurements, emergency procurements, and certain classes of professional and artistic services. The UI was drafting rules that the NIU staff was expected to receive for review while in Urbana and bring back to the university for review and comment. The rules must then be submitted to the Joint Committee on Administrative Rules (JCAR). Even after submission to this committee, however, those rules can still be changed and shaped by the universities prior to their approval. We will not be through this process by July 1, Ms. Shinham said, therefore, we will have to operate under some emergency rules. It requires two advertising periods and a JCAR hearing before they are official. The law raises many concerns, she said, such as extending the procurement process for purchases that are currently exempt from the bidding process; increasing the workload, not just in the procurement office, but across campus; a high cost for implementing and maintaining the system in process on campus and centrally, under control of the CPO; and we have a very short time for implementation. It will be tough, Ms. Shinham said, but we are devoting the resources we feel are necessary in order to make this a success. We have met with selective groups on campus, and as the rules are defined, we plan to have more meetings to explain in more detail what this means to them and what they will have to do to have their procurements processed. 

Chair Raymond asked what the state was doing to provide the university with the funding necessary to cover the increased expenses associated with the procurement legislation. Ms. Shinham said she was unaware of any possible state funding, and Ms. Swanson said it was not on the state's agenda as far as she knew. The Chair also asked if the IBHE, or anyone else, had amended any of the budget requests being submitted to the legislature for the next fiscal year to cover these expenses. Ms. Shinham said she was not aware of any such request. 

Chair Raymond complimented the Northern Star on what he said was an excellent series in the Northern Star on the impact of the procurement bill and what Kathy Swanson and others in the administration were doing to try to bring these problems to the attention of those in state government. He said the more these kinds of issues are publicized and covered in the press, the more it will be communicated that the entire community of people is interested and concerned about what is happening, not only with NIU, but with the other universities as well. Hopefully, he said, the very difficult position in which they put higher education will somehow be communicated to the elected officials who are imposing unfunded mandates on those of us trying to provide higher education and hold the line on tuition for the citizens of Illinois. All of us have to take the opportunity to communicate by whatever means we have to those who are elected. 

Chair Raymond asked Parliamentarian Davidson if the Board would have to change its Regulations to reflect this new state law, to which he replied in the affirmative. This is within less than three years of the independent boards of trustees being created by the same state legislature that has just passed this new law, Chair Raymond said. As far as I know, he said, the law was not initiated by anything that happened in higher education, yet higher education is being impacted by it. He assumed that the other state agencies being impacted by this legislation did not have independent boards of gubernatorial-appointed trustees overseeing their corporations on a day-to-day basis and asked if that was true. Ms. Swanson replied that the Capital Development Board has appointed officers, but it is a system different from that of higher education. 

Trustee Siegel asked if this legislation applied to Senate Bill 770, the land development initiative implemented by the Board. Dr. Williams replied that he thought the university would not be exempt. Senate Bill 770 does allow the university to do certain types of transactions through that bill, but he thought those things would still be subject to this process. Trustee Siegel asked if he was correct in the assumption that we were originally exempt from the capital development part of the land development initiative, but now we are reregulated. Dr. Williams said that was correct. In addition to this unfunded mandate, Trustee Siegel said, I would be very suspect if we were actually able to achieve what the IBHE recommendation has been on our budget. Although the IBHE approved less than we asked for, Trustee Siegel said, and although the Governor has endorsed it, that does not mean we will receive it. Trustee Siegel asked Ms. Shinham if he was correct in his understanding of her statement that what was formerly a Board of Trustees prerogative is now being reallocated to the state and, in effect, taking away Board power. Ms. Shinham replied that this authority will be assigned to the Chief Procurement Officer. 

Another inquiry made by Trustee Siegel was whether the universities would have any input on which their SPO's would be. Dr. Williams said the major change is that the legislation actually takes the responsibility and gives it to the CPO. It is a very important issue, he said, because, technically, this Board can approve a transaction and the CPO can deny it, which basically impacts upon the authority of this Board. Dr. Williams said that once the procedures and processes have been agreed upon they have to be reviewed and approved by the Procurement Policy Board. Once those have been approved, the CPO has the option of making the SPO appointments. It is his understanding, he said, that it is not mandated but is an option. He said that it was more of a procedural position as opposed to a policy position because the statutory responsibility still remained with the CPO. Trustee Siegel said he thought the Board should be taking the initiative to identify who that SPO would be in order to give that input rather than wait until all these procedures had been developed and more Board authority had dissipated. The SPO question is not really a concern, Dr. Williams said, because he and the other university vice presidents of finance had discussed the SPO issue and felt comfortable in moving forward with Craig Bazzani as the CPO. Their understanding was that they would have the opportunity to tell him who would be running things on each of their campuses. 

Dr. Williams said he considers the SPO as a staff role that has no direct authority other than what may be delegated through the CPO. The key issue is the working understanding of procedures and policies by which the CPO will operate that role. Those in higher education have an understanding that we will come together as a group and work out what those procedures and policies will be. Mr. Bazzani is not on his own in terms of establishing how he will operate in that position. Higher education will have a uniform proposal for procedures and policies. 

Trustee Siegel said if it is just a process issue, there is no problem, but if it is a dissipation of Board authority, as everyone has said it is, then the input should to be at the Board level and not at the administrative level. To try to clarify the point, Chair Raymond said that the Board had delegated the authority to administration to take certain action at certain dollar levels and keep the Board informed; and at a certain dollar level, the Board has to approve it. So, it is when it gets to that higher dollar Board approval level where our authority is being impacted, he said, if this CPO and the SPO can somehow influence Board decisions at that higher dollar level. Chair Raymond said he thought it would be appropriate for the administration to take the lead on designating who the procurement officer for NIU would be just as they take the lead on other administration positions. It is in carrying out those responsibilities at that higher dollar level for which the Board of Trustees has sole authority, the Chair said, that I agree with Trustee Siegel. There is concern about the impact on Board authority. Until the Board sees how these regulations are written, Chair Raymond said, we are not going to know how it is going to affect us. He then suggested that NIU Counsel carefully track the progress of the development of these regulations, analyze how they impact Board authority and what kind of changes will have to be made to the Regulations already in place. They should then report to the Board what their analysis is of the impact on Board of Trustees authority. 

Ms. Shinham said that one member of the university's legal staff, Nordin Gilbert, was in Urbana at that meeting. Chair Raymond said that as soon as these regulations are finalized, he would like to have a report from the General Counsel's Office on the impact on Board authority and if they have any recommendations on action that should be taken. Obviously, the most basic action, the Chair said, is we will have to change our own Board Regulations; but there may be action that we want to consider in conjunction with the boards of the other state universities. We may have an opportunity to see some of them in Nashville at the annual convention of the Association of Governing Boards over the weekend, he said, if so we should take it up with them. 

Trustee Grans said that as a Trustee, she was very disappointed in this whole thing because she thought three years ago, when all of the new boards of trustees were appointed, that there was both control and partnership with the university to move an agenda along. This seems to be a giant step backward to another layer of bureaucracy, she said. It is the students, the faculty and the town who suffer from these actions. We should not lose sight of the bigger picture, Trustee Grans said. It is a good idea for the trustees to meet and to know that as groups of trustees, NIU can take the lead or a following position, as long as something positive is done for all the universities. Trustee Siegel said he agreed with Trustee Grans, except there had been no indication from the other universities that they had a problem with the procurement legislation. So, he said, if we took a position, we would be taking it alone. Ms. Swanson said she did not think the other university boards had been as fully informed as NIU's Board of Trustees.  

Dr. Williams suggested that he bring an update to the next Committee meeting in May. He repeated that the SPO is really just a procedural staff role and is not really at the cutting edge of the decision making. He said at the next meeting the Committee could start looking at the drafted policies and procedures that will really make the difference. It's really getting to the heart of the procedures and policies that make the difference. Higher education is working together at this, he said. The CPO position is a horrendous responsibility. With the cost at $350,000, Dr. Williams said, we have not even scratched the surface. That is not even the beginning of what this is going to cost the university. That does not even impact on the time constraints, the paperwork and all the other things that will be pursuant to it, he said. 

Concerning procurement legislation, Kathy Swanson reported the vice presidents of business had been meeting to try to develop areas of specific problems with the legislation. There is an extensive list of three or four pages that has been identified by this group as issues they would like to see changed to make the bill a little more workable and operable in a university setting. Ms. Swanson said she thought it should be remembered that the legislators passed something they were not completely comfortable with or completely involved and knowledgeable with in terms of the operations of a university versus a regular state agency, which does not house students, does not feed students, does not provide extracurricular activities for students, and does not generate, basically, a city-within-a-city type of concept. It makes it very difficult for a university to operate, she said, and these issues have been identified. That legislative package will probably not be taken forward until next year. That is being determined, Ms. Swanson said, by Dr. Bazzani, who has been named but not officially appointed yet as the Chief Procurement Officer and who has been coordinating this effort. That is the decision that has been made by Dr. Bazzani and his staff at this point, but it could change, she said. 

Because of NIU's extensive continuing education work, Ms. Swanson said, we have over 45,000 students involved in Continuing Education across the northern part of the state. The Continuing Education programs will be drastically hurt by this legislation and we have pursued our own independent exemption for Continuing Education instructors at NIU. Instead of having to bid those people out and provide those services, a bill has been passed out of the House that would allow their contracts to be negotiated, which would allow us to continue to maintain the integrity of the teaching process in the Continuing Education program. Many of those instructors are not full-time and not hired by the university. They are covered under the "other" auspices of the professional services contract in the procurement regulation, which requires bidding. This exemption was passed through the House the previous week by 90 votes. It was somewhat controversial, Ms. Swanson said, because it is the only exemption to the entire procurement code by any state agency or any organization that has been allowed to be brought to the floor for discussion and debate. It is now in the Senate and the success level there is unknown at this point. Ms. Swanson said she would be contacting Board members to help with that Senate effort in Springfield during the next couple of weeks. 

Trustee Raymond asked if Ms. Swanson had received some support from the other state universities in the Continuing Education exemption effort. Ms. Swanson said that she did to a certain extent. The legislation is written so that it would not apply just to Northern. It would be an amendment to the procurement code as a whole and would be allowed for all state universities. However, Ms. Swanson said, there has been some internal discussion at the universities and some do not feel that Continuing Education is as much a priority for them as it is for Northern. The issues, she said, are priority levels, so NIU has pretty much been carrying the Continuing Education issue alone. Trustee Raymond asked if continuing education is not a priority of the state of Illinois. Ms. Swanson answered that it was, but in terms of market share and amount of attention, the other universities did not consider it as much a priority. Trustee Raymond asked if the other universities preferred to put out bids for part-time instructors. Ms. Swanson said that some universities feel it is not something that is going to be a tremendous problem. However, NIU has one of the largest Continuing Education programs in the state with an enrollment of 45,000, so it is a major issue for NIU. That is why, Ms. Swanson said, the university has chosen to pursue that issue, which, so far, has been successful. 

Chair Raymond said the Committee wants to be kept advised and briefed on the entire procurement issue and would like a progress report at its next meeting. He also asked that the General Counsel's Office be included in everything that goes on so that they can keep the Board advised about the legal impact on their authority and the Board Regulations. 

Agenda Item 6.e. – Real Property Lease Agreement – University Press 

Dr. Williams said the University Press, which has offices in both Altgeld and Williston Halls, has to be relocated to another facility in order to facilitate all the other moves. This item included information on space identified in downtown DeKalb that is available for rent or purchase. This is a lease item that would not normally be required by Board Regulations, but was furnished so the Board would be aware of each step taken regarding all the moves necessitated by the Altgeld renovation. After going through an RFP process, Dr. Williams said, this space was selected. The university is also exploring the possibility of the potential for a lease-purchase agreement or an outright purchase of this property. Chair Raymond asked what effect, if any, the procurement legislation would have on a lease of this type in the future. Ms. Shinham and Ms. Patti Perkins said that because this lease is less than ten years, less than $100,000 and less than 10,000 square feet, it would be exempt. 
  

This is a contract renewal for the printing of the Northern Star, Dr. Williams said, which has been before the Board on previous occasions. This is totally paid through Northern Star revenues generated from advertisements and other activities. Trustee Siegel asked, if these are funds generated from Northern Star sales, why it has to come to the Board for approval. Dr. Williams explained even though the money is self-generated, the purchase was over $250,000 and had to be approved by the Board. He then asked for Committee endorsement and the recommendation to forward it the full Board for approval. Trustee Grans moved to endorse the Northern Star printing contract renewal and was seconded by Trustee Moser. The motion was approved. 

Agenda Item 7.b. – Printing Services – Printing Equipment Contract (Renewal) 

This item was also a contract renewal for Printing Service equipment as part of a multiyear contract. There were no substantive changes in this contract. The university requested approval. Chair Raymond asked if this lease would be impacted by the procurement law next year. Dr. Williams said that it would be subject to the law and all of the required reporting and bidding requirements and review through the CPO. To answer another query from Chair Raymond, Dr. Williams said the law requires that the lowest bid be accepted unless there is a way to disqualify that bid. If a different vendor comes in with a low bid, Chair Raymond asked, does that mean all the present copiers would have to be replaced? Dr. Williams replied that this was correct unless there was something about that supplier that violated the law or disqualified them, which would be decided by legal counsel. The university's Director of Purchasing would work with legal counsel, who would point out any exceptions. However, he said, that is very rare. Ms. Shinham said that after receiving the response on the bids, the university does have the right to throw out all bids received and start again if the responses are not satisfactory because the specs were not written in a manner that would assure receipt of correct bids for the particular needs. Trustee Siegel made a motion to endorse the contract, seconded by Trustee Moser. The motion was approved. 

Agenda Item 7.c. – International Programs Contract (Renewal) 

Dr. Williams stated that this was submitted for the renewal of the university's International Programs contract. He explained that NIU enters into various agreements that provide for room and board and, many times, instructional costs with universities throughout the world. This is a revolving expenditure for the university; the students pay these dollars to the university and then the university pays for the services in whatever country the students choose to study. A budget, not to exceed $2.5 million, is set up for this purpose. The approval gives NIU the operational latitude to enter these agreements and pay the subsequent bills, Dr. Williams said. When asked how procurement legislation would affect this contract renewal next year, Ms. Shinham and Dr. Williams said that the contracts would be prepared as sole-source agreements because NIU deals with specific universities in various countries, exempting them from the advertisement process. The university asked Committee endorsement of this item and that it be submitted to the full Board for approval. Trustee Grans so moved, seconded by Trustee Moser. The motion was approved. 

Agenda Item 7.d. – Athletic Sports Camps – Housing and Meals Expenditure Authorization 

This item was for the approval of a contract for the university's summer athletic sports camps. The athletic sports camps are self-supporting operations paid for by the fees collected from the participants. These sports camps include cheerleading, football, baseball, boys' and girls' basketball, boys' and girls' soccer, and softball. The approval sought is to provide room and board for overnight campers at the University Plaza of DeKalb, which had the winning bid. A major growth has been experienced in this activity over the years, Dr. Williams said, and that is why the item was brought before the Board. Dr. Williams confirmed Chair Raymond's assumption that a bidding process through the Chief Procurement Officer would have to be used for this authorization next year. Trustee Siegel asked about the increase this year over last year. Dr. Williams said when they asked that same question of the athletic areas, they said that the cheerleader camp is one of the biggest in the Midwest and is growing. This is a projected figure and is worded "not to exceed" in order to give them the flexibility to handle their most optimistic number of participants. The actual expenditure, Dr. Williams said, will depend upon the number of participants in each of the programs, which are entirely self-funded, so they will only be able to expend what they generate. To confirm Trustee Siegel's inquiry, Dr. Williams stated that this expenditure is subject to the University accounting and auditing procedures. The university requested Committee endorsement and recommendation to the full Board for approval. Trustee Siegel moved to approve the item, seconded by Trustee Moser. The motion was approved. 

Agenda Item 7.e. – Center for University Resources for Latinos and Latin American Studies - Design and Construction Budget Revision 

Dr. Williams explained that the Center for University Resources for Latinos and Latin American Studies is a project that the Board approved pursuant to the issuance of revenue bonds. Bids were put out for the project on two occasions; they were all unsatisfactory. The architects, Campbell Tiu Campbell, were asked to take another look at the whole project, Dr. Williams said, and provide some recommendations on how we should proceed given the dollar amounts involved. Dr. Williams introduced Mr. Wendell Campbell, designer of NIU's Black Studies Center, and Mr. Dan Franks, both from the firm of Campbell Tiu Campbell, formerly known as Wendell Campbell Associates. Mr. Franks gave a quick overview of the architects' recommendations regarding this project. 

The building for this project is located at 515 Garden Road. The primary concerns were taking the residential structure and trying to turn it into a university facility aesthetically and functionally, and combining the two user groups, the University Resources for Latinos and Latin American Studies, under one roof. In the first phase, Mr. Franks said, they planned an addition at the first floor, providing an opening through the slab to allow light and an opening down into the conference room at the lower level. They tried to utilize as much of the existing structure as possible, providing new windows, a complete tear-off of the roof structure and a new roof, the existing walls, ceiling joists and gyp board, to save money and stay within the original budget. There was to be an additional basement space which would include a large conference area for the user groups and as much useable basement space as possible, providing new openings and some fenestration into the lower levels. The contractors, however, did not see the economy of using the existing structure as much as the architects or their independent cost consultant. Mr. Franks said the contractors thought a new structure would probably be the appropriate way to go and their costs showed that to be true. This is a solution that had been looked at previously. Their last bid came in $97.11 per square foot. The architects went back and looked at a slab on grade structure with a cost consultant, who determined slab on grade could be built at $98.50 per square foot for a totally new structure, demolishing the existing residential structure. This would allow a main entry off Garden Road and all parking would be off site. 

Mr. Franks showed a schematic floor plan, which divided the building into three separate zones. It would be a 7,400 square foot facility with the center zone as the public space with the meeting conference room in back; the north side as the student zone; and the south side as the office zone. As far as the layout and the quality of space, there would be more fenestration for all of the spaces since there are no small windows in the basement area. There is no longer a need for the elevator since it would be slab on grade, all one level. The exterior elevation would be very similar to what was planned previously and the mechanical system would go into the ceiling structure. Mr. Franks said they would try to maintain as much of the original elevation as possible; the same materials for the roof; the brick and some of the architectural elements that we worked with the user groups to achieve. The main difference, he said, would be locating the entry/vestibule at the center of the building instead of at the corner of the building. There would still be a clerestory at the center, which is a staging area for the conference room and would allow some light into that area. 

Dr. Williams said that there was enough funding in the revenue bond funds to cover the cost of structure in answer to a question from Chair Raymond. Trustee Siegel asked why the structure was changed from a multilevel facility to a single level with slightly less space at a higher cost. Dr. Williams said that when they went for the original bid, it was discovered that the original budget was not sufficient because the contractors felt they could not utilize many of the existing elements. When they finished with the bid, the cost of the bid in comparison to the cost of a new facility was a little of a dollar per square foot difference. That's what we have to compare with, Dr. Williams said, what came out in the bidding process in comparison with a new facility. When that is done, he said, it is more efficient and just makes more sense to build new than to try to deal with the existing facility. Dr. Williams thanked Vice President and Provost Carroll Moody for working with them and having the users involved in working with the architects. Both program directors have reviewed the latest plans he said and are very much excited about them. It is more efficient and works better for them. In answer to a question from Trustee Siegel, Dr. Williams said the contingency as well as architectural engineering fees and all other related fees that would be involved in the project are included in the total requested. Both group directors, Drs. Gonzalez and Gutierrez, were very much in favor of the changes made to the plan. Dr. Gonzalez said the students had also been involved in all aspects of the plan. Chair Raymond asked for a motion to approve the demolition of the existing structure at 515 Garden Road to redesign the new center as a one-story, slab on grade structure for a total project budget of $850,000, including construction cost, architectural/engineering fees, equipment and contingency, with funds reserved in the 1996 Revenue Bond account. Trustee Grans so moved, seconded by Trustee Moser. The motion was approved. 

Agenda Item 7.f. – DuSable Hall Renovation Project 

Dr. Williams said one of the things that is desperately needed on campus is improvement of classroom facilities by addressing the interior environments of the classrooms. They need to be upscaled so that they are computer equipped and computer ready. We need to think of those things that will assist our students, he said, to have proper areas for meetings, where they can relax and have food, and other activities. The university has been dealing with the needs for DuSable for the last five years. Improvements were made in the HVAC system because DuSable is one of those buildings that was built in the era when they believed that having operable windows was a no-no and a bad idea, Dr. Williams said, so, all of the windows are fixed and cannot be opened. Also, this facility has the original furniture in the classrooms that was there 30 years ago. The university would like to move forward with improving the building by painting, upgrading and putting in new furnishings. Dr. Moody emphasized that smart classrooms will be a part of this renovation. It has also been an issue for the Student Association, he said, which pointed out this particular classroom building because just about every freshman has classes in it. The need for the total project is well over $5 million dollars, Dr. Williams said, so this request is for one-tenth of that, $500,000, for the initial phase. In answer to a question from Chair Raymond, Dr. Williams said the funds would come from the university's capital repairs line but was not sure where the rest of the funding would come from. The university requested $1.5 million for deferred maintenance and improvements in this year's budget, but IBHE cut that to around $350,000. Another request will be made in next year's budget. Trustee Siegel moved for approval of the initial phase of the DuSable Hall renovation project, seconded by Trustee Grans. The motion was approved. 
  

Kathryn Swanson, Assistant to the President for Government Relations, reported that the university's budget was still intact, however, the legislature had not yet adjourned. A relatively uneventful Senate Appropriation Hearing was held in Springfield about two weeks before the meeting. Chair Boey and Trustee Siegel attended the hearing, which went exceptionally well, she said. The university's House Appropriations hearing was scheduled for early in the morning on Thursday, April 23. The Governor was scheduled to attend the end of the Board meeting on April 23 and would be addressing the Board at that time as well. Ms. Swanson said she had been told that the university should be prepared to expect some additional cuts in the budget from the legislature, but she had no idea, at that point, where those cuts would come from. 

Ms. Swanson also reported on the Advanced Photon Source funding, in which the Board has been very involved and supportive. Dr. Clyde Kimball in the Physics Department leads the project at NIU. It involves a relationship with five other universities, including Northwestern University, University of Chicago, Northern Illinois University, Southern Illinois University and Illinois Institute of Technology. These universities are together in an affiliation for advanced x-ray research in synchrotron radiation at Argonne. Ms. Swanson said that the present grant runs out at the end of this fiscal year, and the Governor's Office and the legislature have tentatively agreed to support the grant with not only the $2 million that the current grant was originally funded at, but an additional million. So this year, it appears that the Advanced Photon Source will receive $3 million and university staff were working on that through the legislative process to insure it is fulfilled at the end of session. There is also a program for the first year, Ms. Swanson said, that the legislature is looking at creating this year involving federal match funds for universities involved in federal research grants. It has been proposed for funding at $5 million. Dean Zar, Dean of the Graduate School, has been in negotiations as well with the Board of Higher Education for the distribution of those funds. This is a new program that would be designed to augment a decline in federal research dollars available and provide a specific state set-aside for universities engaged in federal research grants. 

The university's flood control project for $6.7 million is on the list to be funded. We have no affirmed guarantee that there will be a bond bill this spring; it is too early. 

Ms. Swanson reported on the Taxpayer Relief Act, involving the Hope Scholarship Program and the Lifetime Learning Tax Credit. She reported previously on the tremendous unfunded mandate that was placed on universities and colleges across the country, public and private, for tracking and providing data to the IRS so that students and their families would be eligible for those credits. She, President La Tourette and others have been working with Congressmen Manzullo and Hastert in the House. The Congressmen introduced legislation several months ago which now has over 40 cosponsors in the House, and the Senate picked up legislation about three weeks ago that now has eleven Senators cosponsoring it. It is entitled the Higher Education Reporting Relief Act and would provide relief to universities, taking them out of the position of being in the middle trying to collect data from students and their families about family income and taxpayer records. The IRS and the universities and colleges across the country would not be in the position of having to report and track all that, which has an estimated $125 million impact across the country. 

Government Relations now has a web site. Ms. Swanson introduced Bob Hutchinson, her Administrative Intern, who was responsible for the web site. It can be accessed through the Administration section of the NIU homepage. The site contains all kinds of federal and state information on what is going on with federal and statewide budgets, substantive issues, etc. She encouraged the Board and those in the university community to take a look at it.  

Trustee Grans made a motion to adjourn, seconded by Trustee Siegel. The meeting was adjourned at 12:02 p.m. 
  
  
Respectfully submitted 
  
Sharon M. Mimms 
Recording Secretary