The Illinois Attorney General’s Office is questioning the ethics of a Board of Regents decision to grant NIU Professor Clyde Wingfield a year off with pay, while a local legislator is suggesting the decision be investigated.

The deal, which will allow Wingfield to collect his $70,000 annual salary while in Washington D.C., was decided in executive session July 20. It was later summarily approved with other decisions from that session during the regular Regents meeting July 21, said Regent lawyer Richard Coffee.

Regents Chairman Carol Burns said customary practice is to approve decisions and agreements from the private executive session during the regular open meeting. It is not, however, the Regents’ practice to name specifically what is being approved, she said. Coffee confirmed that this is common practice.

However, Michael Luke, chief of the opinions division of the Illinois Attorney General’s office, said the Regents should be more specific about what it is they are approving. When measures come up for approval they should be described fully, Luke said. “This can’t be done by an (indirect) reference. They (the agreements) must be spelled out.”

Rep. John Countryman, R-DeKalb, is critical of the Regents’ actions and policies. He has received many angry phone calls from NIU constituents concerning Wingfield’s leave and is considering investigating the agreement.

Countryman said he will suggest the Illinois Audit Commission look into the matter. “I can’t call for an investigation because the legislature is not in session. We can’t pass a resolution or anything.”

Burns said she does not believe the Regents are violating the Open Meetings Act or its intentions. She said the Regents regulary check with legal counsel to maintain compliance with the act’s regulations.

Listing all the private session agreements is both time-consuming and often inappropriate, Burns said. She said a single, all-inclusive motion is common practice. “My understanding is that all universities handle it this way.”

Luke said that such a motion “violates the spirit of the act. It’s no different than a secret ballot.”

Illinois House Bill 2004, currently on the governor’s desk, would require agreements such as Wingfield’s leave to be made public when they come up for approval, Luke said. It is an effort “to codify what the act intends.”

NIU President John LaTourette said he felt the practice of the inclusive motion was acceptable. “There was no attempt to hide anything.”

LaTourette said he did not partake in the decision to grant Wingfield leave. “I was aware of it (the leave) but I felt it was a board matter. I felt I should not intervene.”

The issue of Wingfield’s leave was initiated about a year ago by Wingfield, LaTourette said. There was talk about an “appropriate reassignment that would benefit the Regency system.

“I think it was done legally,” LaTourette said. However, he said the Regents “sometimes have problems communicating their decisions.”

Countryman said, “I would like to see the minutes from that (Regents) meeting” before deciding what to do.

A possible option would be a legislative audit, he said. This would enable the legislature to determine whether money allocated is being spent as it was intended.

If it is determined that money is being spent in a way that does not agree with the original intentions, Countryman said, $70,000 could be cut from NIU’s state allocations.