352,1 Jst 1976 cop. 4 OAK ST. HDSF Digitized by the Internet Archive in 2013 http://archive.org/details/stateexpenditure7509keye STATE EXPENDITURES IN CHAMPAIGN COUNTY/ ILLINOIS, 1969, 1970 and 1975. Scott Keyes Planning Paper 75-09 BUREAU OF URBAN AND REGIONAL PLANNING RESEARCH The University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign Urbana, Illinois 61801 STATE EXPENDITURES IN CHAMPAIGN COUNTY/ ILLINOIS. 1969, 1970 and 1975. Scott Keyes Planning Paper 75-09 Professor Department of Urban and Regional Planning University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign UNIV'ERSl' CAMPAIGN March 1975 3*2.1 £« sT /f 1\" Explanatory Note This paper is an advance draft of Chapter 20 of a study dealing with a pro- posed new tool for planning, the Areawide Advisory Budget. In order to put this chapter in context* it should be read in connection with the advance draft of Chapter 1, "The Nature, Uses and Preparation of an Areawide Advisory Budget," which sets forth the general theory of the propdsal, and also contains a prelim- inary Table of Contents of the entire study. Much of the work on this project has been done by students in urban planning workshops which I have conducted over the past two years. The report as a whole is now being prepared for publication. Meanwhile, this advance draft of Chapter 20, together with the draft of Chapter 1, are being circulated to a number of interested persons and agencies for review and comment. Scott Keyes Urbana, Illinois March, 1975 •i- Contents Page Total Expenditures 2 State Agencies and Their Programs 3 State-Serving Activities / 5 Community-Serving Activities 7 Relationship of Revenues and Expenditures 10 A Note on Capital Outlays 12 Strategy for the State 16 Appendix Table A. State Revenues Collected in Champaign County, Illinois, by Type. 1969, 1970, and 1975 21 Table B. State Expenditures in Champaign County, Illinois, by Agency, Type of Program, and Source of Funds. 1969, 1970 and 1975 22 -ii- CHAPTER 20 Indications for the State Government Activities of the various state agencies which have programs in Cham- paign County have been discussed in detail in preceding chapters from a func- tional point of view. It now becomes essential to bring these agencies and their programs together in order to present a consolidated view of the role of the state government as a whole in the area. In order to avoid needless repetition, no effort is made in this chap- ter to recapitulate all of the specific program recommendations to state agencies which are found at various points throughout the report. Rather, the emphasis here is on perspective: the kinds of activities carried on in the area by the state government as a whole; their costs and sources of funding; the revenues received in the area by the state government, and the relationship of these revenues to projected expenditures; and, finally, to round out the picture, capital outlays and their funding. Summary fiscal data for all state agencies are presented in Appendix Table B. The format of this table is in most respects essentially the same as the format of the state budget. The classification of agencies is the same. The classification of projected 1975 expenditures by source of funds — i.e. legislative appropriations from general revenue, other current funds, and bond issues, as well as other sources not requiring legislative action, is the same. There is, however, one significant difference between Table B and the state budget. The difference is that benefit payments made from trust funds for unemployment insurance, workmen's compensation and the state ad- ministered retirement systems are included in Table B., whereas they are not shown in the state budget. From the point of view of areawide planning, such payments are an important part of individual and family income and hence need to be considered along with all other state activities affect the economy and well-being of the area. For convenience, Table B is keyed to the individual chapters where more detailed agency and program data may be found. (See Column 11.) Total Expenditures Total expenditures in the area by the state government as a whole are projected at $326.2 million for fiscal 1975 (Table 1). A substantial part of the funds, some $65.1 million, would come from the Federal government. An additional small amount, $8.0 million, would come from private gifts and contracts to the University, together with a small amount of matching funds put up by local government in connection with police and firemen training programs, or law enforcement. Of the $253.1 million of state funds, about two-thirds ($173.1 million) would be appropriated by the legislature. The non-appropriated funds would come from various sources available to the University, as well as trust fund operations and benefit payments, and cer- tain capital outlays not elsewhere classified. Table 1 'State Expenditures by Type and Source of Funding Fiscal Year 1975 < a ' (in millions) Type of Funding Total Operations Grants-in-aid All Expenditures $326.2 $256.0 $67.3 State Funds, Total 253.1 199.6 50.6 Appropriations 173.1 141.3 31.9 General Revenue Fund 128.0 120.1 8.0 Other Appropriations 41. 3 18.8 22.5 Bond Issues 3.8 2.4 1.4 Non-Appropriated University Funds 57.1 57.1 — Trust Funds 19.9 1.3 18.6 Capital Outlays n.e.c. 2.9 — — Federal Funds 65.1 48.5 16.6 Local Funds 8.0 7.9 .1 (a) For detail, see appendix Table B. -3- State Agencies and Their Programs State activities are carried out in the area by a large number of agencies. Altogether some 39 agencies for which program expenditures have been projected are listed in Table B. In order to facilitate effective analysis of these agencies and their programs it is necessary to group them according to the area they are in- tended to serve. Some are intended to serve the entire state. Others are intended primarily to serve community needs in the area. The nature and purpose of the analysis will vary accordingly. The rationale for this dis- tinction has been discussed earlier. (See Chapter 1, p. 4.) The classification of state agencies which has been adopted for this purpose is presented in Figure 1, while the projected use of state funds as such is summarized in Table 2. More than three-fourths of the state spending financed by state revenues ($198.0 million, or 78.2 percent) would be for activities serving the whole state. Expenditures for community-serving purposes would total $55.1 million, or 21.8 percent. As can be seen in the following tabulation, expenditures on community serving activities are tending to increase relative to total state spending in the area. Total Community-Serving Spending Activities * ' in Area( a ) Amoun t Percent 1969 $170.4 30.5 ]7.9 1970 $194.7 33.6 19.8 1975 $253.1 55.1 21.8 (a) In millions. State funds only. -*»- Figure 1 State Agencie 3 in Champaign County, Illinois Arranged According to Area Served, Fiscal Year 1975 Type of Agency jislative licial t 1'iartments State-Serving General Services Registration and Education Transportation (Aeronautics) Community-Serving Annual Appropriations er Agencies Capital Development Board ?cted Officials Ijher Education University of Illinois State Universities Retirement System (Operations) University Civil Service Merit Board General. Assembly Administrative Office of Illinois Courts Appellate Court Aging Agriculture Children and Family Services Conservation Corrections Environmental Protection Agency taw Enforcement Local Government Affairs Mental Health Military and Naval Public Aid Public Health Revenue Transportation (except Aeronautics) Civil Defense Agency Governor's Traffic Safety Coordinating Committee Illinois Fire Protection i Personnel Standards and ' Education Commission Illinois Law Enforcement Commission Local Governmental Law I Enforcement Officers : Training Board Veterans Commission Board of Vocational Education and , Rehabilitation Secretary of State Superintendent of Public Instruction Illinois Community College Scholarship Commission University of Illinois | Division of Services for Crippled Children Trust Funds Labor Industrial Commission State Employees Retirement System Teachers Retirement System State Universities Retirement System (Benefit Payments) -5- Table 2 State Expenditures from State Funds by Type of Funding and Area Served Fiscal Year 1975 (in aillions) Classification Total Area Served State Community All Expenditures Per Cent Current Appropriations Operations Grants-in-Aid Non-Appropriated University Funds Trust Funds Capital Outlays n.e.c. $253.1 100.0 173.1 141.3 31.9 57.1 19.9 2.9 $198.0 78.2 136.7 135.4 1.3 57.1 1.3 2.9 $55.1 21.8 36.5 5.9 30.6 18.6 State-Serving Activities For all practical purposes, state-serving activities consist of the University of Illinois and a few additional agencies and their programs which might be characterized as "satellites" (Table 3). It is advantageous, for example, for the three state surveys administered by the Department of Registration and Education (Geological, Natural History and Water) to have access to the University's facilities. Both the Capital Development Board and the Aeronautics Division of the Department of Transportation are con- structing facilities which will be transferred to the University at a later date. Champaign is a logical location for the headquarters of the State Universities Retirement System, while the University Civil Service Merit Board has even more need to be located here. The expenses shown for the De- partment of General Services cover operation and maintenance of the building south of the campus which houses several state offices. The projected figures for the University, which include both the Urbana-Champaign campus of the University, and the general University -6- Table 3 Expenditure of State Funds on State- Serving Activities Fiscal Years 1969, 1970 and 1975 (in millions) Classification 1969 1970 1975 Total $140.2 $156.1 $198.0 University of Illinois ..135.1 150.4 187.0 Operations 119.4 135.7 184.1 Appropriations 86.9 97.5 127.0 General Revenue Fund 81.6 90.4 110.3 University Income Fund 4.6 6.4 14.6 Agricultural Premium Fund .7 .8 2.1 Non-Appropriated Funds 32.5 38.2 57.1 Capital Outlays n.e.c. 15.7 14.7 2.9 Department of Registration and Education 4.3 4.9 6.0 Capital Development Board — / 2.4 Department of Transportation — — 1.3 State Universities Retirement System .5 .5 .7 University Civil Service Merit Board .2 .2 .4 Department of General Services .1 .1 .1 administration, reflect, in this instance, the final budget as signed by the Governor. The original budget request made by the Governor was based on recommendations made by the Illinois Board of Higher Education (IBHE). Funds appropriated to the University come from the general revenue fund, the university income fund (student tuitioas and fees) , and the agricultural premium fund. Other "state" income available to the University comes from a number of sources, such as auxiliary enterprises, other earnings, the con- tract research reserve, and endowments. As mentioned earlier, the projects being carried out by the Capital Development Board and by the Department of Transportation will be transferred to the University when they are completed. Also included tl Table 3 are University capital outlays not elsewhere classi- fied. -7- Connnunity-Serving Activities There are too many state agencies and programs serving the community to list them separately in one brief table. Readers who wish the detail will find it in .Table B. Certain aspects of the overall picture of state spending on community-serving activities are brought out in Table 4, how- ever, and are worthy of further comment. Overall spending for these activities is projected at $55.1 million in 1975, nearly double what it was in 1969. But more significant for planning and managing the state's role in the area are two trends which are quite apparent in the table. One trend is the growing importance of jtrust funds in financing state activities in the area, or, to put it the other way around, the relative decline in the position of legislative appropriations in funding community-serving activities. The function of legislative over- sight is not being eroded, because the community-serving activities for which the legislature must pass appropriations are growing in numbers and size. But other activities not subject to legislative oversight are growing even more rapidly. -8- Table 4 State Spending on Community- Serving Activities Fiscal Years 1969, 1970 and 1975 (in millions) Classification 1969 1970 1975 Amount All Spending $ 30.5 $ 38.6 $ 55.1 Current Appropriations Operations Grants-in-Aid 21.8 10.0 11.8 27.0 8.4 18.6 36.5 5.9 30.6 Trust Funds 8.7 11.6 18.6 Percentage Distribution by Typ e of Funding All Spending 100.0 100.0 100.0 Current Appropriations Operations Grants-in-Aid 71.5 32.8 38.7 69.9 21.8 48.2 66.2 10.7 55.5 Trust Funds 28.5 30.1 33.8 The other trend which comes out clearly in Table 4 is the very sub- stantial shift in the kinds of activities which are financed by appropri- ations. As projected for 1975, expenditures for the operations of the regular state agencies which conduct their own programs in the area will actually decline from their 1969 levels. Expenditures for grants-in-aid, on the other hand, will be more than two and a half times greater than they were six years ago. These shifts are shown graphically in Figure 2. To some extent, the decline shown in expenditures for state agency op- erations is misleading. What causes the decline is a drop in spending by the Department of Transportation on highway construction in the area. Ac- tually, most state agencies will have higher budgets for operations in 1975 than they had in 1969 or 1970. Except for the Department of Transportation, -9- >- CO to o CM 0) u a a. § a. a. 4-1 O CD cn u d CO o r-l •H .H r-l r-l o r-i to O (0 3>^ O <3 ^ OS •SH -q g W +i (0 a +i & » s> b « c O tH "O r»» •H I-* QC CJ UJ 1— t 1 cc © > >- h- UJ ) i— < => 1 Z. z ! r> UJ C < 1 UJ o CC o UJ z —1 o CO UJ —i q: 1— • rs «c H- > *^ 3- -c co 3 r^. at c c o< *0 o 3 j_i 0) pt. co cc •H en J-< -U a> a c •H o a> 4J w w •H a u m > a. s r«. •H < u c* 4-1 r-t U >-> ^ < J3 0! 3 C > cc U a o a _ f- o < < -14- During 1975, the state will spend about $9.4 million of state funds on capital outlays in the area. This is only about 46 percent of the $20.6 spent in 1970, and only 40 percent of the $23.3 spent in 1969 (Table 6 and Figure 4) . A more meaningful comparison is the change in the relative role of capital outlays in state spending in the area, as shown in the following tabulation: Total Spending Spending on Capital Outlays in Area (a) Amount Per Cent of Total 1969 $170.4 1970 194.7 1975 253.1 $23.3 20.6 9.4 13.6 10.6 3.7 (a) In millions. The level of capital outlays in 1969, characterized by heavy expendi- tures for construction both at the University and on highways in the area, was undoubtedly inflationary. But by the same token, the outlays projected for 1975, at only a fourth of their earlier level, in relative terms, can only be deflationary — an outcome which is extremely unfortunate when the construction industry is already in a depressed condition. Opinions will vary on what the level of expenditure on capital outlays should be in a stable local economy. Assuming, for purposes of argument, a level about halfway between the two extremes shown above, or ten percent of total spending, would add about $16 million to presently planned outlays. Splitting this proportionately between state-serving and community-serving activities would mean around $12 million for the former (mostly the Univer- sity) and $4 million for the latter. Community-serving capital improvements in the amount of $4 million would appear to be consistent with the "sweetening" -15- LU 3 LLl a. x LU I 5 a: (4-1 o CO CO u c « O rH •H .H r-l O o o 1 M CO » Qi cu ^0 1? +i 3 £ •*J 5 O ? No <0 -0 +s ?, •*» « to Sn Cu <3> !<•* 09 a '^8 V-, »*! «> O t~-j CD & +i H-, 09 « 0) & o 10 CM CO ra s iH CO CO W r-» •H o> a rH co CM c^ IU 3 *-> •H T3 C & O H O O CM o o o o in -16- ref erred to above, and by helping to stabilize the local economy, would con- tribute to the stability of the state revenue originating in the area. Table 6 State Expenditures for Capital Outlays Fiscal Tears 1969, 1970. .and 1975 Agency 1 Agencies partment of Conservation vironmental Protection Agency partment of Transportation Division of Aeronautics Division of Highways Motor Fuel Tax Administration pital Development Board linois Law Enforcement Commission tiversity of Illinois 1969 (State Funds Only) $23.3 7.6 5.9 1.7 15.7 1970 (State Funds Only) $20.6 5.9 4.2 1.7 14.7 1975 Total $14.1 .1 .4 8.1 5.4 2.7 2.4 .3 2.9 State Funds $9.4 .1 * ' 4.0 1.3 2.7 2.4 2.9 Federal Funds $4.7 .4 4.1 .2 Other Funds $ .1 .ess than $100,000 Strategy for the State With the review of the state-serving and the community-serving activi- ties in hand, it now becomes possible to visualise the state's total role in the area, and to think in terms of a strategy for shaping its activities as part of a comprehensive areawide planning process. Figure 5 presents such a visualization in graphic form. What emerges from this perspective is a suggested four-point strategy, involving capital outlays, the operations of the regular agencies, the grants-in-aid, and the trust funds. There is not a great deal that the area can or should do to try to in- fluence the development of the University or any of the other state-serving .1 .; • -17- U-l ft cc UJ a. •5 9 1 e <& tj •^ S> a: £ •^ *■ 3 o CO to tr a, £ is §3 CD 5^ « K K S* 3 O *^ CLr CO fj « cp Q) § T3 -2 UJ W1 w mmm &8S8S§c^« : X^ K*x< : xs?:X:S:Xs;S i-i 00 CO 00 >- rH QJ O o z M > w CO t H < Eh to Crt H U < CO 4-1 c 3 O o In- activities which happen to be located here. How the University is devel- oped depends on policies governing the provision of higher education throughout the state as a whole. But it is fair to hold that the implica- tions of alternative strategies for University development can and should be discussed with those who are responsible for areawide planning in order to try to anticipate possible adverse impacts, and this observation applies particularly in the case of capital outlays. The evidence appears persua- sive that effective advance planning and programming of public works in the area in the past half dozen years could have been helpful in alleviating inflationary and deflationary pressures. The community-serving activities are a different matter. Here the areawide planning function can and should definitely attempt to shape the state's role in the area. The broad outlines of a strategy become clear from points which have been made throughout the report, as veil as from Figure 5. One line of strategy would be to see that the regular agencies which conduct state programs in the area have adequate operating budgets. In relative terms, the amount of money involved might be very small, but the benefits could be substantial in helping the agencies to do the jobs for which they were established in the first place. A second line would be to recognize and cultivate the working relation- ship which has come about in recent years between the state government and local governments in the area. There can be no doubt concerning the vital role which the state has come to play in helping local governments to carry otherwise impossible fiscal burdens. But the number and size of state aids make it inevitable that questions will arise on both sides which have to be considered in the context of the needs and resources of the area as a whole -19- — a view which is reinforced by the fact that it is the area's own money which is being spent, even though it comes back in a variety of ways from Springfield, rather than from the county treasurer. Finally, the third line of strategy has to do with the trust funds. These funds are seldom considered to be a relevant subject for areawide planning. Yet, in a community such as Champaign-Urbana, the state adminis- tered retirement funds are an important part of the community's economy, because of the large number of university faculty and state employees, as well as public school teachers in the area. The funds face increasing strains because of the rising number of annuitants, the salary levels at which their benefits must be calculated compared to the levels prevailing when their reserves were built up, and the continuing failure of the state to make its actuarially and statutorily required contributions. Comprehen- sive areawide planning, therefore, must assign a high priority to dealing with what has been aptly called a "fiscal time bomb ticking away at the heart of the community." APPENDIX taelc a. state revei es COLLECTED II CHAMPAIGN COU'.'TY, ILLINOIS, BY TYPE, 1969. 1970, AND 1975. Type of Revenue Total (000) 1969 1970 1975 (Projected] Per Capita 1969 1970 1975 (Projected) All Revenues Taxes, Total Income Taxes (Gross) Sales Taxes Motor Fuel Taxes (Gross) Public Utility Taxes Cigarette Taxes Liquor Gallonage Taxes Inheritance Tax (Gross) Insurance Tax and Fees Horse Racing Taxes and Fees Corporation Franchise Tax and Fees Other Privilege Taxes Other Receipts, Total Motor Vehicle and Operators License Fees Other Fees Receipts from State Hospital Patients Tuition and Other University Charges Interest on State Funds and Investments Reimbursements Revolving Fund Receipts Intrafund Reimbursement Lottery All Other Nonfederal Receipts Income from Sale of Bonds Income of Trust Funds Contributions Investment Income 45,959 22,389 12,063 4,447 1,541 1,844 779 757 658 217 83 23,570 2,665 187 107 8,379 399 217 188 404 506 10,518 7,351 3,167 59,986 32,332 8,409 11,864 4,828 1,704 2,248 984 936 1,006 217 136 27,654 3,290 185 106 9,184 533 162 206 59 617 13,310 9,227 4,083 110,983 49,279 17,631 1 7 ,280 5,550 2,556 2,676 1,145 1,075 901 179 286 61,998 4,529 241 114 16.422 848 356 919 119 1,863 1,008 5,184 30,101 17,799 12,302 287.96 140.28 75.58 27.86 9.66 11.55 4.88 4.74 4.12 1.36 .52 81.78 16.70 1.17 .67 52.50 2.50 1.36 1.18 2.53 3.17 65.90 46.06 19.84 366.62 197.99 51.49 72.65 29.57 10.43 13.77 6.03 5.73 6.16 1.33 .83 87.83 20.15 1.13 .65 56.24 3.26 .99 1.26 .36 3.78 81.36 56.40 24.96 652.84 289.53 103.59 101.53 32.61 15.01 15.72 6.73 6.32 5.29 1.05 1.6C 185.69 26.61 1.42 .67 96.49 4.98 2.09 5.40 .70 10.95 5.92 30.46 177.06 104.70 72.36 22 TABLE B. STATE EXPEiiDlTJRl AGENCY, TYPE OF PROGRAM, A! Line Nunber 8 9 10 H 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 23 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 Agency All Agencies Operations Grants- in-Aid Capital outlays n.e.c. Legislative General Assembly Operations Judicial Administrative Office of Illinois Courts Operations Appellate Court Operations Departments Aging Operations Grants- in-Aid Agriculture . Division of County Fairs Grants- in-Aid Children and Family Services Operations Grants- 1n-A1d Conservation Land Acquisition Program Grants-in-A1d Corrections Youth Field Services Operati ons Environmental Protection Agency Operations Grants- in- Aid General Services Operations Labor Bureau of Employment Security Operations Unemployment Benefits Law Enforcement Operations Local Government Affairs Local Government Distribution Grants- in-Aid Other Programs Grants- in-Aid 1969 (State Funds Only) 170.436,188 142,963,087 11,773,276 15!699.825 53,636 53,636 101 ,603 101,603 26,263 26,263 1,838 1,838 426,030 296,900 129,130 73,703 73,703 2,273,418 2,273.418 335,653 335,653 35,137 35,137 1970 (State Funds Only) 194,666,426 161,356.362 18,620,816 14,689,248 60,359 60,359 148,892 148,892 All Expenditures '27,922 27.922 2,063 2,063 603,491 377.303 226,188 93,809 93,809 114,000 114,000 4.258,470 4,258,470 403,976 403,976 1,049,300 1,012,500 36,800 326,182,103 255,974,677 67,306,426 2,901,000 93,836 93,836 160,000 160,000 51,098 51,098 58,900 53,901 4,999 2,400 2,400 882,269 424 ,691 457,578 94,600 94,600 466,184 48,684 417,500 107,000 107,000 7,842,708 992,232 6,850,476 550,000 550,000 1 ,590,900 1,545,000 45,900 23 HAMPAI6N COUNTY, ILLINOIS BY GE OF FUNDS, 1969, 1970, 1975 1975 • Reference ^ f r"" State Funds ■ 1 1 Federal Funds Other Funds General Other Trust Bond Total Revenue Current Funds Funds Issues ,.090,309 1,603,887 !,585,422 ,901 ,000 runu 128,037,471 120,062,228 7,975.243 J8, 401 ,089 75,872,959 22,528,130 19,914,878 1,252,000 18.662,878 6,736,871 ( 2,416,700 1,419,171 2,901,000 J5.125.018 18,493,964 l"6*,631 ,054 7,966.776 7,876,826 89,950 1 2 3 4 5 93,836 93.836 93,836 93,836 — — — -• Chapter 17 6 7 8 9 160,000 160,000 160,000 * 160,000 — — — — "T / 10 11 51 ,098 51,098 — ~* "" 12 51,098 51.098 • 13 47 ,080 — . Chapter 12 14 11,820 6,821 11,820 6,821 -- .- — 47,080 — 15 16 4,999 4,999 ;; 17 2,400 — 2,400 " ;; 18 19 2.400 — 2,400 -- mm .. 863,355 863,355 — — — 18,914 18,914 — Chapter 12 20 21 405,777 405,777 -" m m 22 457,578 457,578 — — ** 75,000 — -- — 75,000 — -- Chapter 13 23 24 25 75,000 — — • mm 75,000 a- Chapter 17 26 94,600 94,600 • i 27 28 94.600 94,600 — --. — * * ■ 29 1 30 54,500 37,000 — — 17,500 411,684 11,684 400,000 -- Chapter 16 37,000 17,500 37,000 __ -- 17,500 — 31 32 107,000 107,000 — -- ™" 33 107,000 107,000 • — 34 6,983,056 132,580 __ 6,850.476 -- 859,652 859,652 :: Chapters 7 and 9 35 36 132,580 132,580 -- "■" .. • 37 6,850,476 — — 6,850,476 ~ " 550.000 ^^ 550,000 -- — — ■ Chapter 17 1 38 39 550,000 mm 550,000 40 1,590,900 45,900 1,545,000 -- *• 41 42 1,545,000 — 1,545,000 *• Chapter 17 43 44 ; 45,900 45,900 " 24 TABLE B. STATE EXPENDITURES AGENCY. TYPE OF PROGRAM, AND SOURCE Line 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 89 90 91 Agency Mental Health Operations - Grants- in- Aid Military and Naval Operations Public Aid Operations Grants-in-Aid Medical Other Public Health Operations Grants-in-Aid Registration and Education Operations Geological Survey Natural History Survey Water Survey Revenue Senior Citizen Property Tax Relief Grants-in-Aid Transportation Division of Aeronautics Grants-in-Aid Construction and Maintenance on Highways Operations Motor Fuel Tax Administration Grants-in-Aid Public Transportation Grants-in-Aid Other Agencies Capital Development Board Operations Civil Defense Agency Operations Governor's Traffic Safety Coordinating Committee Operations Illinois Fire Protection Personnel Standards and Education Commission Grants-in-Aid Illinois Law Enforcement Commission Grants-in-Aid Industrial Commission Workmen's Compensation Benefits Local Governmental Law Enforcement Officers Training Board Grants-in-Aid __— 25 1969 (State Funds Only) T 1970 (State Funds Only) 589,874 555,661 34,213 All Expenditures 465,507 428,732 36,775 95, 739 45, 59/ 95, 739 45, 59/ 1,025, 767 1,363, 675 122, 112 157, 804 903,655 1,205 871 208,851 279 241 694 ,804 926 630 1,004 ,850 1,483 ,076, 667 ,187 885 ,411 337 .663 597 ,665 4,293 ,900 4,935 ,900 4,293 ,900 4,935 ,900 2,083 ,100 2,349 ,700 1,149 ,700 1,215 ,800 1,061 ,100 1,370 ,400 — mm 8,807,157 7,141,975 6,948,072 5,237,228 1,665,182 i| 1,710,844 3,752 3,752 4,200 4,200 1,293,970 1,293,970 2,930 2,930 1,441,120 1,441,120 2,200 2,200 1 ,281 ,029 740,144 540,885 38,000 38,000 10,147,527 520,420 9,627,107 1,284,183 8,342,924 1,933,036 1,053,009 880,027 5,981,600 5,981,600 2,536,600 1,723,600 1,721,400 525,000 525,000 11,667,272 5,427,671 3,200,000 3,200,000 2,652,101 387,500 2,416,700 2,416,700 30,908 30,908 5,200 5,200 750,000 750,000 2,105,301 2.105,301 8,100 8,100 IMPA16N COUNTY, ILLINOIS BY (DS, 1969, 1970. 1975 (continued) 5,403 5,403 2,600 2.600 4,660 4,050 1,151,619 665,389 486,230 38,000 38,003 2,973,824 226,903 2.746,921 485,421 2.261,500 1,100,565 749,574 350.991 5,981.600 S.981.600 2,536.600 1.723.600 1.721.400 525.000 525.000 387.500 83,807 48,396 35,411 387,500 6,403 5,403 245,928 55,560 190.368 4,352,101 1,700.000 1,700,000 2,652,101 2.600 2,600 4,050 4.050 7.173.703 293.517 6,880,186 798,762 6.081 .424 586,543 247.875 338,668 1.326.671 [5.601,000 4,101,000 1,500.000 1,500,000 2.416,700 2.416.700 2.105*301 2.105,301 25,505 25.505 666,700 666,700 2,600 2.600 83,300 83,300 Reference Chapter 11 Chapter 8 / Chapter 11 Chapter 16 Chapter 12 Chapter 15 Chapter 15 Chapter 15 Chapter 15 4,050 Chapter 17 Chapter 17 Chapter 17 Chapter 8 Chapter 17 4,050 Line tiunber bt«msmJ* 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 81 82 83 65 86 87 ea 89 90 91 26 TABLE B. STATE EXPEND HURLS AGENCY, TYPE OF PROGRAM, AND SOURCE .infc Number 92 93 94 95 95 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 HI 112 113 114 115 IIS 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 • 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 Agency State Employees' Retirement System Retirement-Benefits Teachers' Retirement System Retirement Benefits Veterans' Commission Operations Grants- in- Aid Board of Vocational Education and Rehabilitation Vocational Education Division 6rants-1n-Aid Vocational Rehabilitation Division Operations Grants-1n-Aid Elected Officials Secretary of State Drivers' License Examinations Operations State Library Operations Miscellaneous Reimbursement of Election Expenses Superintendent of Public Instruction Operations Grants- 1n- Aid Common School Fund Other Programs Higher Education Illinois Community College Board Grants-ln-Aid University of Illinois Operations 6eneral University Urbana -Champaign Campus Scholarship Commission 6rants-1n-Aid State Universities Retirement System Operations Retirement Benefits University C1v1l Service Merit Board Operations University of Illinois Division of Services for Crippled Children Operations Grants- in-Aid Capital Outlays n.e.c. University of Illinois 1969 (State Funds Only) 1970 (State Funds Only) All Expenditures 460,242 460.242 1,140,818 1 ,140,818 66.100 53,715 12,385 236,451 79,041 79,041 157,410 54,621 102,789 260.104 127,904 70,510 61,690 7.485,227 41,390 7,443.837 5,592,036 1 ,851 .801 758,881 758.881 119,440,000 119,440,000 6,427,000 113,013,000 266,595 266,595 3,849,620 336,725 3,512,895 199,600 199,600 13,505 15,689,825 15,699,825 535,460 535,460 1,310,942 1,310*942 92,100 76,165 15,935 410,186 252,016 252,016 1 58,1 70 55,360 102.810 275,655 191,042 84,613 12,113,556 39.770 12.073.786 10,039,365 2,034,421 962,562 962.562 135,790.000 135.790.000 6,974,000 128,816,000 382,801 382,801 4,409,343 389.844 4,019,499 225.300 225.300 17.644 14,689,248 14,689,248 856,736 856,736 2,097,507 2,097,507 70,700 63,200 7,500 1,825.000 25,000 25,000 1,800,000 763,200 1,036,800 388,978 273,400 115,578 21,693,280 305,000 21,388,280 13,000,000 8,388,280 1,802.000 1,802,000 236,685,342 236,685,342 16,472.921 220.212.421 1.032,000 1,032,000 7.447,858 695.000 6.752,858 391.800 391.800 125.334 125,334 2,901.000 2,901.000 27 in u .,-.;•, AiGN COUNTY. ILLINOIS BY I FU DS, 1959, 1970, 1975 (continued) 1975 Reference State Funds Federal Funds Other Funds Total General Revenue Fund Other Current • Funds Trust Funds BCKd Issues 856,736 856,736 — _ . 856,736 " 856,736 — ^ m _^ Chapter 9 2,097,507 2,097,507 -- -- 2,097,507 2,097,507 — — — Chapter 9 70,700 63,200 7,500 70,700 63,200 7,500 — m m mm — mm Chapter 12 230.000 5.000 5,000 225,000 82,800 142,200 230,000 5,000 5,000 225,000 82,800 142,200 -- — — 1,595,000 20,000 20,000 1,575,000 680,400 894,600 — Chapters 10 and 11 / i 325.578 210,000 115,578 115,578 115,578 210,000 210,000 — — 63,400 63,400 — Chapter 17 Chapter 13 1u 107 n IK 111 . 114 1.1J 5 m * 18,401,200 305,000 18.096,200 13,000,000 5,096,200 244,000 244,000 18,157,200 61 ,000 18,096,200 13,000,000 5,096,200 " 3,292,080 3,292,080 3,292,080 — Chapter 10 1,802,000 1,802,000 1,802,000 1,802,000 — — -- -- — Chapter 10 11 J 184,142,845 184,142,845 14,589,184 169,553,661 110,337,842 110,337,842 8,918,421 101,419,421 73,248,003 73,248,003 5,560,763 67,687,240 557,000 557,000 110,000 447,000 — 44,665,671 44,665,671 1,465,331 43,200,340 7,876,326 7,876,826 418,406 7,458,420 Chapter 4 in I. ; 123 12=1 1,013,424 1,013,424 1,013,424 1,013,424 — — — 18,576 18,576 -- Chapter 10 126 7.447,858 695,000 6,752,858 — — 7,447,858 695,000 6,752,858 — -- — Chapter 9 127 129 , 391 ,800 391 ,800 291,800 391,800 — — — — — 130 1 131 ( 71 ,427 71,427 71,427 71,427 -- — — 53,907 53,907 Chapter 11 132 j 123 134 ' 2,901,000 2,901,000 — — 2,901 ,000 2,901,000 — 1j5 136 137 28 UNIVERSITY OF ILLINO.S-URBANA 352.1 K52ST1 975 C004 State expenditure, In Champaign County 3 0112 088004715