UNC System President Peter Hans speaks during a meeting of the UNC System Board of Governors on Thursday, Feb. 29, 2024, in Raleigh, N.C.
Kaitlin McKeown
kmckeown@newsobserver.com
Administrative personnel cuts at North Carolina’s public universities are combining with tuition increases to boost budgets by $100 million a year.
Across the UNC System, 700 administrative positions have been cut since June, President Peter Hans announced during Wednesday’s UNC Board of Governors meeting. That amounts to $50 million in cuts to salaries and benefits.
Plus, tuition and fee increases the Board of Governors reviewed Wednesday would bring in an additional $50 million a year, according to a presentation given to the board.
After cuts, ‘we’re watching them like hawks’
During a discussion about tuition increases, board member Art Pope said before any increase in price, the board must confirm that each campus attempted to balance their checkbooks through increased productivity and efficiency.
“I’m happy to report some real progress based on activity in the first six months,” Hans said. “System-wide, this means 700 fewer administrators than we had in June. And before there’s hand-wringing about cuts, because I can promise you, my approval ratings dipped on the campuses significantly after announcing this cap, I want to just emphasize that this is how any large organization should operate.”
Hans emphasized that the $50 million in savings from cuts can stay in campus budgets and go toward the business of teaching students.
Board member Harry Brown asked Hans how he plans to ensure that colleges don’t just use the newfound money to hire more administrative personnel.
“One of the concerns is that [campuses] turn right back around and hire some of these people right back and because that seems to be, I don’t know why, but it seems to be something the campuses always tend to do,” Brown said.
Hans tried to assuage Brown’s fears.
“These campus folks are very clever, but we’re watching them like hawks on this,” Hans said.
“Because we haven’t had … a new state budget in place this past year … we have had some at least temporary — I’m hoping, temporary — compression on the availability of funds,” he said. ”Campuses have largely used the administrative personnel cap reductions savings to cover that, as opposed to hiring new people. But your vigilance is well-placed, and I promise we share that commitment.”
Tuition increases
After nearly a decade of holding tuition rates flat, the Board of Governors allowed chancellors across UNC institutions to submit proposals for tuition increases last fall, with a maximum increase of 3% for in-state students.
Wednesday, the board reviewed those proposals. Next month, members will vote. The increases are set to take effect in the 2026-27 school year for incoming students.
“This is a challenging, sort of philosophical thing here,” said Kirk Bradley, a member of the board. “But part of our job is to be good fiscal stewards and allow campuses to operate with the quality we expect.”
Board members Pope and Woody White were among the only board members to push back on the proposed increases. White said he hadn’t received enough campus-by-campus proof that these increases are truly necessary.
For Triangle schools, the increases proposed are as follows:
UNC-Chapel Hill would cost $9,081 for in-state undergraduate students and $49,323 for out-of-state undergraduate students.
NC State University wouldcost $9,030 for in-state undergraduate students and $34,744 for out-of-state undergraduate students.
NC Central University would cost $6,774 for in-state students and $20,201 for out-of-state students.
The only school in the UNC System that didn’t take advantage of the offer to raise tuition was Winston-Salem State University. That school is holding tuition and fees flat for in-state students.
Washington — Federal Reserve Governor Lisa Cook filed suit against President Trump, Chair Jerome Powell and the Fed’s Board of Governors on Thursday, asking a federal judge to block the president’s attempt to fire her from the central bank.
Mr. Trump announced Cook’s termination from the Fed late Monday, citing allegations she had committed mortgage fraud, which he described as “deceitful and potentially criminal.” The move came after the president spent months railing against the Fed and Powell for leaving interest rates relatively high so far this year.
Cook filed her lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia on Thursday, teeing up a legal showdown that seems destined to ultimately be settled by the Supreme Court. Her legal team asked the district court to declare that Mr. Trump’s attempted firing is “unlawful and void” and that Cook “remains an active member of the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve.”
“Governor Cook seeks immediate declaratory and injunctive relief to confirm her status as a member of the Board of Governors, safeguard her and the Board’s congressionally mandated independence, and allow Governor Cook and the Federal Reserve to continue its critical work,” the suit said.
Members of the Fed board are confirmed by the Senate and serve for 14-year terms. Under the Federal Reserve Act of 1913, the president can only remove them early “for cause.” The law doesn’t specify what qualifies as “cause,” and it has never been tested in court, but it is generally understood to be malfeasance.
In her suit, Cook’s lawyers Abbe Lowell and Norm Eisen asked the court to state that Fed board members “can only be removed for cause, meaning instances of inefficiency, neglect of duty, malfeasance in office, or comparable misconduct,” citing Supreme Court precedent. Even if the court disagrees with that standard, they wrote, the law “clearly does not support removal for policy disagreements.”
Powell and the Fed board are named in the suit because Cook asked the court for an injunction ordering them to “refrain from effectuating President Trump’s illegal attempt to fire Governor Cook and treat Governor Cook as a member of the Board of Governors.”
In response to the lawsuit, White House spokesman Kush Desai said the president “exercised his lawful authority” in removing Cook.
“The President determined there was cause to remove a governor who was credibly accused of lying in financial documents from a highly sensitive position overseeing financial institutions,” Desai said in a statement. “The removal of a governor for cause improves the Federal Reserve Board’s accountability and credibility for both the markets and American people.”
The Trump administration has argued in the past that the president has the legal right to remove at will members of federal boards that exercise “substantial executive power,” like the National Labor Relations Board.
The Supreme Court has upheld Mr. Trump’s power to fire some board members, but said in May that the Federal Reserve is a separate case, calling it a “uniquely structured, quasi-private entity.”
Earlier this month, the Trump-appointed director of the Federal Housing Finance Agency, Bill Pulte, accused Cook of falsifying mortgage documents by claiming two homes that she bought in 2021 as her primary residence. He alleged that Cook — an economist who has served on the Fed board since 2022 — had committed mortgage fraud, and referred the matter to Attorney General Pam Bondi and Justice Department special attorney Ed Martin.
Days later, Mr. Trump publicly called on Cook to resign.
At the time, Cook didn’t address the substance of Pulte’s allegations directly, but said in a statement that she had “no intention of being bullied to step down from my position because of some questions raised in a tweet.” She added that she would “take any questions about my financial history seriously” and said she was gathering more information.
Lowell, her lawyer, said Monday that Mr. Trump didn’t have the legal right to fire Cook “based solely on a referral letter” to Justice Department leadership, a point her legal team reiterated in Thursday’s lawsuit.
“[R]emoval ‘for cause’ requires some connection to official conduct, prohibiting removal based on an unsubstantiated allegation of private misconduct (which in this case allegedly occurred prior to her Senate confirmation),” the complaint said. “And even to the extent that private misconduct could bear on a particular officer’s official conduct in certain cases, ’cause’ requires a factual basis supporting such asserted misconduct.”
The broadside against Cook came as Mr. Trump pressures the Fed to lower interest rates. The central bank’s rate-setting committee — which Cook and Powell both sit on — has opted to leave interest rates relatively high so far this year, fearing that inflation could resurge. Last week, Powell hinted that the central bank may cut rates soon, but it will “proceed carefully.”
The president favors immediate rate cuts, which could boost economic growth and make it cheaper to borrow money, though at the risk of causing higher inflation. He has floated firing Powell at various times over the past few months and has encouraged other Fed officials to overrule him and slash rates.
The Fed typically makes interest rate decisions independently. Mr. Trump is hardly the first president to criticize the Fed for leaving rates high, but he’s been unusually assertive. Last year, he argued he should have “at least [a] say” in the moves made by the central bank.
Many experts believe it’s important for central banks to operate independently so they can make decisions based on economic data, not politics. If elected officials are in charge of monetary policy, they could opt for the politically popular short-term benefits of low interest rates — like a hotter economy and cheaper borrowing costs — even if that leads to higher inflation in the long run, Brookings Institution senior fellow David Wessel noted earlier this year.
A prominent sign that welcomes students to Wayne State University’s campus was splattered in red paint on Wednesday to symbolize “the blood of innocent Palestinians” after the school refused to divest from companies linked to Israel, a popular activist group said Thursday morning.
Wayne State’s chapter of Students for Justice in Palestine (SJPWSU), an activist group that is calling on universities nationwide to divest from corporations that deal with Israel, posted a photo and video of the vandalized sign on Instagram and sent the university a message.
“Whether you like it or not you will be held accountable – because the university is the PEOPLE’S university,” the group wrote Thursday morning. “BOG we see you, you have blood on your hands. The blood of Palestinians won’t wash off as easy as the W. From the belly of the beast – no justice, no peace.”
“Wayne State is stained with the blood of innocent Palestinians with their refusal to divest from genocide,” the group wrote. “The admin would rather brutalize students, community members, and faculty that are the lifeblood of the school. By having their lOF trained pigs rip off hijabs, attempting to fire faculty for speaking up, and moving its meetings online to silence us, Wayne State has made it clear it is no more than a glorified hedge fund.”
Wayne State spokesman Matt Lockwood tells Metro Times that the university removed the graffiti “first thing this morning” and that campus police hope to track down the culprits.
“WSUPD is reviewing surveillance video to try and identify who did it,” Lockwood says.
During the encampment, university officials promised that the Board of Governors would listen to activists and consider their proposal to divest. Instead, the elected board dodged activists by moving its public meeting to virtual on Wednesday, once again drawing condemnation. The university also moved the public comment period from the beginning of the meeting to the end, making it impossible for students and others to address issues on the agenda, including the budget, before they were voted on.
Acker condemned the graffiti as “antisemitic” because he was the only member of the Board of Regents to be targeted. The graffiti messages read “Free Palestine,” “Divest Now,” “UM Kills,” and “Fuck You Acker.” Red handprints were also left on the office’s doors.
The trustee board voted last week in a special meeting to approve two line-item amendments to the university’s budget: one change to divert the $2.3 million in annual DEI spending, and another to carve out the university’s athletics budget from the overall plan to allow for further review of that department’s financial standing.
Hans spoke to reporters following a UNC System Board of Governors meeting Thursday in which the board voted to repeal previous DEI requirements across all of the state’s public universities. Hans emphasized that the new policy will support “student success programs,” and money previously directed toward DEI programs and efforts will be re-prioritized to various success-oriented initiatives at the universities. Regarding what programs might benefit from the reallocated funds, Hans said he doesn’t think “the board necessarily has a specific program in mind,” though he said the efforts should help retain students and assist them as they work toward graduation.
“They’re going to trust the chancellor and their teams on campus to be able to reinvest those funds in something that is working on their campus,” Hans said. “Now, they’re all called different things on every campus and they may have slightly different points of emphasis, because there are different student populations. They’re just different campuses.”
Asked by The News & Observer whether campus safety and police would be considered part of such student-success efforts, Hans replied: “No.”
Hans said the UNC-Chapel Hill board’s action “was not in compliance with the Board of Governors’ policy” on university budgets, which tasks trustees with taking an “up or down vote” on the university chancellor’s recommended spending plan. Hans said that legal counsel for the UNC System advised UNC-Chapel Hill’s counsel that the board did not have the authority to “change line items” in the budget.
But the UNC trustees “chose to disregard that advice,” Hans said.
Board chair asked about compliance in meeting
UNC Board of Trustees Chair John Preyer told The N&O Thursday that the board “always wants to follow system policy.”
“But it’s a shame that the system does not want to redirect the savings on DEI to public safety when our university police department has worked so tirelessly to protect our students,” Preyer said.
The board’s vote last week came weeks after tensions escalated on campus over a pro-Palestinian encampment, resulting in police using force to disband protesters on at least two separate occasions. Trustee Marty Kotis cited the protests as a reason for diverting the DEI funds to police, though fellow board member Dave Boliek told The N&O the policy was under consideration before the protests began.
At the Board of Trustees’ special meeting, Preyer seemed to anticipate that the trustees’ vote might raise questions, asking UNC-Chapel Hill General Counsel Charles Marshall prior to the action: “Is someone going to come back and say, ‘Sorry, you couldn’t have done that’?” Preyer appeared to be referencing the board’s decision to decouple the university’s athletics budget from the rest of the budget, not the decision to divert DEI funding.
Marshall replied to Preyer’s question: “Very possibly.”
“We had conversations last year about whether this is an up or down vote. My understanding is it was,” Marshall said.
Marshall noted that the university system in recent years has adopted a new budget-approval process. The “all-funds budget process,” which considers the entirety of a university’s spending instead of department-level plans, is used to “improve financial efficiency and to make targeted investments in institutional and system strategic goals,” per a system description.
“This is a new process, alright? I don’t think any campus has ever tried to line-item,” Marshall said. “I don’t think that’s what the Board of Governors is looking for, but I did not call them before I came in here.”
Still, Marshall said he was “comfortable” with the board’s action, given that any issues would “get resolved” at the UNC System level.
UNC System policy states that trustees “shall advise the chancellor with respect to the development, execution, and administration of the budget of the constituent institution, consistent with actions by the General Assembly and the Board of Governors” and approve the plans on an annual basis.
With the trustees’ actions being out of compliance with system budget policies, Hans said the committee subsequently considered interim Chancellor Lee Roberts’ original budget proposal in the committee meeting. Meeting materials contained a spending plan labeled as the chancellor’s budget. However, an accompanying letter from UNC-Chapel Hill Chief Financial Officer Nate Knuffman noted the two amendments approved by the trustees.
UNC-Chapel Hill Interim Chancellor Lee Roberts addresses the media prior to a closed session portion of a meeting of the board of trustees in Chapel Hill, N.C. on Thursday, May 16, 2024. Kaitlin McKeown kmckeown@newsobserver.com
Trustee voiced opposition to diverting funds
While the trustees’ vote to divert DEI funding originally appeared unanimous, trustee Ralph Meekins later clarified at the board’s May 16 meeting that he did not vote and that he did not support the board’s action. Meekins said he was not informed of the motion to divert the funds until the meeting, and noted that the vote to approve the “meticulously crafted” budget is generally taken as an up or down vote.
Meekins said he remained confident in Roberts’ actions on the budget and any potential changes to DEI efforts at the university.
“Fortunately, in spite of the actions this board has taken, the issue of how UNC-Chapel Hill handles its efforts on diversity will ultimately be determined by our interim chancellor. I trust that he will await clarification from the BOG regarding its DEI policy and will adhere to its directives while thoroughly examining the matter, listening to all perspectives, and ultimately making an informed decision,” Meekins said. “It’s undoubtedly a challenging task, but I pray he approaches the changes to our DEI program with precision, using a scalpel, not a machete. Given his track record so far, I am optimistic that this will indeed be the approach that he takes.”
Roberts told reporters at the board’s May 16 meeting that he would wait for the Board of Governors’ new policy to become finalized to determine how the university’s DEI spending and programming would change.
“We’re going to have to wait for the implementation guidelines to understand exactly how to how to redirect our funding,” Roberts said.
UNC System legal staff is expected to issue guidance to campuses on how they should comply with the policy “in the coming weeks,” per a printed handout provided to media Thursday. The changes, which could result in DEI-related jobs being changed or eliminated, are expected to be in-place by the beginning of the upcoming academic year.
In the Spotlight designates ongoing topics of high interest that are driven by The News & Observer’s focus on accountability reporting.
This story was originally published May 23, 2024, 4:45 PM.
Related stories from Charlotte Observer
Korie Dean covers higher education in the Triangle and North Carolina for The News & Observer. She was previously part of the paper’s service journalism team. She is a graduate of the Hussman School of Journalism and Media at UNC-Chapel Hill and a lifelong North Carolinian.
Editorials and other Opinion content offer perspectives on issues important to our community and are independent from the work of our newsroom reporters.
Andrew Tripp, General Counsel for the UNC System, speaks during a meeting of the UNC System Board of Governors’ University Governance committee on Wednesday, April 17, 2024, in Winston-Salem, N.C.
Kaitlin McKeown
kmckeown@newsobserver.com
The UNC System Board of Governors will vote Thursday on a policy that would gut diversity, equity and inclusion efforts at public universities across North Carolina. It’s a move that’s necessary, they say, in order to uphold a deep-rooted commitment to diversity of thought.
“Our universities will support intellectual freedom, not promote a particular ideology … North Carolina is a diverse state, and our public universities belong to everyone,” Ramsey wrote in a statement following last month’s initial committee vote.
But as the board weighs important decisions about diversity-related matters, it’s also holding up a mirror to itself. The governing board of North Carolina’s public university system is woefully lacking in ideological diversity, and its members are far more reflective of the Republican leaders who appoint them than of the state and system they ought to represent.
The Board of Governors, which oversees all 17 UNC System campuses, has 24 members. The General Assembly appoints all 24 members. Of the 23 current members, just two are registered Democrats. Sixteen members — two-thirds of the board — are registered Republicans. The remaining five members are registered as unaffiliated, though several of them have donated significant sums to Republican candidates. The board has one vacancy, as Lee Roberts resigned from his role in January to serve as UNC-Chapel Hill’s interim chancellor.
Many members also have political backgrounds. Harry Brown, who was appointed in 2023, is a former Republican lawmaker who served as Senate majority leader for a decade. Also appointed in 2023: Woody White, another former Republican senator. And in 2020, the General Assembly appointed Art Pope, one of the most influential Republican donors in North Carolina, to the board.
Chris Marsicano, assistant professor of educational studies at Davidson College, noted that North Carolina is one of only two states that has the legislature appoint the governing board. In most cases, the governor makes the appointments.
He said that in 2005, the BOG had eight Republicans and 22 Democrats, but by 2013 there was not a single Democrat. Now there are two.
“They went from having some Republicans to almost exclusively Republican and Republican-leaning members within 15 years,” he said.
That’s not for lack of trying by Democrats. State Sen. Gladys Robinson, a Greensboro Democrat and former member of the Board of Governors, said that nominees she has proposed have not been considered by the Senate. Even when Democrats were in the majority, Robinson said, they were committed to having diversity by having the minority party appoint members. She noted that House Speaker Tim Moore was appointed to the Board of Governors in 1997 when he was chairman of the Cleveland County Republican Party.
“Very seldom have we gotten any support, regardless of the caliber of nominees,” she said. “We’ve put forward some of the best leaders that North Carolina has, but the Senate refuses to appoint them.”
State Sen. Dan Blue, a Wake County Democrat and the Senate’s minority leader, said people who could make strong contributions to the board don’t want to enter the nominating process.
“Multiple people told me, ‘Why go through all this knowing it’s not going anywhere?’” he said.
Instead, Robinson said, Republican lawmakers are appointing people “who are their friends and who have made contributions to their campaigns. It has nothing to do with the resumes of these people.”
Indeed, many members of the Board of Governors have made hundreds of thousands of dollars in campaign contributions to Republican candidates for state and federal office, including Moore and Senate leader Phil Berger.
Diversity among UNC-Chapel Hill trustees
The UNC-Chapel Hill Board of Trustees, which recently voted to shift UNC’s DEI funding to public safety and police, is similarly homogeneous. There are 14 voting members, and more than 75% of them are registered Republicans. There is not a single registered Democrat on the board. There are three former lawmakers on the board, one of whom is now a registered lobbyist. Also on the board is Jim Blaine, Berger’s former chief of staff and one of the state’s most prominent political consultants. The board’s former chair, Dave Boliek, who still sits on the board, is the Republican nominee for state auditor in November’s general election.
Trustees, however, have spoken at length about the importance of diversity of thought, and how conservative voices are stifled in favor of liberal ones in Chapel Hill. That commitment to ideological diversity was the purported motivation for fast-tracking the development of a School of Civic Life and Leadership, intended to be a haven of sorts for conservative thought on campus. Boliek, for instance, told Fox News that the school is an “effort to remedy” the lack of right-of-center views on campus.
Roger Perry, a Chapel Hill developer who chaired the Board of Trustees from 2007 to 2009, said the makeup of the board has become more political.
During his era, the governor and Board of Governors appointed trustees. Since then, the governor has been cut out and trustees are appointed by the Board of Governors, the speaker of the House and the Senate president pro tempore.
To be appointed now, Perry said, “I’m sure there’s a political litmus test, or you have holy water put on you by the Senate president pro tem or the speaker.”
Before Republicans took control of the legislature, Perry said, trustees would recommend new members based on their volunteer service to the university, regardless of their political affiliations.
“The qualifications that were necessary 15 years ago are totally different from the qualifications today,” Perry said. “On my board, I couldn’t tell you who was registered one way or the other.”
“That is not to say all 12 members on the Board of Trustees haven’t paid their dues in terms of service. There are several who have, but most have not,” he said.
Perry said the tight political control reflects Republican lawmakers’ desire to alter the university’s prevailing progressive culture and its effect on students.
“I think they do fear that the university turns out people who vote against them,” Perry said. “That’s true, but it’s not because they get indoctrinated, it’s because they get educated.”
Little appetite for change
The boards don’t appear eager for people to know much about them. A list is available on the Board of Governors website, but the page doesn’t appear with a simple Google search and can be difficult to navigate. On the Board of Trustees website, some biographies appear incomplete. For example, one member’s biography does not mention the term he served as a state lawmaker, and Blaine’s biography greatly understates the extent of his ties to Berger and the legislature. Yet these people are tasked with making significant decisions about North Carolina’s prized university system, a massive public expenditure and one of the state’s largest employers.
Former UNC System President Tom Ross served as co-chairman of the Governor’s Commission on the Governance of Higher Education in North Carolina, which Gov. Roy Cooper created in 2022 to assess and recommend changes to the governance structure of the UNC System. In 2015, a Republican-dominated Board of Governors pushed Ross out of office. No reason was given, but Ross was apparently removed because he is a Democrat.
His co-chair on the commission was the Republican who replaced him as the UNC System president: former U.S. Secretary of Education Margaret Spellings. The commission, Ross said, “tried to set out areas where we felt having people representative of North Carolina is important. The university is for everybody.”
Republican state lawmakers say they — and by extension, their appointees — are representative of North Carolina because voters have put them in power.
But Ross said Republicans “didn’t get 100 percent of the vote and they don’t have 100 percent of the legislature.”
Republican legislative leaders opposed the creation of the governor’s commission and ignored its recommendations on how to make the university’s governing boards more representative of the state’s political racial and geographic diversity.
“I’m disappointed there wasn’t more willingness to engage and discuss. [The commission] was a bipartisan group,” Ross said. “Most of us realized it wasn’t going to be embraced with open arms by the legislature, but we did hope they would pay some attention to it.”
Ultimately, the insular political makeup of UNC’s governing boards makes its purported commitments to ideological diversity appear hollow and hypocritical. But it also hurts the strength of the entire UNC System and the institutions that are a part of it.
“I worry that a lack of diversity on these boards is reducing the possibility of true game-changing academic initiatives,” Marsicano, the Davidson professor who co-authored a brief for the Governor’s Commission on the boards’ diversity, said. “Having a diversity of viewpoints allows for a greater ability to maximize the strengths of the university.”
Most critically, though, it jeopardizes the long-held principle that North Carolina’s universities belong to everyone. System leaders say they want more ideological diversity on campus, but without a commitment to diversity within their own ranks, it appears as if the only ideology they really want on campus is their own.
There were fewer than 24 hours between The News & Observer revealing the evening of April 16 that the UNC System Board of Governors would consider a policy targeting diversity, equity and inclusion (DEI) efforts, and a board committee voting to approve the move.
And there were fewer than 48 hours between the policy becoming public knowledge and the board’s public comment submission form for the meeting closing Thursday at 5 p.m.
But the short turnarounds didn’t keep some members of the public from making their opinions on the policy heard.
Public comment records provided to The N&O by the UNC System office show that 25 people submitted comments to the board for its April 17-18 meetings. Of those, 21 comments were about the proposed policy changes to diversity efforts at the state’s public universities. Two of the comments supported the board’s action. The remaining 19 denounced the move.
So, what did the comments say?
Welcome to Dean’s List, a weekly roundup of higher education news in the Triangle and across North Carolina from The News & Observer and myself, Korie Dean.
This week’s edition takes a deeper look at the public comments submitted regarding a Board of Governors committee’s vote to repeal the UNC System’s existing policy on diversity and inclusion, plus information on the new interim chancellor at Appalachian State University and the impending retirement of Campbell University’s president.
Kellie Blue, chair of the UNC System Board of Governors’ University Governance committee, speaks during a meeting on Wednesday, April 17, 2024, in Winston-Salem, N.C. Kaitlin McKeown kmckeown@newsobserver.com
Public comments to Board of Governors regarding DEI
The Board of Governors, which oversees all of the state’s public universities plus the North Carolina School of Science and Mathematics, generally does not allow public comments during its meetings, but it accepts written comments through an online form ahead of full-board meetings.
Ahead of the board’s April meeting, the public comment submission form was open from April 9 until April 18 at 5 p.m.
The N&O was the first to report Tuesday, April 16, that the board’s University Governance committee would consider a policy repealing the UNC System’s existing policy and regulations on diversity and inclusion. Among other changes, the new policy is expected to impact DEI-related jobs that are currently mandated under the existing policy, either by eliminating the positions or by forcing their ties to DEI to be removed or revised.
The policy was added to the committee’s meeting materials that Tuesday afternoon, ahead of its Wednesday afternoon meeting. It was not included in the materials when they were first made available about a week before the meeting.
Public comments on the topic began to pour in sometime Wednesday, according to the records. The records show that students, parents, alumni, faculty and staff affiliated with seven of the state’s 16 public universities submitted comments.
In the two comments supporting the board’s proposed policy:
▪ Chris Kirby, a professor at UNC Charlotte, urged the board to eliminate funding for DEI efforts and activities throughout the university system, saying that those promoting the efforts “seek to inculcate unwavering adherence to predetermined political ideologies.”
Kirby wrote that UNC Charlotte has “a wide-reaching DEI bureaucracy” that includes several “high-level administrators.” Kirby wrote he believes the “bureaucracy” advances “an inherently political agenda” that “also wastes an extraordinary amount of taxpayer dollars.”
“State residents should not be subsidizing out-of-control administrative bloat that contributes to rising college costs and student indebtedness,” Kirby wrote. “Defunding the DEI bureaucracy would help restore the focus of all constituent institutions to their traditional guiding principles: freedom of academic inquiry, merit-based advancement, and scholarly excellence.”
UNC Charlotte, like many campuses across the UNC System, operates an Office of Diversity and Inclusion that is overseen by a chief diversity officer and employs other staff members. The office, which was established in 2020, has a stated mission “to guide UNC Charlotte toward inclusive excellence by creating a culture and climate where students and employees can access and thrive.”
“We do this by leading in developing, integrating, and advancing the university’s inclusive excellence strategy to support our vision of educating, inspiring, and empowering communities to champion humanity, care and dignity for all,” the office’s website states.
▪ Michelle Bardsley, a parent of two UNC System graduates, asked the board to “take steps to eliminate DEI programs and funding in our NC colleges and K-12 public schools.”
“Our NC educational institutions need to be focused on teaching our children and young adults’ employable career and workforce skills, leadership, and character education,” Bardsley wrote. “Let’s stay focused on the mission of public education in NC, spend tax dollars wisely, and successfully prepare our children and young adults to work and compete in a global economy.”
Andrew Tripp, General Counsel for the UNC System, speaks during a meeting of the UNC System Board of Governors’ University Governance committee on Wednesday, April 17, 2024, in Winston-Salem, N.C. Kaitlin McKeown kmckeown@newsobserver.com
Among the remaining 19 comments, which opposed the board’s proposed policy:
▪ Tamika Henderson, a parent affiliated with UNC-Chapel Hill, wrote to the board to express “deep concern and strong opposition” to the proposed policy.
“As a concerned citizen, parent of a UNC student, and advocate for equal opportunity and inclusivity in education, I firmly believe that diversity and inclusion are crucial components of a thriving academic environment,” Henderson wrote. “The UNC System has long been recognized for its commitment to fostering a diverse and inclusive community, and the proposed elimination of diversity goals and jobs undermines these fundamental principles.”
Henderson said the proposal would “risk diminishing the reputation of UNC, devaluing a degree from UNC thereby creating a negative economic impact.”
“This proposal not only undermines the efforts of individuals who have worked tirelessly to promote diversity and inclusion within the UNC System, but it also sends a concerning message to current and prospective students, faculty, and staff who value and rely on the commitment to diversity,” Henderson wrote.
▪ Hope Murphy Tyehimba, a two-time alumna of UNC-Chapel Hill and former employee of East Carolina University, NC State University and NC Central University, wrote that she was “greatly troubled by the direction that the UNC Board of Governors is considering taking regarding this matter.”
Tyehimba said she credits her success at UNC, both as an undergraduate student and as a law student, to the support services she received from the university as a first-generation student from rural North Carolina. She later paid that success forward by advising other students from similar backgrounds, she wrote.
“The thought of UNC no longer providing specialized support and resources to African American students, and other students of color, is greatly troubling and concerning. The university is quickly transforming into an institution that I no longer recognize,” Tyehimba wrote. “Please reconsider taking any action that would limit the ability of DEI officers to be employed within the System and to continue providing much needed services to students like me who relied upon and provided such services to others.”
▪ Cameron Toler, a student at the UNC School of the Arts, wrote that the board’s decision to act on the policy during its meeting at the school was “insulting,” given that the university “flourishes without question as a result of DEI.”
“This moment is a scourge upon our institutions and I hope for the sake of every students wellbeing and the integrity of their education that a change is made in the leadership that led to this decision,” Toler wrote. “How dare this decision be made.”
▪ Sarah Ho, a staff member at the NC State University College of Veterinary Medicine, wrote to the board to describe the positive impact she sees DEI-related staff make at the college.
“They prepare our students well for a diverse and global workforce. They work to ensure ALL of our students feel a sense of belonging. Their efforts help to attract the best students, faculty, and staff to the University,” Ho wrote. “Our community would suffer greatly without them. Please do not cut this vital resource.”
▪ TaMera Harris, a graduate of NC Central University, denounced the board’s action, writing that “diversity is needed to make sure that an opportunity of higher education is afforded to everyone.”
Interested in submitting a comment to the board? The online form to submit public comments to the Board of Governors is expected to reopen in advance of the group’s May meeting, when it will vote on the DEI policy change through its consent agenda. The form to submit a comment can be found on the UNC System website: northcarolina.edu/leadership-and-governance/board-of-governors/meetings-materials/public-comment-sessions.
Interim chancellor named at App State
Heather Hulburt Norris will serve as the interim chancellor of Appalachian State University.
Norris had been serving as the university’s provost and executive vice chancellor since 2020, first on an interim basis before securing the role fully in 2021. She first came to the university in 2003 before rising through the ranks to become dean of the university’s Walker College of Business in 2016.
“Dr. Norris is an experienced and talented leader who is well regarded in the App State community,” Hans said in a news release Friday. “She has served in various roles at the university, from faculty member to dean to provost, and she has excelled at all of them because of her collaborative style and her commitment to public service. I’m grateful to her for taking on the position of interim chancellor.”
Norris said she is “passionate about the success of our students, faculty and staff” and is looking forward “to working collaboratively with faculty, staff, students and members of the communities we serve to ensure the continued success of this great institution.”
The UNC System news release said that a search for the next permanent chancellor of App State will be launched “in the near future.” The system is also searching for new chancellors at four other universities: UNC-Chapel Hill, NC A&T State University, Winston-Salem State University and NC Central University.
Heather Hulburt Norris is the interim chancellor of Appalachian State University. Courtesy of the UNC System
Creed, a scholar and historian of religion, in 2015 became the private, Christian university’s fifth president after serving in administrative roles at Samford University and the George W. Truett Theological Seminary at Baylor University.
During his time at the helm of Campbell, Creed led the university through the COVID-19 pandemic and oversaw the university’s most successful capital campaign, which raised more than $105 million, among other accomplishments.
“Serving as Campbell’s president has been an honor and the capstone of my career in higher education,” Creed said in a news release. “I am thankful for the many wonderful people who assisted and supported me, and especially for the opportunity to make a difference in the lives of our students. After more than 30 years of leadership in higher education, I’m eager to take on other projects and to spend more time with my loving wife, children, and grandchildren.”
Creed will remain as president for the next year “to keep Campbell moving forward and to ensure a smooth transition to his eventual successor,” Board of Trustees Chair Gene Lewis III said in a news release.
“Thanks to President Creed, Campbell is poised to make great strides under a new leader, who will elevate our university among private institutions of higher learning in the heart of one of America’s fastest-growing states,” Lewis said. “That should be an exciting opportunity for strong candidates nationwide. Our board looks forward to working closely with a search consultant and President Creed to identify the next leader, who will take Campbell to new heights.”
Sign up for The N&O’s higher education newsletter
That’s all for this week’s roundup of North Carolina higher education news. I hope you’ll stay tuned for more.
Like what you read here and want to be on our mailing list when the Dean’s List newsletter launches? Have suggestions for what kind of content you’d like to see featured in the future? Let us know by filling out the form below:
This story was originally published April 23, 2024, 11:29 AM.
Related stories from Charlotte Observer
Korie Dean covers higher education in the Triangle and North Carolina for The News & Observer. She was previously part of the paper’s service journalism team. She is a graduate of the Hussman School of Journalism and Media at UNC-Chapel Hill and a lifelong North Carolinian.
