The UNC Board of Governors authorized a new definition of academic freedom on Thursday, a move that enshrines an explanation of the concept into UNC System policy — but also places key limits on what kind of faculty activity it protects.
Academic freedom appeared in system policy before, and it was described as “full freedom, within the law.” The new definition drills down on what exactly it does and does not include.
For system President Peter Hans, the adoption of an expanded definition of academic freedom is an important step toward shared understanding and respect for the concept. The definition doesn’t alter the foundational value, he said in the meeting, but rather clarifies and strengthens it.
Peter Hans, president of the University of North Carolina system, speaks during a meeting of UNC Board of Governors in Raleigh, N.C., Thursday, Feb. 26, 2026. Ethan Hyman ehyman@newsobserver.com
But some faculty across UNC System schools are deeply disturbed by the new definition, which they see as an attack on the crucial concept of unbridled academic freedom. That’s because of three main parameters the policy places around it.
The policy states that “academic freedom is not absolute.” It does not include:
“Teaching content that lacks pedagogical connection to the course, discipline, or subject matter.”
“Using university resources for political activity in violation of university policy.”
“Refusing to comply with institutional policies to which the university is subject.”
Members of the American Association of University Professors gathered in the lobby of the UNC System’s downtown Raleigh office building on Monday morning to deliver an unsuccessful petition asking the board not to vote on the policy. Association leaders Abigail Hatcher and David Ambaras spoke to reporters before the meeting.
Members of the American Association of University Professors silently protest as the UNC Board of Governors authorize a new definition of academic freedom during their meeting in Raleigh, N.C., Thursday, Feb. 26, 2026. Ethan Hyman ehyman@newsobserver.com
“People who come to this university to do research and teach do so with the expectation that they will be able to pursue the truth,” Ambaras said. “People who come to this university system to study do so with the expectation that they will get the quality education that the name UNC represents. A redefinition of the code to restrict academic freedom would damage that expectation. People would not be confident that they are coming here to learn freely. Parents would not be confident that they can send their children here to study freely, and faculty would not be confident that they could take jobs in the system in order to do their work freely.
“Academic freedom has a definition that’s been accepted by the courts and by higher education, the sector as a whole. This is the first example we’re seeing of a university system trying to revise it downward, and we can’t accept that.”
NC State University professor of natural resources Fred Cubbage said the requirement for expressions of academic freedom to comply with institutional policies gives universities a free pass to fire tenured faculty if they wish.
While the AAUP members said there was no faculty input into the new definition, that’s not exactly true.
Wade Maki, a professor at UNC Greensboro and chair of the system’s Faculty Assembly, greets board member Gene Davis after Professor Maki spoke during a meeting of UNC Board of Governors in Raleigh, N.C., Thursday, Feb. 26, 2026. Ethan Hyman ehyman@newsobserver.com
Wade Maki, a professor at UNC Greensboro and chair of the system’s Faculty Assembly, led a 15-month initiative to produce the definition ultimately included in the new policy. He consulted chancellors, campus administrators, student governments, the assembly and other university stakeholders, according to UNC.
He then delivered the draft definition to the board, which presented a draft of the new policy at the January Board of Governors meeting. Seeing some points of concern, Maki asked for one more week to bring the definition back to Faculty Assembly and make changes to the wording of certain lines. The board granted him that extra week, and the revisions softened the language of the parameters in some places.
“A lot will depend on the implementation,” Maki said at the Thursday meeting. “Yet this has been a bold project, challenging and worthy, that places a clear stake in the ground nationally. It clarifies freedom and responsibilities for faculty, students and administrators. It will serve as a model for other states. And above all, I want to thank the board for giving us the time and opportunity to weigh in and have feedback considered even well beyond the normal feedback process.”
That revised version was officially voted into policy Thursday.
The UNC Board of Governors authorized a new definition of academic freedom on Thursday, a move that enshrines an explanation of the concept into UNC System policy — but also places key limits on what kind of faculty activity it protects.
Academic freedom appeared in system policy before, and it was described as “full freedom, within the law.” The new definition drills down on what exactly it does and does not include.
For system President Peter Hans, the adoption of an expanded definition of academic freedom is an important step toward shared understanding and respect for the concept. The definition doesn’t alter the foundational value, he said in the meeting, but rather clarifies and strengthens it.
Peter Hans, president of the University of North Carolina system, speaks during a meeting of UNC Board of Governors in Raleigh, N.C., Thursday, Feb. 26, 2026. Ethan Hyman ehyman@newsobserver.com
But some faculty across UNC System schools are deeply disturbed by the new definition, which they see as an attack on the crucial concept of unbridled academic freedom. That’s because of three main parameters the policy places around it.
The policy states that “academic freedom is not absolute.” It does not include:
“Teaching content that lacks pedagogical connection to the course, discipline, or subject matter.”
“Using university resources for political activity in violation of university policy.”
“Refusing to comply with institutional policies to which the university is subject.”
Members of the American Association of University Professors gathered in the lobby of the UNC System’s downtown Raleigh office building on Thursday morning to deliver an unsuccessful petition asking the board not to vote on the policy. Association leaders Abigail Hatcher and David Ambaras spoke to reporters before the meeting.
Members of the American Association of University Professors silently protest as the UNC Board of Governors authorize a new definition of academic freedom during their meeting in Raleigh, N.C., Thursday, Feb. 26, 2026. Ethan Hyman ehyman@newsobserver.com
“People who come to this university to do research and teach do so with the expectation that they will be able to pursue the truth,” Ambaras said. “People who come to this university system to study do so with the expectation that they will get the quality education that the name UNC represents. A redefinition of the code to restrict academic freedom would damage that expectation. People would not be confident that they are coming here to learn freely. Parents would not be confident that they can send their children here to study freely, and faculty would not be confident that they could take jobs in the system in order to do their work freely.
“Academic freedom has a definition that’s been accepted by the courts and by higher education, the sector as a whole. This is the first example we’re seeing of a university system trying to revise it downward, and we can’t accept that.”
NC State University professor of natural resources Fred Cubbage said the requirement for expressions of academic freedom to comply with institutional policies gives universities a free pass to fire tenured faculty if they wish.
While the AAUP members said there was no faculty input into the new definition, that’s not exactly true.
Wade Maki, a professor at UNC Greensboro and chair of the system’s Faculty Assembly, greets board member Gene Davis after Professor Maki spoke during a meeting of UNC Board of Governors in Raleigh, N.C., Thursday, Feb. 26, 2026. Ethan Hyman ehyman@newsobserver.com
Wade Maki, a professor at UNC Greensboro and chair of the system’s Faculty Assembly, led a 15-month initiative to produce the definition ultimately included in the new policy. He consulted chancellors, campus administrators, student governments, the assembly and other university stakeholders, according to UNC.
He then delivered the draft definition to the board, which presented a draft of the new policy at the January Board of Governors meeting. Seeing some points of concern, Maki asked for one more week to bring the definition back to Faculty Assembly and make changes to the wording of certain lines. The board granted him that extra week, and the revisions softened the language of the parameters in some places.
“A lot will depend on the implementation,” Maki said at the Thursday meeting. “Yet this has been a bold project, challenging and worthy, that places a clear stake in the ground nationally. It clarifies freedom and responsibilities for faculty, students and administrators. It will serve as a model for other states. And above all, I want to thank the board for giving us the time and opportunity to weigh in and have feedback considered even well beyond the normal feedback process.”
That revised version was officially voted into policy Thursday.
This story was originally published February 26, 2026 at 7:05 PM.
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.
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.
A group of students from UNC-Chapel Hill wait outside of the Alex Ewing Performance Place building on the campus of UNC School of the Arts after a meeting of the UNC System Board of Governors’ University Governance committee went into closed session on Wednesday, April 17, 2024, in Winston-Salem, N.C.
Kaitlin McKeown
kmckeown@newsobserver.com
WINSTON-SALEM
Students from UNC-Chapel Hill say they were kept out of the building where the UNC System Board of Governors — a public body — met Wednesday, raising questions about whether the board potentially violated the state’s open meetings law.
The UNC students who attempted to attend the governance committee’smeeting Wednesday afternoon said they were told by Ed Purchase, the UNC System’s director of university public safety operations, that the meeting room was full and all of the seats available to the public were filled. Purchase did not allow the students to enter any portion of the building where the meeting was held, they said.
North Carolina law states that “any person is entitled to attend” meetings of public bodies, including the Board of Governors and its committees.
UNC System spokesperson Andy Wallace told The N&O Wednesday that some members of the public were unable to enter the meeting room because of a lack of available seats and because the open-session portion of the meeting, in which the vote on the DEI policy took place, lasted for such a short time. By the time system staff could have made accommodations to let more people in, Wallace said, the meeting had gone into closed session, in which members of the public are not allowed.
Raleigh attorney Mike Tadych said the UNC System’s actions Wednesday in keeping the students out of the meeting seemed “dubious,” but said it was “not black and white” to him whether those actions violated state law. Tadych said public bodies, including the Board of Governors, are required “to take reasonable measures to provide access to public meetings.”
UNC student Samuel Scarborough said he and other members of the Southern Student Action Coalition (SSAC), a progressive student-activist group,and TransparUNCy, a group dedicated to shining a light on political influences on North Carolina higher education, wanted to attend the meeting “to make our voices heard” and “be present in the room” as the vote on the DEI policy took place.
“We were not given this opportunity,” Scarborough said.
Asked by The N&O via email Thursday if the UNC System believed it had followed state law on open meetings by keeping students from entering the building, Wallace replied Friday with this statement: “All UNC Board of Governors committee and full board meetings are livestreamed and available to the public via PBS NC. Chancellors, campus staff, UNC System staff, PBS NC technical staff and the Board itself are present in the room to attend the meetings. Seats are reserved for the media. Any open seats are available to the general public on a first-come, first-served basis.”
Students say they were kept out of meeting
Though the Board of Governors typically meets at the UNC System office in Raleigh, the board meets twice a year at one of the system’s 17 campuses. The board’s meetings are open to the public, though it can enter closed session and meet without the public present for reasons that are outlined in state law.
The board held its April meetings at the UNC School of the Arts, with the Catawba Theatre inside the Alex Ewing Performance Place functioning as its meeting room for all of its committee meetings on Wednesday and its full-board meeting on Thursday.
Scarborough was one of about 10 students from SSAC and TransparUNCy who attempted to attend the board’s University Governance committee meeting Wednesday, which began at 3:45 p.m.
Wallace described the following chain of events to The N&O Wednesday when a reporter asked why the students were kept out: Fred Sellers, the system’s vice president for safety and emergency operations, “was made aware there were four members of the public that wanted in,” Wallace said, but there were only three seats available. One of the four said they would watch the meeting via the live-stream made available by the system on its website, Wallace said, and the other three people were allowed inside. Sellers then heard that more people wanted to enter the meeting, Wallace said, but by that time, the board was entering closed session.
The open-session portion of the meeting, in which the vote on the DEI policy took place, lasted roughly five minutes.
Alexander Denza, another student with the groups, said students arrived to the doors of the Alex Ewing Performance Place before the committee meeting began. Denza provided to The N&O a video of the students’ encounter with Purchase, the UNC System public safety director, which Denza said was filmed beginning at 3:40 p.m. — five minutes before the meeting began, and 10 minutes before the meeting was closed to the public for the closed-session portion of the meeting.
In the video, Purchase is seen standing in front of the main doors to the building answering questions from the students. Purchase told the students that there were “three seats for the public” available at the meeting, noting that all of the other seats were all filled by university chancellors, their guests and other attendees. The three seats had been filled by faculty and staff of the School of the Arts, Purchase told the students.
Purchase told the students that the meeting was being streamed online and that they could watch it through that platform.
Asked by a student in the video how many people had been turned away, Purchase answered that he hadn’t “turned anybody away.”
“You guys are the first,” Purchase told the group.
Asked by another student if there was a larger space where the meeting could have been held to accommodate more people, Purchase said he did not know. Purchase also said that he did not know how many seats in the theater were occupied by university staff.
Toward the end of the roughly four-minute video, Purchase is seen telling the students: “If you guys are going to hang out, maybe you could hang out over there, if that’s alright.” It is unclear exactly where Purchase was gesturing, but he told students they were blocking the entry to the building “a little bit.” At separate points in the video, one person is seen being able to access the doors to leave the building, while two other people are seen entering the building.
Denza told The N&O that neitherhe, nor any of the other students he was with, was let inside the meeting room or the building by system staff at any time Wednesday afternoon.
Did the board violate open meetings law?
Both Wallace, speaking to The N&O, and Purchase, as seen speaking to the students on the video, said all of the seats available to the public were full, citing that as the reason that the students were not allowed inside the meeting room.
It is unclear whether exceptions to the state law on open meetings are made when a room reaches its capacity. The Catawba Theatre has signs posted outside of its doors stating that “occupancy by more than 210 persons is dangerous and unlawful.” It is also unclear whether that occupancy was met Wednesday.
At a morning committee meeting Wednesday, additional seats were added to accommodate meeting attendees after the seats that were initially available were all filled. Denza also noted that other public bodies have allowed attendees to stand in the meeting room when seats are not available, pointing to photos of attendees lining the walls of a June 2021 meeting of the UNC-Chapel Hill Board of Trustees that involved discussions of whether journalist Nikole Hannah-Jones would be offered tenure to teach at the university.
Asked by The N&O Wednesday whether the room was filled to a point at which a fire code or other regulations would make the room unsafe, Wallace said only that the room was full.
Tadych, the attorney, said thatcourt rulings on a related issue indicates public bodies, such as the Board of Governors, must take “reasonable measures” to not completely exclude members of the public from the meeting. Such measures could include streaming the meeting through video or audio for attendees in an overflow meeting space, Tadych said.
In one court case Tadych cited, “the public was excluded only to overflow space and not permitted to enter the meeting room for the convenience of the body.” The body also instituted a ticketing policy for admission to the meeting, which was found to be “unreasonable as it was instituted without notice to the public.”
Two courts found “that the public body’s use of streaming and overflow rooms where the meeting could be viewed via audio/visual feeds were reasonable,” Tadych said.
While Board of Governors meetings are live-streamed, it does not appear that overflow space to view the stream was made available for the students Wednesday when the room became filled. Tadych said he was not sure whether only providing a live-stream of the meeting, but not a space to view it, would be considered an attempt to provide reasonable access to the meeting.
The state law on open meetings states that any person can seek a judgment from superior court on whether a public body violated the law. If the court were to find that the body did violate the law, the court could rule that actions taken during the body’s meeting are “null and void.”
Denza told The N&O that the students plan to file a complaint with the North Carolina attorney general’s office about not being let into the meeting. That office “issues opinions reminding government entities of their obligations under these laws and how to comply,” according to its website.
NC Reality Check is an N&O series holding those in power accountable and shining a light on public issues that affect the Triangle or North Carolina. Have a suggestion for a future story? Email realitycheck@newsobserver.com
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.
A design illustration of the expansion of UNC-Chapel Hill’s Kenan-Flagler School of Business.
UNC System
RALEIGH
The campuses of several UNC System schools will be changing over the next few years, with several new academic buildings taking shape or being renovated.
The majority of the projects are paid for by the State Capital Infrastructure Fund, which is funding from the state budget written each year by the General Assembly.
Lawmakers return to Raleigh for a new legislative session on April 24, but some committees are meeting now, and one of them got a project update Wednesday from the UNC System Office.
Here’s the status of the projects already under construction and those in the works.
UNC-Chapel Hill
▪ UNC-Chapel Hill’s Kenan-Flagler Business School is getting an addition. The project will allow UNC to increase the number of students and is already underway. Costing $194 million, it is paid for half by the state budget and half from UNC. It is expected to be finished in 2025.
▪ Another project is a new Nursing Education Building that will replace the west wing of Carrington Hall. Already under construction, the project will allow the program to increase the number of students and will cost nearly $98 million, most of which is paid from the legislature’s State Capital Infrastructure Fund.
ECU
▪ The Brody School of Medicine at East Carolina University in Greenville will be under construction by early next year, according to the UNC System.
The medical education building will be nearly 200,000 square feet and have space for 120 students in classes each year. The budget is $265 million and entirely funded by the legislature’s State Capital Infrastructure Fund. The project should take about two years to complete once construction starts in February.
Design illustration of the East Carolina University Brody School of Medicine that will be constructed starting in early 2025. It is funded by the state budget. UNC System Office
NC State
▪ A major project already underway on the NC State University campus in Raleigh is the Integrative Sciences Building, a new STEM building for teaching and research. It is already under construction and has a livestream of the work.
It will cost $187 million, with about half each funded by the state and the university.
The Integrative Sciences Building, now under construction at N.C. State University in Raleigh. UNC System
▪ Renovations are set to begin this summer on Dabney Hall at NC State. The renovations will cost $140 million and are funded by the State Capital Infrastructure Fund as well as the university. The work will be done in phases, floor by floor, and include upgrades to the chemistry lab, according to the UNC System.
Dabney Hall at N.C. State University in Raleigh, which will be renovated starting in the summer of 2024. UNC System
UNC-Greensboro
▪ The Jackson Library and Tower will both be renovated at UNC-Greensboro. The renovations are aimed at making the buildings up-to-date and more accessible. With a cost of about $98 million, it is still in development.
UNC-Pembroke
▪ A new Health Sciences Center is planned for UNC-Pembroke. Still in the planning phase, the new building will house the university’s Advanced Practice of Optometry, Occupational-Physical Therapy, Anatomy, Behavioral Health and Nutrition programs. It is estimated to cost $91 million and is entirely funded by the State Capital Infrastructure Fund.
UNC School of the Arts
▪ At UNC School of the Arts, the Stevens Performing Arts Center will be renovated at a cost of nearly $81 million. Renovations include replacing the windows and renovating the lobby and basement, according to the UNC System.
What’s next
This year’s legislative session will be used to pass a budget adjustment bill, making changes to the two-year spending plan that was passed last year. UNC System officials told lawmakers on Wednesday that they will ask for increases in capital project funds because of inflation, as well as more funding for campus safety upgrades and infrastructure upgrades at multiple HBCU campuses.
Dawn Baumgartner Vaughan is the Capitol Bureau Chief for The News & Observer, leading coverage of the legislative and executive branches in North Carolina with a focus on the governor, General Assembly leadership and state budget. She has received the McClatchy President’s Award, N.C. Open Government Coalition Sunshine Award and several North Carolina Press Association awards, including for politics and investigative reporting.
Now the governing board that oversees the universities could reinstate the requirements in some form.
A UNC System Board of Governors committee on Wednesday will review a policy recommendation from system staff that would require applicants with certain weighted grade point averages inhigh school — between 2.5,the minimum that will be needed to apply, and 2.8 — to submit test scores again. That would take effect with those students who will enter the universities in the fall 2025 semester.
For that semester and the one immediately following it, spring 2026, there would be no required minimum score for students required to submit them, according to the proposed policy revision. Beginning in the fall 2026 semester, though,students with GPAs that require them to submit scores would be required to score either at least 17, out of a possible 36, on the ACT or 930, out of a possible 1600, on the SAT.
Under the proposed policy change, the chancellors of the state’s 16 public universities, with approval from their campus-level boards of trustees, would decide for their respective schools whether students with weighted GPAs above 2.8 would be required to submit test scores.
If the committee approves the policy changes Wednesday, the full Board of Governors will vote on the matter at its meeting in April. The full-board vote would be taken through the consent agenda, meaning the board could approve it as part of a package of policies and without individual consideration or discussion.
The board first waived test requirements system-wide in July 2020, initially only for students applying for admission through 2021, citing the disruptions the pandemic had caused to education and testing, including test days for the SAT and ACT being postponed. The board then voted twice to extend the waiver, first through 2022, then through the fall 2024 semester.
Throughout the pause, students have had the option to submit test scores if they wished to do so. Students who did not submit scores were required to meet the system’s minimum weighted GPA requirement, 2.5, to be considered for admission.
The minimum GPA requirement would remain in place for all applicants under the proposed policy changes.
Other colleges’ test waivers ending
The board’s discussion on the policy will come as many colleges and universities across the country deal with the same issues around standardized testing requirements, which many schools paused — but did not fully end — during the pandemic.
Now, four years removed from the start of the pandemic and almost one year after the federal government declared an end to it, colleges are evaluating whether to continue their test-optional or no-test policies, or reinstate the requirements.
When the Board of Governors previously voted to waive the university system’s test requirements, some board members expressed fear that the change would allow ill-prepared students to be admitted to the state’s universities or that the change might devalue degrees from the schools, The News & Observer previously reported.
Wake Forest University in Winston-Salem has been test-optional for more than 15 years, with “little appreciable difference” in student performance between students who submit scores and those who do not, The N&O reported.
Just before the pandemic, the Board of Governors had approved a policy change that allowed the state’s universities to admit students with either a minimum 2.5 GPA or minimum test scores. That change was based on UNC System research that GPA is a better indicator of student success and performance, The N&O previously reported.
Duke University, which is test-optional this admissions cycle, is no longer assigning numerical values to applicants’ standardized test scores or essays during the admissions process, The Duke Chronicle reported this week. Duke admissions officials made the changes due to “a rise in the use of generative artificial intelligence and college admissions consultants,” The Chronicle reported.
Under current system policy and the proposed revision, chancellors of UNC System universities reserve the right to set additional admissions requirements that exceed the minimum system requirements.
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.
