Editorial: UNC Board's focus should be educational excellence, not legislative fealty

CBC Editorial: Tuesday, Oct. 29, 2019; Editorial #8477
The following is the opinion of Capitol Broadcasting Company.

The exclusive priorities of those the General Assembly elected to serve on the University of North Carolina Board of Governors are the students, faculty and staff who attend, teach and work at one of the system’s 17 campuses.

But for as many as a dozen of the 24 members of the board, that may not be the case.

Directly, or indirectly, these board members have jobs or posts outside their UNC duties that depend on the wishes and whims of legislators – particularly the legislative leadership. That potential came to light with the most recent election by the state House of Reggie Holley, a lobbyist with at least seven clients, to the UNC board.

The possibility of quid-pro-quos involving these board members’ or their employers’ advocacy work and matters concerning public higher education is not remote. Legislative leaders want to hold sway over the UNC system and they are shrewd about doing it.

North Carolinians should be particularly concerned. The UNC board, particularly since the system’s reorganization in 1971, has established itself as strongly independent. Until recently, the board’s leadership and executives, had the independent stature to stand up to and, when necessary, confront and fight the legislature on behalf of the best interests of public higher education.

The recent rash of firings and resignations of top campus and system officials – with well-worn tracks leading directly between legislators and their dutiful appointees – is undeniable evidence of a weakened and subservient board.

The fact that there is open talk – which he has not categorically denied -- that current House Speaker Tim Moore is lobbying to be the system president is more case-in-point evidence.

Moore and Senate leader Phil Berger have looked to school choice advocates and lobbyists in particular. The fate and reputation of their schools and programs is entirely in the legislature’s hands. Don’t think for a moment that Reggie Holly, Darrell Allison, Pearl Burris-Floyd and Philip Byers aren’t fully aware.

Robert Rucho, Thomas Goolsby and Leo Daughtry are former Republican state legislators. They know how things work and who calls the shots.

Tom Fetzer, the long-time Republican operative who had led the state GOP and is a former Raleigh mayor has entrenched himself among the highest echelon of state government lobbyists. Fetzer has also lobbied openly and behind the scenes to become a UNC campus chancellor. David Powers leads his own consulting firm with direct dealings with legislators and policies they decide.

Others, including Steven Long, Terry Hutchens and Michael Williford, work in law firms where the offices’ clients may have interests or issues in the hands of the legislature.

A dozen members of the UNC board – fully half of its members – carry the very real potential to be compromised and become puppets of the legislative leadership.

Years ago there were various criteria and categories legislators were required to follow in their election of UNC board members. There were even candidate nominations and fierce campaigns within the General Assembly to win a coveted slot.

We are not about to suggest that the old was optimal. But the evolution has NOT been an improvement.

To achieve more diversity and less fealty to the legislature, give the governor the authority to appoint a third – eight members -- of the board. Even in circumstances where the governor and legislature’s majority may share political party the clear difference in interests would bring about a broader board.

The UNC system is now working on its fourth president with Tom Ross’ forced departure in 2015. There are interim chancellors on the major campuses of UNC-Chapel Hill and East Carolina University as well as at Fayetteville State University, Western Carolina University and the UNC School of the Arts.

The evidence is abundantly clear that the current legislative leadership’s strong arm has politicized the board leaving management of the UNC system ineffective and unstable.

It is time for a change.