UNC System board committee approves policy gutting DEI. Students say they were kept out.

Administrative positions and offices dedicated to diversity, equity and inclusion are likely to be eliminated at all public universities across North Carolina following a vote Wednesday by members of the board that oversees the campuses.

The UNC System Board of Governors’ University Governance committee approved a policy that repeals the university system’s existing policy on diversity and inclusion, which requires each of the state’s 17 public campuses to employ diversity officers and work toward achieving diversity-related goals, among other requirements.

The committee passed the policy unanimously and with no discussion.

The new policy would eliminate those jobs — or, if a university wishes to keep the positions, it would be forced to remove the job’s ties to diversity.

After the positions are eliminated or changed, chancellors of each university would have to describe to UNC System President Peter Hans “reductions in force and spending” that resulted from the cuts, and how the “savings achieved” could be “redirected to initiatives related to student success and wellbeing.”

The policy states that the university system will “continue to ensure that diverse persons of any background, from North Carolina and beyond, are invited, included, and treated equally.” Universities would also continue to follow nondiscrimination policies and laws.

The committee passed the policy without objection and with no discussion. UNC System President Peter Hans was not made available for comment Wednesday.

The policy now goes to the full, 24-member board for consideration at its May meeting. At that meeting, the policy is likely to be considered on the consent agenda, meaning the board could vote on the policy without further discussion.

If the full board approves the policy, it would take effect immediately. Chancellors would be required to certify they have made changes to align their campuses with the changes by Sept. 1.

Faculty, students react to policy

Reaction to the policy — from both supporters and opponents — was swift online Tuesday night after the proposed policy came to light in a story published by The News & Observer.

That dialogue continued Wednesday, with students and faculty speaking out about the issue.

Two faculty leaders told The N&O Wednesday that, to their knowledge, faculty were not consulted on the policy or informed about it prior to it being added to the meeting materials Tuesday afternoon. The policy was not included in the materials when they were first posted last week.

Beth Moracco, faculty chair at UNC-Chapel Hill, said the new proposal took “us as a surprise,” and the quick turnaround from the policy being introduced to being voted on means that she and other faculty “have not really had a chance to digest and react to it.”

Wade Maki, a UNC Greensboro professor who chairs the UNC System Faculty Assembly, said faculty “look forward to having an opportunity to engage” with board members on the policy now that conversations around it have started publicly. Maki said he is under the impression that faculty and campuses will be able to provide input and feedback soon, likely in a forum outside of a formal board meeting.

Some faculty are concerned about the policy “because diversity is a key value” of many people in the system, Maki said.

“It’s foundational to what we do,” he said. “And it’s going to continue to be.”

The College Democrats of North Carolina urged students on X, formerly Twitter, to “stand up to the UNC Board of Governors” and “save programs on your campus” by contacting the UNC System office and Hans.

Jack Yordy, an Appalachian State University student who is also the state council chair for the state College Democrats, told The N&O that the policy is “kind of like another target of right-wing outrage of the month.” Yordy compared the move to previous legislation and policies in North Carolina and across the country targeting critical race theory, or CRT, and “woke and cancel culture.”

Yordy said ending diversity and inclusion efforts on campuses would have “an actual, real impact on the safety and well-being of students.”

“We want our college campuses to be a welcoming and safe place,” Yordy said.

Some students say they were kept out of meeting

Students from the UNC-Chapel Hill group TransparUNCy, which is dedicated to shining a light on political connections in North Carolina higher education, attempted to attend the meeting in-person. They told The N&O they were kept out of the UNC School of the Arts building where the meeting was held after being told by UNC System security that the meeting room was full.

System spokesperson Andy Wallace told The N&O 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 took place, lasted for such a short time — roughly five minutes.

State law states that “any person is entitled to attend” open meetings. It is unclear whether exceptions are made when a room reaches its capacity. Asked by The N&O whether the room was full to a point at which a fire code or other regulations would make the room unsafe, Wallace said only that the room was full.

Alexander Denza, an organizer with the group, told The N&O before the meeting that “it’s important that the Board of Governors knows that students are watching their changes.”

“These changes that they’re making right now are going to have a chilling effect on speech and also [on] discourse in our communities,” which he said is ironic given UNC-Chapel Hill and the broader UNC System’s recent goals of promoting open discourse.

Denza said he is concerned about how vague the proposal’s language is, which he said could mean that the policy’s impacts might vary from campus to campus and allow administrators the ability to “work the language in the ways that best fits their agenda or situation.”

Samuel Scarborough, another UNC student who is a member of the group, said the group wanted to attend the meeting “to make our voices heard.”

“Knowing that institutionally, we don’t have as much power as we wish we had, we want to at least be present in the room as these decisions are happening and have a chance to speak,” Scarborough said. “We were not given this opportunity.”

In the Spotlight designates ongoing topics of high interest that are driven by The News & Observer’s focus on accountability reporting.