Archives

News

Assault charges against R. Doyle Parrish, a member of the University of North Carolina’s Board of Governors, were dropped last week, according to court information.

R. Doyle Parrish

R. Doyle Parrish

Parrish, 61, was arrested in May and accused by Raleigh police of assaulting his wife by slapping and pushing her in a May 12 incident at the couple’s North Raleigh home.

He is the chief executive officer and co-founder of the Raleigh-based Summit Hospitality Group, which manages 17 hotels and several restaurants.

Parrish faced a misdemeanor charge of assault on a female, but the case was dismissed by prosecutors on Wednesday, according to information filed at the Wake County courthouse.

Details about what led to the dismissal were not immediately available, and a call for comment to the Wake assistant district attorney who handled the case was not immediately returned Monday afternoon.

The court file for Parrish’s case could not be located Monday by staff at the Wake County Clerk of Courts Office.

Following his arrest, Parrish kept his seat on the UNC Board of Governors, the 32-member board that directs the state’s 17-campus university system. He did step down from committees tasked with selecting the UNC system’s next president, citing the need to take care of some personal issues.

This post will be updated if more details about the dismissed charges become available.

 

NC Budget and Tax Center

State lawmakers would like to amend North Carolina’s state constitution in ways that would undermine our ability to adequately meet the needs of a growing and changing state and impede our ability to build today for a strong economy for the future. These amendments would reduce annual state revenue by nearly $2 billion if implemented in 2015, meaning state funding cuts to important public investments that drive the state forward – our public schools, affordable higher education, safe and healthy communities, and modern infrastructure.

Colorado, which enacted TABOR in 1992, serves as a cautionary tale regarding the perils of taking such a path. The state suspended the law for five years in 2005 in response to a sharp decline in public services. As a result of TABOR, Colorado went from the middle of the pack to the bottom among states in regards to state support for public education and initiatives that serve children. Regarding Colorado, an updated 2015 report by the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities highlights:

  • Colorado fell from 35th to 49th in the nation in K-12 spending as a percentage of personal income.
  • College and university funding as a share of personal income declined from 35th in the nation to 48th.
  • Colorado fell to near the bottom of national rankings in providing children with full, on-time vaccinations.
  • The share of low-income children in the state who lacked health insurance doubled, making Colorado the worst in the nation by this measure

North Carolina has ALREADY experienced erosion in state support for public schools, higher education and early childhood programs in recent years and currently ranks near the bottom among states in many areas. The implementation of these constitutional amendments would all but guarantee a last place finish in every race, every year.

  • North Carolina already ranks 43rd in average pay for our teachers.
  • North Carolina had the largest decline among states in average teacher salaries from 2003-04 to 2013-14.
  • North Carolina ranks 41st in change in state spending per student at 4-yr public universities since 2008

TABOR would make sure that we are unable to boost investments in early childhood initiatives, public schools, and public colleges and universities at a time when doing so is important to North Carolina becoming a more competitive and attractive state.

Contrary to the saying that if you’re at the bottom the only way to go is up, if TABOR comes to North Carolina, the only fate for the Tar Heel State is a permanent place at the bottom in regards to our commitment to public education.

NC Budget and Tax Center

As North Carolina students embark upon a new school year, lots of media coverage has focused on waning state-level support for public schools. This waning support extends beyond public schools to both ends of the education pipeline – early childhood and higher education. Whereas North Carolina should be boosting investments in its entire education pipeline in order to become a more competitive and attractive state, we have taken a different path.

Early childhood programs, like NC Pre-K and the Child Care Subsidy Program, are crucial to promoting the healthy development of North Carolina children. Although child poverty has worsened since the Great Recession, state investments in early childhood programs remain woefully inadequate while waiting lists persist. Today, the NC Pre-K program serves approximately 8,000 fewer four-year olds compared to 2009 peak levels during the recession (see chart below).

Chart 1

Read More

Commentary

The Pope Center for Higher Education is out with a new article in which it laments the fact that student loan debt and loan defaults are both up in North Carolina.  This is obviously not an unimportant problem and so good for them for raising it.

As one might have suspected, however, the group’s conclusion as to why this is so and what ought to be done about it are mostly the usual market fundamentalist gibberish.

According to the Pope people, too many North Carolinians go to college — especially minority students who go to HBCU’s. The “solution,” therefore, is for all those kids who are trying to better themselves to cut it out. Better to get a job in retail or fast food and get on with life as a cog in the new post-industrial North Carolina.

Uh, earth to Pope people: Your article never mentions the word “tuition” except to say that it’s generally lower in HBCU’s.  In case you hadn’t noticed, it’s been skyrocketing in the UNC system in recent years as conservatives have repeatedly slashed the state’s commitment to higher education.

A critical and obvious part of the solution to the problem of rising student debt — notwithstanding the Pope group’s denials — is to lower tuition and the other costs associated with higher education.  That an article would purport to discuss the problem of rising student debt without even paying lip service to the rapidly rising cost of attending college (or for that matter, the proliferation of predatory, for-profit colleges) is a testament to the amazingly powerful blinders with which the ideologues on Right Wing Avenue view the world and dispense their toxic policy prescriptions.

Commentary

The indictments of the often-predatory for-profit college industry continue to pile up. This is from a new article by Prof. Stephanie Cellini for the Brooking Institution in which she argues that public community colleges are regularly a much better bet for students:

“Some back-of-the-envelope calculations suggest that for-profit associate’s degree students need at least an 8.5 percent annual earnings gain to cover the cost of tuition, foregone earnings, and debt service at a typical for-profit college. Our estimates fall short of this threshold, suggesting that for the average student, the earnings gains are too low to justify the cost and generate a positive return on investment. It also suggests that many students may not have full or accurate information on the earnings gains that they can expect post-college.

How do these estimates compare to the social costs of a for-profit education?  Adding in costs to taxpayers in the form of federal student grant aid, loan defaults, and other sources of federal funding would require a 9.8 percent earnings gain to cover the cost to the individual and society. In the public sector, despite higher taxpayer costs, the much lower costs to students means that  only a 7.2 percent annual gain is needed to cover the combined private and social costs—a figure well below current earnings gains estimates in that sector. These figures again suggest that—on average—public institutions may be a better deal for students and taxpayers.”

Of course, as Lindsay Wagner reported recently, lousy performance is far from the only common problem when one patronizes the for-profit college industry. There’s also the risk of blatant, predatory rip-offs.