Higher Ed, News

Carol Folt stepping down as chancellor at UNC-Chapel Hill

Carol Folt will step down as chancellor of UNC-Chapel Hill, UNC announced late Monday afternoon. Her tenure will end after this year’s graduation.

 

UNC President Margaret Spellings, UNC-Chapel Hill Chancellor Carol Folt and UNC Board of Governors Chairman Harry Smith huddle before a tense meeting of the Board of Governors in December.

In a message to the university community, Folt announced her decision, highlighted some of her accomplishments and acknowledged challenges still facing the UNC community.

Among the challenges – her disagreement with the UNC Board of Governors about whether the “Silent Sam” Confederate monument – toppled by protesters last year – should return to campus.

Folt, who has been Chancellor since 2013, has been a frequent target of some of the more conservative members of the Board of Governors. They have criticized her actions surrounding the Silent Sam monument, protests related to the issue and for not taking stronger action against students, faculty and staff engaged in protests around that issue and others with which she has disagreements with the board.

At the same time, Folt has been a frequent target of those in the community who feel she has not done enough to oppose the board of governors’ attempts to pull the campus and the university system to the political right.

In the message Folt said she has ordered the removal of the pedestal on which the monument stood at McCorkle Place in the center of campus.

“As chancellor, the safety of the UNC-Chapel Hill community is my clear, unequivocal and non-negotiable responsibility,” Folt wrote in the statement. “The presence of the remaining parts of the monument on campus poses a continuing threat both to the personal safety and well-being of our community and to our ability to provide a stable, productive educational environment. No one learns at their best when they feel unsafe. ”

“The independent panel of safety experts we convened in November to help us review options for the monument that we presented to the UNC Board of Governors made a strong and compelling case for risks to public safety,”  Folt wrote. “The fact that despite our best efforts even since then, threats have continued to grow and place our community at serious risk has led me to authorize this action.”

“As I have said before, safety concerns alone should preclude the monument from returning to campus,” Folt wrote. “This was also the strong preference of the UNC-Chapel Hill Board of Trustees. The base and tablets will be preserved until their future is decided. While I recognize that some may not agree with my decision to remove the base and tablets now, I am confident this is the right one for our community – one that will promote public safety, enable us to begin the healing process and renew our focus on our great mission.”

In a statement late Monday, several members of the UNC Board of Trustees said it supported her decision to remove the statue’s base in a release that seemed to frame her resignation as directly related to the statue.

“As current officers of the UNC-Chapel Hill Board of Trustees and a former chair who served with Chancellor Carol L. Folt, we support her decision to remove intact the base of the Confederate Monument and accept her decision to step down from her position,” the trustees wrote in the statement. “We thank Chancellor Folt for working tirelessly to elevate our University each and every day to serve the people of North Carolina and beyond.”

“The chancellor has ultimate authority over campus public safety, and we agree Chancellor Folt is acting properly to preserve campus security,” the statement read. “Nothing is more important than keeping our campus community and visitors as safe as possible.”

The message was signed Charles “Chuck” Duckett, vice chair; Julia Grumbles, secretary and Lowry Caudill, current trustee and past chair.

UNC Board of Governors Chairman Harry Smith issued his own statement Monday night.

In it, Smith said the board was blindsided by Folt’s resignation during Monday’s closed session “to deliberate issues related to UNC-Chapel Hill’s leadership.”

He also criticized her order to have the Confederate monument’s base removed.

“We are incredibly disappointed at this intentional action,” Folt said.  “It lacks transparency and it undermines and insults the Board’s goal to operate with class and dignity. We strive to ensure that the appropriate stakeholders are always involved and that we are always working in a healthy and professional manner.”

“In December, the Board developed and articulated a clear process and timeline for determining the best course of action for the future of the Monument—and this remains unchanged,” Smith said.

“Moving forward, the Board will continue to work tirelessly and collaboratively with all relevant parties to determine the best way forward for UNC-Chapel Hill,” Smith said. “We will do so with proper governance and oversight in a way that respects all constituencies and diverse views on this issue. The safety and security of the campus community and general public who visit the institution remains paramount.”

Early Tuesday, Gov. Roy Cooper issued a statement supporting Folt’s decision on removing the statue’s base.

“I appreciate the Chancellor’s actions to keep students and the public safe,” Cooper said in the statement. “North Carolina is welcoming to all, and our public university should reflect that.”

Folt’s announcement comes after UNC President Margaret Spellings’ own resignation, announced in October. Spellings, like Folt, has had a series of tensions with the UNC Board of Governors.

Folt’s statement in its entirety:

 

Dear Carolina Community:

At the start of this semester and new year, I see possibility and promise and am filled with the sense of the limitless potential that makes Carolina such a vital place. In that spirit, I would like to share two important announcements with you.

First, you’ve heard me say many times that it is the privilege of my life to serve as chancellor of this great university. I’m deeply proud of what you’ve accomplished and what we’ve accomplished together since I became a Tar Heel nearly six years ago in 2013. I am writing today to let you know that I have decided to step down as chancellor following graduation, at the end of the academic year.

I have always been driven by the “new and the next,” working with people to take on challenges, solve problems, create frameworks for success, and act to achieve them. Over our years together, we have created a deep and thoughtful shared vision for Carolina’s future—the Blueprint for Next—and we used it to propel our historic Campaign for Carolina past its mid-point goal of $2.25 billion last summer. With the dedication and care of our staff and faculty, our schools are advancing curricula for the future and our students and alumni are succeeding in all fields. We’ve raised nearly $500 million in scholarships and aid, and our community is making discoveries every day that save lives and advance our state and society. As I have reflected on all of this, I’ve decided that this is the right time for me to pass the leadership of our outstanding university, with all its momentum, to the next chancellor, and look ahead for my own “new and next.”

There is much I intend to accomplish with you in the next few months. I will continue to focus on our core mission, do all I can to make sure every person on our campus can thrive and feel welcome, and push forward with Carolina’s campaign and history task force. There has been too much recent disruption due to the monument controversy. Carolina’s leadership needs to return its full attention to helping our University achieve its vision and to live its values. And I want this semester to be exciting and fulfilling for every one of our soon-to-be graduates.

Most importantly, we must always do what we can to make sure our faculty, students and staff have a creative, innovative work and living environment, one that is inclusive, forward-looking and safe. This year for example, we reached our highest level of research funding ever (5th in the nation in federal funds), continued to see historic increases in first-year applications and levels of philanthropy, and pushed ahead as a national leader in affordability, access and student graduation rates. These accomplishments show how talented and dedicated our community is and what can be achieved even in the face of disruption. Just imagine what is possible if we can put our full attention to the potentials and needs of the future.

Second, I have authorized the removal of the base and commemorative plaques from the Confederate Monument site in McCorkle Place. As chancellor, the safety of the UNC-Chapel Hill community is my clear, unequivocal and non-negotiable responsibility. The presence of the remaining parts of the monument on campus poses a continuing threat both to the personal safety and well-being of our community and to our ability to provide a stable, productive educational environment. No one learns at their best when they feel unsafe. The independent panel of safety experts we convened in November to help us review options for the monument that we presented to the UNC Board of Governors made a strong and compelling case for risks to public safety. The fact that despite our best efforts even since then, threats have continued to grow and place our community at serious risk has led me to authorize this action.

As I have said before, safety concerns alone should preclude the monument from returning to campus. This was also the strong preference of the UNC-Chapel Hill Board of Trustees. The base and tablets will be preserved until their future is decided. While I recognize that some may not agree with my decision to remove the base and tablets now, I am confident this is the right one for our community – one that will promote public safety, enable us to begin the healing process and renew our focus on our great mission.

As we celebrate Carolina’s 225th year, we are poised for a strong future. Supported by citizens of our state, generations of dedicated faculty, students, staff, donors and alumni, we are accomplishing great things for the state and the nation. Carolina is better positioned than ever to be the “university of and for the people.” I believe Carolina’s next chancellor will be well placed to build on our momentum. And with your help and energy we will make this another semester filled with Tar Heel energy, creativity and action.

Respectfully yours,

Carol L. Folt
Chancellor

 

News, public health

In one of NC’s many food deserts, a co-op grocery store closes

When Greensboro’s Renaissance Community Co-Op opened in 2016, it was the area’s first since grocery store since 1998.

Last week the store, in largely Black and low-income East Greensboro, announced it is closing at the end of the month. Despite demonstrable need in the under-served, low income area the store simply didn’t maintain the sales strength to keep its doors open.

The store on Phillips Avenue is at the center of what the U.S. Department of Agriculture calls a food deserts – a low income area where at least 33 percent of the people are more than a mile away from a real grocery store or supermarket.

There are 24 food deserts in Guilford County – 17 in Greensboro and seven in High Point.

More than 35,000 people in Guilford County have poor access to healthful food, according to USDA statistics. More than 18,000 of those are low-income.

Guilford’s food deserts are mostly in well-known low-income areas: south of Kivett Drive in High Point, most of east Greensboro and a large rural area near the outskirts of McLeansville.

Concerned Citizens for Northeast Greensboro worked with the Greensboro-based Fund for Democratic Communities partnered and Durham community development lender Self-Help to get the store off the ground. Citizens raised more than $1.2 million and the project received grants of $250,000 from the city of Greensboro and $25,000 from Guilford County. The c0-op’s membership grew to more than 1,300. But in the end, sales weren’t enough to sustain it.

Roodline Volcy, president of the co-op’s board of directors, told the News & Record that over 16 years without a grocery store, people seemed to  have developed other habits in terms of how they got their food.

“I’m just heartbroken over the whole thing,” said Greensboro City Councilwoman Goldie Wells, who represents the area.

News

UNC student paper: TA strike over Silent Sam “took advantage of students”

The Silent Sam Confederate monument – and the withholding of grades at the end of last semester over its future – continues to be a divisive issue.

This week The Daily Tarheel, the student newspaper of the UNC-Chapel Hill, blasted the teaching assistants who took part in the withholding of grades.

From the paper’s editorial:

The Board condemns these protests, not for the subject of derision, but for the manner in which these TAs expressed their opposition. A large part of the student body would share the views of the TAs in regards to this issue. Many students believe a museum like the administration proposed would serve not to contextualize the statue but rather to memorialize it, to ingrain it inside of UNC’s culture. Many students have protested the existence of Silent Sam, standing alongside figures such as Maya Little.

For this group of TAs to decide, after their last paycheck had been delivered, to hold the grades of their students hostage to make a statement is a cowardly move. For students to be so blatantly taken advantage of by those who hold positions of power above them reveals a remarkable lack of bravery from these TAs. These individuals used their authority as TAs to harm students who need these grades for internships, jobs or even graduate school acceptances.

As some were quick to point out in the comments, the professors and TAs participating in withholding grades did ultimately release them in time to avoid problems with internships, jobs or graduate school programs.

But the editorial demonstrates that while nearly every student, faculty and staff organization at UNC-Chapel Hill has made known their opposition to the Confederate statue and its return, not everyone in the community agrees on the tactics used to oppose it.

 

News

A look at race and risk assessment for minority youth defendants

Dr. Christina A. Campbell

As reform advocates continue to examine possible changes to North Carolina’s bail and pre-trial release systems, groups like the ACLU have urged caution.

Pre-trial risk assessments like those now being used in some of North Carolina’s largest counties can lead to racial inequities simply through the way they’re designed.

For a closer look at that issue, this piece from the Dr. Christina A. Campbell of The University of Cincinnati is worth your time.

From the piece:

 

One decision that juvenile courts frequently face when assessing an offending youth is whether that juvenile should be diverted through dismissal or into service learning programs, mental health treatment or advocacy/mentoring programs, especially when he or she has been arrested for relatively minor offenses.

The specific interaction of race and criminogenic risk, however, is rarely addressed with juvenile offenders.

Recent research conducted by myself and colleagues at the University of Cincinnati School of Criminal Justice, titled “Risk Assessment: An Interaction Between Risk, Race and Gender” showed that relationship between risk score and recidivism differed significantly for African-American and white youth, with the scores significantly less predicative for black juveniles.

Although a commonly used risk assessment instrument significantly predicted recidivism for all youth in the study, the risk-recidivism interaction was even more present for males and ethnic minorities.

More specifically, while there were no differences in the types of crimes committed and no difference in the proportion of low, moderate and high-risk African-American and white youth in the study, black males were more likely to receive a new court petition following their initial involvement with the juvenile court, compared to their white counterparts.

This means that there were factors beyond criminogenic risks as measured by risk assessment tools that led to recidivism. And it was the implementation of a risk assessment tool that allowed researchers to uncover this disparity.

Make the time to read the whole thing here.

News

U.S. Supreme Court to take up North Carolina gerrymandering case

The U.S. Supreme Court will take up a long-running partisan gerrymandering case, the court announced Friday afternoon.

As anticipated, the high court will hear Rucho v. Common Cause. The case will be set for argument in the court’s March session.

Federal courts have twice found the state’s 2016 congressional redistricting plan unconstitutional.

In the case, Common Cause argues extreme partisan gerrymandering punishes supporters of the minority party based on their political beliefs and in violation of the First Amendment.

State Rep. David Lewis (R- Harnett), an architect of the redistricting map, was transparent about its partisan intention when it was debated in 2016.

“I think electing Republicans is better than electing Democrats,” Lewis said. “So I drew this map to help foster what I think is better for the country.”

“Whether it is Democrats or Republicans manipulating the election maps, gerrymanders cheat voters out of true representation,” said Karen Hobert Flynn, president of Common Cause, in a written statement Friday.

The court will also take up Lamone v. Benisek, a Maryland case that alleges a Democratic gerrymander. The outcome of the two redistricting cases could set a legal precedent dictating how maps are redrawn after the 2020 census.

“The Supreme Court has the opportunity to set a clear standard that will restore a meaningful vote to millions of Americans disenfranchised by gerrymanders in Maryland, North Carolina and across the country.”