Legislators on the Board of Governors?

A proposal that surfaced last week to name state legislators to the UNC Board of Governors would further politicize a board that’s already overly politicized.

It’s not a good idea.

HB455 would allow each house of the NC General Assembly to appoint two of its own members to the Board of Governors. The legislative members would have non-voting positions, and their terms on the board – like those of legislators – would last two years.

The proposal would formalize something that former Rep. John Fraley, R-Iredell and a friend of higher education, did for several years: As a member of the public, Fraley sat in on Board of Governors meetings to be sure he stayed informed on issues confronting North Carolina’s public universities. (Fraley was recently appointed to the Board of Governors after retiring from the General Assembly.)

That was extraordinary dedication from a citizen legislator on Fraley’s part. 

But it didn’t require a law for him to do it.

The proposal to formally name legislators to the Board of Governors would replace the legislature’s reins on the board with a harness. It also flies in the face of guidance offered by both Republican and Democratic state leaders as part of our series on proper governance of the UNC System.

Former Board of Governors Chair W. Louis Bissette Jr. pointed out that board members’ duty is to the institution – not to the body that appoints them.

“A perfect Board of Governors is one that is independent, or as close to independent as a public body can be. Our universities should be held accountable, but governing boards do not exist to serve as oversight committees for the legislature,” Bissette wrote.

“The University System’s Board of Governors owes its fiduciary duty to the System. Its duty of loyalty is to the institution it represents, not the institution that appoints its members, the General Assembly.”1

Former Bank of America CEO and Chairman Hugh McColl wrote that our universities need room to operate.

Visionary actions “can happen if we just let our universities stick to the good strategies they’ve already created and stop dealing with the political crisis of the day,” McColl wrote. “The core operations of our universities are strong. Our faculty are excellent. They need room to work.

“That means politicians should be less involved in university affairs. Recently, legislators have become more involved in university operations and decisions. I understand why they might want to increase oversight of our universities but it’s clear to me that those efforts have backfired. Our universities need less political interference.”2

And Winston-Salem businessman Don Flow wrote that the UNC System needs less – not more – politics.

“If it is not de-politicized, I believe the UNC system will be significantly and permanently diminished. A politicized process creates dual loyalties that result in a lack of institutional alignment,” Flow wrote.

“… We should explore banning lobbyists on governing boards and consider other restrictions on how financially intertwined board members can be with legislators and state funding. These are not radical changes. But they would preserve and even enhance public control of the university while depoliticizing its board,” Flow wrote.3

A PROPOSAL THAT EMERGED this week in the state Senate would in fact ban lobbyists and their spouses from being appointed to the Board of Governors.

State legislators have great leverage on lobbyists. They can influence, for example, whether a bill a lobbyist favors become law – even if it has nothing to do with education. So lobbyists can face more conflicts of interest than other board members.

There are currently three lobbyists – Thom Goolsby, David Powers and Reggie Holley – on the Board of Governors. Former member Darrell Allison, who resigned from the board last fall to become Chancellor of Fayetteville State University, also was a lobbyist.

Former Senate Rules Chair Tom Apodaca, now a lobbyist as well, turned down an opportunity to be appointed to the UNC Board in 2019. “I don’t think lobbyists should be on the Board of Governors,” he said at the time.4

SB 546, sponsored by Sen. Jim Perry, R-Lenoir, would forbid lobbyists or their spouses to be appointed to the Board. It would not affect the current lobbyist members because it would apply only to future appointments.

“Doing this would enable us to avoid any appearance of potential conflicts and prevent good ideas from being discounted because of assumptions of someone’s motive,” Perry told The News & Observer.5

That, in turn, is a good idea.