Expect a BIG change in the fortune of State athletics very soon!
unc70 Feb 15, 3:32 p.m.
Those wanting to change the Board membership are way to focused on enrollment head counts for regular students, particularly on undergraduate enrollments. They miss several huge parts of UNC Chapel Hill. Start with the health and medical schools (medicine, nursing, pharmacy, dentistry, public health), their continuing education programs, massive research efforts, and with UNC Hospitals involved with satellite operations across NC. Same for the other professional schools. (law, government, business (and accounting), education, social work). And lots of institutes and centers of all types.
(State has some similar efforts, but far fewer; fewer still at other campuses.)
I noticed the current Board has members with ties to pharmacy and to the other schools and teaching hospitals in NC, not just those in the UNC System.
Hans Feb 15, 3:02 p.m.
Yeah, it kept removing one of my quote tags when I posted, and finally I just said the heck with it.
unc70 Feb 15, 2:37 p.m.
Hans, on rereading I gather the post was by someone else over on PP. I had thought at first it was from you.
They are probably laughing at how clueless the writer seems. They seem to have missed that the referenced section of the NC General Statutes was defining the INITIAL membership of the Board back in 1972:
While not spelled out explicitly, the people corresponding to those descriptions were already designated informally when the legislation was enacted.
Here is a link for the current Board members:
Hans Feb 15, 11:58 a.m.
That's probably because they're still too busy laughing hysterically.
Hans Feb 15, 11:55 a.m.
strive for the following guidelines for school affiliation:
Five with UNC-Chapel Hill
Five with NC State
Two with UNC-Greensboro
One with each remaining school
Six with no UNC affiliation
(These should come from business, industry and education)
It may take two or three years to achieve reasonable balance, but that should be the goal. You may decide on a different distribution scenario, but whatever you decide, there should be an equal number from our two flagship institutions.
Thank you for your consideration. I would appreciate hearing your thoughts and comments.
KT Returns Feb 15, 11:53 a.m.
Are you that mad about being stood up by blueduke4 that you're cruising pack pride?
Hans Feb 15, 11:50 a.m.
I sent a follow-up letter to the co-chairmen of the Senate Select Committee on UNC BOG. Below is a copy of my letter. I see no reason that the General Assembly should not begin this year bringing the BOG membership back into balance. (Thanks to LEHart for the distribution numbers for the initial BOG.)
Dear Senators Soucek and Tillman:
I wrote to each of you yesterday as members of the Senate Select Committee on UNC Board of Governors regarding the imbalance of members affiliated with the various schools within the UNC system. I have read that the 1971 Higher Education Reorganization Act specified equitable distribution of the initial Board of Governors by requiring that it be made up of the following membership:
3 from East Carolina Board of Trustees
2 from Appalachian State BOT
2 NCA&T BOT
2 NC Central BOT
2 Western Carolina BOT
1 Elizabeth City State BOT
1 Fayetteville State BOT
1 UNC School of the Arts BOT
1 Pembroke State BOT
1 Winston Salem State BOT
16 from the Consolidated BOT representing NCSU, UNC-CH and UNC-G
After a lot of searching, I have been unable to verify the above. However, I remember that there was an effort to achieve some degree of balance in the selection of BOG members. As you can see from the above, if in fact it is correct, all members of the BOG were also to be members of the BOT of their respective schools. I don't think that is true today, nor should it be. Some members, in my opinion, should be from business, industry and education and not affiliated with any UNC school. Also, four schools that are now part of the UNC system are not on the above list. I assume they were added later. Whatever balance there may have been in the beginning, it no longer exists; there is no balance today.
As you select this year's nominees, I request that you make every effort to begin bringing the system into some semblance of reasonable balance. There currently are thirty-two voting members of the BOG. I suggest that you st
BeastOfTheHill Feb 14, 4:36 p.m.
it not so much that facts end it as it is the fact the TBK is never going to be satisified until UNC shuts down all sports operations. He thinks "they don't play on a level field" and will do anything to convince others of that.
unc70 Feb 14, 2:52 p.m.
Funny how facts tend to end discussion threads.
unc70 Feb 14, 5:53 a.m.
The GOP gained the majority in the GA in 2010. That is why the GOP controlled redistricting and why Perdue vetoed a number of bills. She tried to veto more, but with a couple of DINOs, the GOP majority was large enough to override many of the vetos. Because she was still governor, the Dems were blamed by many voters for not taking action on issues where the truth was that the Repubs were deliberately sabotaging the effectiveness of state government as part of their strategy for the election of 2012.
BoG members are not strictly selected along party lines, but tend to reflect party along with other constituencies. The BoG has had a Republican majority since 2011.
Please sign in to post.
The Brian Kenny Show
ACC: Wake Forest vs. Notre Dame
Today at 1:00 pm on WRAL-TV
ACC: Miami vs. Virginia Tech
Today at 3:20 pm on WRAL-2
ACC: Georgia Tech vs. Boston College
Tonight at 7:00 on WRAL-TV
ACC: Maryland vs. Florida State
Tomorrow at 12:00 pm on WRAL-TV
CBB: Miami vs. Virginia Tech
Today at 3:30 pm on 99.9 The Fan
ACC: NC State vs. Miami/Virginia Tech
Tonight at 7:00 on WRAL-FM
CBB: Wake Forest vs. Notre Dame
Tomorrow at 1:00 pm on 99.9 The Fan
Buffalo Sabres at Carolina Hurricanes
Tomorrow at 7:00 pm on 99.9 The Fan
- NCAA BB
My all-ACC ballotAdam Gold
— Wed 8:56 a.m.
— Wed 8:55 a.m.
— Wed 12:33 a.m.
— Tue 11:44 p.m.
— Tue 11:42 p.m.
— Tue 11:38 p.m.
— Tue 10:28 p.m.
— Tue 10:20 p.m.
— Tue 9:39 p.m.
— Tue 9:38 p.m.
— Tue 9:37 p.m.
— Tue 9:35 p.m.
— Tue 9:34 p.m.
— Tue 9:31 p.m.
— Tue 9:29 p.m.