Skip to main content

August 3, 2022 Employee Forum Meeting Minutes

Attending: Delegates Attending: L.E. Alexander, Vanessa Blake, Randall Borror, Sharron Bouquin, David Bragg, Shane Brogan, Tiffany Carver, Michael Case, Emma Dehne, Elizabeth DuBose, Jay Eubank, Shayla Evans-Hollingsworth, Jaci Field, Stephanie Forman, Adrianne Gibilisco, Chrissie Greenberg, Lonnie Hawley, Leah Hefner, Jessi Hill, Shayna Hill, Keith Hines, Ta’Keyah Holder, James Holman, Rebecca Howell, Brigitte Ironside, Kira Jones, Stacy Keast, Mary King, Evan Marsh, Amber Meads, Arlene Medder, Mandy Melton, David Michaud, Katie Musgrove, Joseph Ormond, Sara Pettaway, Charlissa Rice, Kelly Scurlock-Cross, Lori Shamblin, Theresa Silsby, Janice Singletary, Sarah Smith, Jake Stallard, James Stamey, Janet Steele, Kurt Stolka, Annetta Streater, Matthew Teal, Julie Theriault, Tracy Wetherby-Williams, Alice Whiteside, Tracey Wiley, Tyrone Williams, Jacob Womack

Excused: Laura Pratt

Chair Katie Musgrove called the meeting to order at 9:15 a.m. She wished all well for the first meeting of the new academic year. She welcomed the Chancellor’s Chief of Staff Christi Hurt to provide opening remarks, speaking on behalf of the Chancellor in the Forum’s customary roundtable. Hurt thanked the Forum for the invitation to speak. She spoke about August as a transition spot between summer and fall and her fondness of heading into a new academic year.

Hurt noted that this year’s first day of class will be August 15, a little earlier in the year than usual. This early start occurs because of the five well-being days built into this year’s calendar. She hoped that these dates will pay off as breathers throughout the academic year.

Regarding South Building, Hurt recalled the number of new leaders coming onboard here at UNC-Chapel Hill. She was pleased to note the new Vice Chancellor for Communications Kamrhan Farwell, whom she termed a “powerhouse” who is a very strong communicator and aware of the “flavors” at work here at Carolina.

Beth Meyer Davis will take over as Dean of the Graduate School, a wonderful piece of news as Davis has served strongly in her time at the Gillings School of Public Health. Hurt thought that Davis is well positioned to address issues facing graduate students, particularly the financial needs of this community. Davis will help the University think through the global future needs of graduate students.

Hurt said that Chancellor Guskiewicz is very excited to see his leadership team filled out and ready to take on the new academic year. She noted the appointment of a range of other leadership positions, including new UNC Police Chief Brian James, whom she termed a wonderful and great ally and colleague. Ongoing searches include the Vice Chancellor for Development and the Dean of the School of Government, the last missing pieces of the University’s leadership team.

Hurt recalled that the recent legislative session had provided funding for the University’s new School for Data Science and Society, which will hire faculty, build out programs, and confer degrees now. She noted the school’s leader, Stan Ahalt. She was pleased that the school was beginning the new year with a full leadership team and a state budget.

Regarding challenges, Hurt said that the University will continue work on mental health services from the previous academic year. She noted the range of mental health services on contract and in place, including the hire of a new mental health counselor and the creation of a new multicultural health program at CAPS (Counseling and Psychological Services). Mental health seminars by Amy Johnson from Student Affairs will continue this year as the University continues to build its capacity in this space.

Hurt noted the novel difficulties that students must navigate in this era of the pandemic, and the need to provide support to all. Hurt recalled the Students for Fair Admissions legal case that will see arguments presented to the Supreme Court this fall with a decision likely in the new year. University officials are working with counsel to ensure preparation for the case and for eventual outcomes. Hurt said that the University has created a website dedicated to the admissions case for those interested.

Hurt raised another campus issue close to her area of expertise, that of violence prevention. She recalled her former role to fortify the campus’ gender violence capacity in her time at Student Affairs. Currently, Carolina has a fully staffed team in violence prevention and response, with gender violence service coordinators providing report response assistance and violence prevention coordinators focusing on programs of note. She urged listeners to be the friend who intervenes to help someone get support and services, who can stop bad behavior, who can make a situation healthier and safer.

Hurt was excited that the HAVEN program geared to faculty and staff has received renewal and relocation to the Gender Violence Prevention office. HAVEN trains faculty, staff, and students to be a first point of contact for someone who needs help specifically around relationship or sexual violence. The training runs two to three hours depending on if one takes the training online. The training provides guidance on how to be a support person who provides resources to those affected.

Peer educators are again doing bystander intervention training, and work on an ambassador program. These educators will resume the leadership and violence prevention course which will be offered from the Women’s Studies department. Hurt was proud of this program’s success and popularity.

In addition, the Chancellor will gather the University’s leadership team from his office and the Provost’s office to a retreat before school officially begins. One part of this retreat will focus on the next phase of the university’s strategic plan, “Carolina Next: Innovations for the Public Good”. Another part will focus on preparations for the legislative budget session. More information about the retreat and its outcomes will be forthcoming. University leaders will also receive background on how the budget process will unfold going into the next academic year.

Hurt offered to take questions from the Forum. The Chair confirmed that Kamrhan Farwell’s official start date will be the end of September. The Chair asked if there is a HAVEN refresher training for those who completed the course years ago. Hurt did not think that such training exists but she would check. She offered that HAVEN trainees could possibly use the asynchronous version of the training offered during the pandemic as a refresher.

The Chair raised a similar question regarding a refresher course for mental health first aid training. Hurt said that this training is administered according to national standards and so may not have supplements available. She praised the training itself as magnificent and useful in how to serve as a good support person for people in need. She did not know if a refresher would be available but thought that the entire four-hour course would be useful to undergo again.

The Chair asked how the Violence Prevention office of the university interacts with Carolina Women’s Center. Hurt said that the Center was under assessment. The eventual mission of a women’s center in the 21st Century will be analyzed as the University deconstructs notions of gender. The University will review Women’s Center needs to rebuild pieces there. Currently, the Women’s Center rolls up to the Provost’s Office, while the violence prevention team is housed in Student Affairs, along with the gender violence services coordinator team. The University will review these reporting relationships with the Women’s Center in due course.

The Chair hoped that staff career development would become a priority of the University in its next phase of work. She thought that this emphasis is overdue given struggles in staff vacancies, retention, and recruitment. Hurt thought that staff career development would indeed be a priority this year.

The Chair then welcomed Executive Director for Transportation and Parking Cheryl Stout to discuss process and representation issues around the department’s five-year plan. Stout said that minor ordinance changes were enacted this year regarding bike share, adverse weather, and license plate display.

Stout said that this year will be Transportation and Parking’s fourth five-year plan. She reminded listeners that the department is a receipt-supported campus auxiliary, which must pay for the system through receipts collected. The primary purpose of the five-year plan is to evaluate the campus transportation system’s needs through community outreach planning initiatives. Transportation officials also consult with campus and hospital stakeholders on the specific core mission of the department. A professional consultant leads this effort and helps develop revenue streams necessary to support the projected financial obligations of the system.

Stout outlined the timeline for this project: this August through October involves the hiring of a consultant to lead the effort and collect data, towards arriving at decisions through April 2023. From May through August 2023 the ordinance changes will receive Board of Trustees consideration. Communications and implementation plans will also be managed. The 26-member advisory committee for transportation and parking (ACT) will continue work through the five-year planning process. ACT contains representatives from the Employee Forum, undergraduate and graduate students, postdoctoral fellows, Athletics, and Academics departments, Faculty Council, and other campus units. The committee works on these issues but also does specific outreach within these units and campus-wide outreach to anyone inquiring.

Stout said that the department continues these activities as part of its professional system evaluation to identify areas for improvement. Allocation policies are among areas for which the department does a significant system evaluation. The department identifies campus transportation demands and does what is needed to provide for these needs. This task is done in cooperation with planning partners and requires an approval process. Stout directed employees with questions to the Transportation website at She offered to take additional questions from the Forum.

Theresa Silsby thanked Stout for her presentation. She asked about the requirement that cars park with the back end to the parking lot. She drives a 4-Runner and finds it easier to back into her space. She asked if license plates must be placed on the front of the car in this circumstance. Stout replied that drivers who wish to back into their spots should access the Transportation and Parking website to order a front plate for $5 which allows drivers to back into their spaces.

The Chair asked about the relationship between Transportation and Parking and the Department of Athletics. In particular, she asked if Athletics pays for facilities reserved during games. Stout said that when the University hosts athletic events, public parking is $10/spot. The Athletics Foundation has been a contributor to the construction of parking facilities. Athletics contributes to expenses related to monitoring and tow trucks in association with its events. She added that Athletics contributes a significant sum of money given all the services provided for the day.

Jay Eubank recalled difficulties in getting home via Chapel Hill Transit or Triangle Transit in adverse weather situations. He said that these situations usually require three to four hours to get home. He said having bus after bus with no room for riders during adverse weather is very dispiriting. Stout said that Transportation and Parking is working with transit providers to address transit needs in these typically evolving situations, particularly in instances of freezing weather. Stout said that the department tries to prep the transit agencies as soon as a change in university operations is announced, to beef up midday services.  Increasing midday service to peak service in an adverse weather event when everyone is leaving the campus at once simultaneously is very difficult for all involved.

A suggestion was offered that P2P service could be mobilized to assist as well. Stout said that P2P has limited capacity given staffing and fleet availability limitations. A question was asked about students using parking spaces via hourly rate in lots where employees pay to park. Stout said that many of the partial restrictions were created very quickly to accommodate COVID. She said that only so many permits are sold for available spaces. When problems emerge for permit holders in a particular lot, Transportation and Parking will study removing the lot from the list of daily options.

Stout confirmed that day parking will still be allowed on campus, subject to availabilities in various locations. Tiffany Carver thanked Transportation and Parking for making prorated parking available for those working on campus less than three days a week.

Julie Theriault asked about structuring the price of parking to assist those at the bottom of the salary structure. She said that daily parking is more expensive than a parking pass used for two days a week. She proposed that the department institute an option for lower paid staff to choose daily parking and have it cost less than an actual parking pass. Stout said that this question will likely be part of the policy conversations to come as the University considers a new five-year plan.

A chat question emphasized the importance of mental health support during a very stressful time of year for university employees. Stout agreed and offered that the university might send out a reminder to staff regarding resources available. She praised the stalwart quality of her staff who had worked through these difficult times.

The Chair then recognized the Chair of the State Employee Association of North Carolina’s (SEANC) Public Education committee Mark Dearmon to address the Forum.  SEANC Executive Director Ardis Watkins would join the group later that morning.

Dearmon noted the challenge of leading his committee during the pandemic years. He had worked to build strong relationships with university employees across the state. He thanked listeners who are already members of SEANC and asked that they encourage others who are not members to join. SEANC will benefit from the power of increased numbers in dealings with the legislature. He recalled SEANC’s work to ensure that state employees would receive $15/hour.

Dearmon said that SEANC representatives are a bit disappointed with this year’s budget, as it could have been much better for state employees. He recalled statements from legislative leaders asking state employees to sacrifice during lean years with the promise of doing better during richer years. He said that there has not been a better year than this one, in which the Legislature can put $7 billion in a rainy-day reserve.

Dearmon said that the legislature should have provided state employees with more than the 3.5% salary raise offered, recalling Governor Roy Cooper’s budget initially offered 5% and a $2,000 bonus. Dearmon noted the effectiveness of SEANC as a non-partisan organization through EMPAC, its political action committee. He recalled SEANC’s support of State Treasurer Dale Folwell who has worked to reform the state health care system and the retirement system.

Dearmon also noted the large turnover rate throughout State government and particularly the UNC System. He said that this situation will not improve unless salaries and other benefits improve. This situation is particularly difficult in North Carolina’s prisons, in which a vacancy rate of over 50% is not uncommon and is potentially life-threatening to guards and prisoners.

Dearmon noted that SEANC will be the lead sponsor of the Chancellors’ Cup golf tournament, with proceeds to go to the Janet B. Royster Staff Scholarship. He said that SEANC officials are looking forward to the tournament taking place in Chapel Hill this year.

Arlene Medder asked if there have been any bright spots for State employees other than this year’s 3.5% salary increase. Dearmon said that hopes are high for a bigger raise next year as well as a cost-of-living adjustment (COLA) for retirees. Dearmon also mentioned various insurance products offered by SEANC to its members, including an online medical and mental health service for those needing consultations. He added that SEANC has its own scholarships for children and grandchildren of SEANC members.

The Chair noted a chat question as to whether long-term nursing home care insurance is available through SEANC. Dearmon offered to send the Chair a link to the SEANC membership guide containing all of SEANC’s insurance products.

Ardis Watkins joined the meeting at this point. Watkins noted that former Employee Forum Chair Charles Streeter now serves as SEANC’s Growth and Expansion committee chair, aiming at increasing the diversity in age of SEANC members. She said that the average age of state employees increases a bit every year, and experienced employees leave state government every year as raises have not met expectations. She was very excited about Streeter’s leadership and the great things he will do in this area.

Watkins noted the political challenges facing higher education, particularly staff at UNC System institutions. She bemoaned the classification of higher education staff as an afterthought among labor leaders. She asked if delegates have questions or advice for her, noting the feeling of vulnerability that some staff may feel in these situations.

Shayna Hill said that here at UNC-Chapel Hill and elsewhere, departments are not seeing candidate pool sizes that used to commonly occur. Candidate pools that normally would garner 50-60 applicants now may only yield five to six candidates. This figure is as low as she had experienced during her 15 years working at UNC. She said that these declining pools will impact working life here at UNC. She said that the university is at a crisis point as many employees with institutional knowledge are leaving state service for better salaries and benefits elsewhere. Watkins said that state government institutions face a vacancy rate between 20-30%, an astounding level which was once considered unthinkable.

Watkins said that the biggest concern for state employees in this situation is the possibility of privatization of services, as administrators may begin to think the simple answer to providing services is to contract them out. She said that this discussion will likely occur if the vacancy rate continues to be as high as it has been. She also said that benefits will remain an important part of the overall compensation package. Contrary to public perceptions, benefits for state employees do not have the same value as previous, a factor which adversely affects the number of applicants for positions.

Watkins noted the work that SEANC has done with the legislature trying to keep benefit levels static. She noted the Clear Pricing Project which has attempted to make health care more transparent and affordable. The State Health Plan is absolutely cost prohibitive for employees with young families, another factor hurting recruitment. Health plan costs eat up all of State employee salary increases, another factor requiring employees to join SEANC and lobby together.

Mark Dearmon noted a chat question regarding privatization and historical data. Dearmon said that privatization is a fool’s errand providing short-term savings but long-term negative impacts upon services. Watkins said that empirical data bear out this observation, that the state can save money in the short-term by selling equipment related to a service. However, in the long-term, costs significantly increase while liability for services increases, even though no state employees are involved in accidents that may occur.

The Chair raised a point from the Staff Assembly regarding the current pay system, as it is currently greatly in need of an update for the state to remain competitive in local labor markets. Without this update, state hiring efforts will continue to suffer for the next 18 to 24 months until the university system has transitioned to the new classification and compensation system. Shayna Hill clarified that SEANC advocacy to the Office of State Human Resources (OSHR) would be most appropriate in this area.

Watkins noted a study that showed a greater number of positions needed reclassifications at a much higher level than previously thought. She said that these studies reinforce negative morale amongst employees who find that they give validity to feelings of being underpaid. She noted a question as to whether people hired off the street with equivalent experience and qualifications as current employees would receive significantly larger salaries, as an inducement to work. Watkins said that the SEANC membership see the current arrangement as a slap in the face to employees who have shown loyalty to the state.

In sum, Watkins has not seen action from OSHR addressing recruitment that also addresses employee retention questions. She did not see how a proposal that fails the retention piece could move forward, granting that no plan will leave everyone happy. She thought that retention is of equal importance as recruitment for positions. She also noted ongoing problems with providing affordable health care for employees and families. A chat questioner drew an analogy between the state of employees and that of customers of cable companies, which provide rewards only to new customers.

Watkins went on to criticize the notion that state government should be run like a business. She said that businesses do not typically hire new employees at a rate higher than their current workforce, then ask their current workforce to train the new hires.

Senior Associate Vice Chancellor for Human Resources Linc Butler said that the state is rolling out a new recruitment and retention bonus program this year. He noted that the lack of a career banding range is being used by departments to help with the recruitment/retention issue.

Watkins wished for firm data on vacancy rates to bring to discussions with State legislators. She hoped that the university, the Employee Forum, and SEANC could partner together to put together a report with data to this end.

The Chair noted that recruitment and retention is not simply a UNC-Chapel Hill issue and smaller universities are greatly affected by this problem. She said that UNC-Chapel Hill could use its voice to advocate for these other campuses as well. She commented that current employees who work on campus full-time are effectively receiving a pay cut compared to positions that can work from home, given fuel and parking costs. The Chair asked if there is an effort to improve the situation for those working on campus. She termed that the flexible work policy that was put out during the pandemic as reactionary with room for improvement in this area. Butler noted that the Future of Work effort had pledged to continually assess its work and remains open to these kinds of improvements.

The Chair hoped that UNC-Chapel Hill, the Employee Forum, and SEANC could find ways to cooperate on finding data on the recruitment and retention issue. Butler thought that some Human Resources personnel could be available for initial meetings. Dearmon said that the idea of a university lobbying day could increase attention to these issues in the Legislature. He hoped that the Employee Forum would be able to work on this project.

Lonnie Hawley raised a point regarding a defined benefit pool with a la carte options for health care. The Chair then thanked Watkins and Dearmon for their remarks.

At this point, Linc Butler provided the Forum’s customary Human Resources update. Butler noted that communication regarding the recent legislative increase has gone out to staff. HR is coordinating with Payroll concerning the timing of the payout, which is expected to occur in the August 12th paycheck. Monthly paid employees will receive their increase in the August 31st paycheck. All employees will receive their increases retroactive to July 1, 2022.

Butler noted that the budget bill provides a provision for labor market adjustments, allowing approximately 1% of each institution’s payroll in State funds to address targeted salary adjustments for labor market retention and other salary issues. Butler said that the University still awaits implementation guidance from OSHR and the UNC System Office. Still, this provision could be an opportunity like the salary adjustment fund which was implemented four and a half years ago. Additionally, there is a provision for a one-time discretionary bonus in this legislation. OHR awaits final guidance on all these programs.

Butler noted the frustration that he and the Forum feel given the lack of movement on career banding salary ranges. He said that the UNC System Office continues to advocate where it can. He noted challenges related to the general labor market and smaller applicant pools. Butler did mention a provision in the budget bill that provides employees the option to have legislative bonus leave paid out without waiting for separation from state government. Again, the Office of Human Resources (OHR) awaits implementation guidance on this new rule. He said that the university will look at all options, be it through an ARP process or central allocation of funds to those who are lowest paid or fall lowest below market rate levels.

The Chair asked if the university could set aside a staff retention fund specifically to help with these types of increases, in one large effort. Butler said that the University needs the full details of the program first before entering these discussions.

Butler said that OHR is working to finalize the new recruitment and retention bonus program, which will allow for a sign-on bonus for recruitment and hiring, as well as one-time retention payments. He said that OHR will educate its campus representatives to provide further information about this program.

Butler said that this program will serve as just one of the tools available to address our recruitment and retention issues. He said that a regulation is making its way to the System Office that will allow these adjustments for EHRA non-faculty as well as SHRA employees.

Butler was glad to see that employees have begun taking their new personal observance leave, an allocation that people have sought for a long time. Butler noted that the Governor’s Office has declared an end to the public health emergency related to the COVID pandemic. Several programs related to the emergency will soon end. Paid work time for employee vaccination boosters will end August 31st. Paid administrative leave for adverse reactions to vaccinations will also end August 31st. The authorization to use COVID leave bank allocations will end August 15th.

Other provisions allowing extension of temporary appointments without these employees needing to take the customary 31-day break will also end in September. OHR has worked with departments to prepare for this change.

Butler noted a chat question regarding extension of community service leave flexibility to assist children affected by COVID. Butler said that this community service leave provision ended at the end of June, with UNC-Chapel Hill having no local authority to extend this leave.

The Chair asked if employees must upload their documentation for this leave by August 31st. Butler said that he would check on this question. Matthew Teal said that the HR website specifies that submitting a documented booster card by August 31st will allow receipt of leave by March 31, 2023.

Julie Theriault reported a technical concern with uploading J&J immunizations for the COVID vaccination leave. Since the J&J vaccine only requires one shot, would the leave automatically get added or would a further upload be required? Jacob Womack said that he had helped Housekeepers go through the process of signing up for this leave. He interpreted Theriault’s comment as worrying that the second J&J shot, which is the booster for that vaccine, would not be credited. James Stamey said that the J&J booster had uploaded in the system yesterday for employees in his shop. He said the system worked correctly for the J&J booster. The Chair noted that only TIM administrators have the option to enter this leave code for employees, so employees must request use of this leave, meaning it won’t be automatically added after uploading booster documentation.

The Chair welcomed Senior Work/Life Manager Jessica Pyjas to present wellness updates for the Forum. She said that 67 employees participated in June wellness webinars and 57 participated in July. The most attended webinar was on emotional intelligence, with almost 50 attendees.

Pyjas outlined the August schedule for wellness webinars, which is available at Pyjas noted that registration for these webinars has extended to 24 hours in advance before the start of the program. Pyjas also highlighted discounts available to UNC employees to various restaurants and recreation activities. She said that there is a discount of 5% off long term care insurance offered through the Perks Connects Discount program. Group code is “Go Heels.” The Chair pledged to forward these updates to Forum delegates following the meeting.

The Chair asked that the Forum consider its consent agenda, with leave given for discussion of the Staff Assembly. Elizabeth DuBose moved that the consent agenda be approved, seconded by David Bragg. The motion was approved without opposition or abstentions.

Shayna Hill said that the Staff Assembly has passed a resolution requesting that the Office of State Human Resources support career banding during the transition to a new compensation and classification system, specifically asking that pay bands be increased, additional duties be compensated, and a working group formed to allow feedback from boots on the ground. She said that this resolution has already been forwarded to UNC System President Peter Hans. Hill also announced that the annual Forum pool party would take place at her house on Sunday, August 14th.

Moving to new business, the Chair welcomed Kira Jones to read proposed Proclamation 22-01 regarding the U.S. Supreme Court decision Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization. The Chair thanked Jones and Jacob Womack for their work to pull together this document. She looked forward to getting the group’s feedback on this proclamation.

Jones read the proclamation. Following this reading, the Chair clarified that proclamations do not require the two-reading rule as applied to resolutions. She asked for feedback on the draft proclamation. Eliza DuBose appreciated those who wrote the proclamation. She suggested including a clause regarding the decision’s placing putting women’s physical lives in jeopardy. Jones said that a footnote regarding this point is in the proclamation but said that she was open to further edits. DuBose thought that the health care system and flagship teaching hospital will be extremely negatively impacted by this decision in terms of care provided. Jones noted the difficulties in citing primary sources for each of these concerns.

Julie Theriault asked to change language from “women” to “pregnant people or people who will become pregnant.” Jones agreed with this suggestion. The Chair proposed rewording this section of the proclamation. Jones thought that this was an easy edit that could be accomplished quickly. Jacob Womack said that these edits could be made on the fly but must be tracked in the process.

Jones noted the computer versions of the document. She would do the edits while conversation continued. Eliza DuBose commented that this subject should focus on healthcare with politics discussed separately. The Chair did not think there would be any way to avoid the politics side of this conversation.

Rebecca Howell proposed restructuring the proclamation considering the recent email from campus leadership on this topic. She thought that front loading these concerns could enhance reader understanding. She thought a restructuring of the proclamation could lead to it being better received by campus administration. Shayna Hill thought that the Forum could rely on the right to free speech as the basis for the proclamation.

Julie Theriault noted a conversation with her department Chair who thought that the proclamation does well in supporting employees given the prospect of great change. She thought that proclamation presents itself well to the public. The Chair agreed that the proclamation does well to represent the Forum’s position as representative of UNC-Chapel Hill’s employees, not the University as a whole.

Members considered other extensive edits to the proclamation. Given the late time and the need to flesh out the proclamation further, the Chair asked about the possibility of the Executive Committee approving the proclamation in session later that month. Parliamentarian Jacob Womack said that the Executive Committee cannot exercise the authority of the full Forum. He said also that the Forum cannot hold a deciding vote via email.

The Chair summed up that the proclamation needs to be reconsidered in September, which she considered unfortunate due to the time-sensitive nature of the topic. Jones presented reasons why the Forum should continue the editing process to approve the proclamation in the current meeting. However, she thought that a September vote still allows some time for impact on campus. The Chair asked all those who participated in the day’s discussion to contribute to an ad hoc editing session before the next full body meeting.

Womack suggested that the Forum not engage in so many edits in an open body session. The Chair noted that the Board of Trustees and administration statements on this topic came out just recently, making it worthwhile to study the proclamation more closely.

The Chair added that the Vice Chancellor representatives’ meeting will take place Thursday, August 11th. Delegates should submit questions via the Qualtrics survey which had been distributed via email earlier that week.

The Chair called for a motion to adjourn the meeting. Elizabeth DuBose made this motion, seconded by Arlene Medder. The motion was approved, and the meeting adjourned at 11:33 a.m. The Chair thanked all for their contributions to this great conversation.

Respectfully submitted,

Matt Banks, Recording Secretary




Comments are closed.