AppState Chancellor Resigns in the Middle of the Semester

 

AppState's PR office announced yesterday that Chancellor Sheri Everts is resigning. Her last day will be this coming Friday. 

It's a sudden and unprecedented leave-taking by an administrator who was reviled, high and low. Well, maybe not in the highest places in Raleigh, but most of the AppState faculty had come to distrust her. Along with the students. In recent weeks she had been the target of repeated campus protests.

North Carolina System President Peter Hans will announce an interim chancellor before April 19.

Back on April 3rd, The Appalachian student newspaper published an editorial complaining about Everts' ill-advised initiative to buy a big building in Hickory and expand the AppState campus to that satellite location. The editorial was prophetic about her jumping ship:

Have you ever heard the expression “jump ship”? When things are getting bad so you run to another thing to escape? How about the billionaires that are attempting to leave Earth and live on another planet because Earth is becoming a toxic wasteland? See the connections yet? Everts is jumping ship, running away from the problems she caused at App State.

She continues to ignore student complaints and push back, causing chaos on the main campus, while painting everything as good. Then, she continues to put money into the Hickory Campus, advertising it as though it is as good as App State, hoping to gain more money and more students, because App State’s main campus can not hold more students.

In its coverage of her resignation, the News&Observer was more comprehensive in detailing the push-back against her at AppState:

Everts’ time as chancellor was not without controversy. In August 2020, amid the then-ongoing COVID-19 pandemic, the university’s Faculty Senate passed a vote of “no confidence” in Everts, citing a lack of competency, transparency and concern for the wellbeing of students. 

Everts was “frequently isolated from and unable to effectively communicate with faculty, and has failed in her basic tasks of strengthening institutional finances, providing goals, operating in a transparent fashion, embracing shared governance, and pulling the university community together in a common mission,” the faculty’s no-confidence resolution stated. 

More recently, Everts drew the ire of students and alumni for her decision to “upgrade” the university’s “expression tunnels” — officially, the Rivers Street tunnels — by removing the art, paint and other designs in the tunnels and adding brighter lighting and cameras to monitor the area. 

She also faced criticism by student groups, including the Appalachian State College Democrats, for a variety of actions they called “attacks on free speech and expression.”

AppState Chancellor Under Fire for Suppressing the Queer Community on Campus

 

The Appalachian State University Graduate SGA has produced a string of accusations against Chancellor Sheri Everts alleging that she is behind the suppression of "Pride Week," the banning of drag shows on campus, and the actual firing of "at least four (4) Queer & Trans Staff and Faculty" without explanation (and presumably without cause). The document actually names names of those shown the door.

Other student groups have joined the out-cry against Everts (including the ASU College Democrats, which produced its own statement of solidarity). The student groups want Pride Week restored.

Aside from their condemnation of the AppState administration (principally Everts), the students don't raise the questions that immediately come to my mind ... that perhaps Everts is merely carrying water for the Republican-heavy Board of Trustees and the even-more-laden-with-cultural-conservatives Board of Governors, who have shown some eagerness for clamping down on what they consider the too-liberal university system. Everts has seemed all too willing to please those powers and not at all susceptible to the pleas and arguments of her own student body and faculty.

She's been highly unpopular on campus for a long time. The ASU Faculty Senate passed a "no confidence" resolution about her back in 2020, but nothing much about her style of authoritarian administration has changed.

Faculty Dissatisfaction with AppState Chancellor

 

Stella Anderson

At Appalachian State University, the Chair of the Faculty Senate has always gotten time at the first general faculty meeting each fall to address the entire faculty, with the administration present, to report on problems and on-going activities that affect what is actually mandated in the operational Code for the university system, in short, something called "shared governance" (which implies input by the faculty).

The Chair of the Faculty Senate this year, Stella Anderson, had her 10-minute address ready, but she got cut off the program by Chancellor Everts. (Maybe the chancellor had gotten wind of some of the complaints Anderson intended to air.) Not only did Everts unilaterally end last Friday the tradition of the Faculty Senate Chair getting time at the podium, but she also cut out traditional addresses by the chair of the staff council and the president of the Student Government Association. In other words, nobody actually hopeful for and dependent on the promise of "shared governance" was allowed to speak. Only the Chancellor.

So shut out of that general assembly, Stella Anderson recorded her speech on video and published that on YouTube (titling it ominously "Breaking With Traditions"), and in the calmest tones, supported by a slide show, she recited an extensive laundry list of grievances about the chancellor's "lack of adherence to system policy," including the high-handed rewriting of the Faculty Handbook that ignored faculty input and which simply redounded to more power for the bosses and less for the faculty.

Anderson's bottomline: "There is nothing more fundamental to faculty when it comes to shared governance than the policies that affect faculty employment. There is no greater 'test' of shared governance than work done in drafting and revising [university] policies." 

The current reputation of Chancellor Sheri Everts on campus seems to have hit what may be rock-bottom. The consensus holds that she is breaking a trust.

AppState Town Hall: Concern About University’s Direction and Administration

By Mata Hari, guest-posting: 

“Houston, we have a problem.” This is the message about Appalachian State that concerned faculty and students delivered at a town hall held on campus on Sunday evening.

The problem lies not with the university itself, according to town hall participants, but with the administration, and specifically Chancellor Sheri Everts, whose leadership style was characterized by some speakers as “authoritarian.”

Panelists and audience members described a campus climate of “fear,” in which students are “silenced” by the administration and faculty told to “sit down and shut up.” They told stories about an administration that uses Zoom to mute open discussion, that suppresses unfavorable reports on issues like diversity, that press-gangs deans into publicly denouncing faculty views that fail to tow the administration’s line.

The town hall, which was held in Belk Library and on Zoom, was organized by Appalachian’s Student Government Association (SGA), Faculty Senate, and Staff Senate. Its theme was the university’s direction.

The town hall was opened by Faculty Senate Chair Louis Gallien. The first panelist, Richard Rheingans, a professor of Sustainable Development, put the town hall in context. The students and faculty, he observed, are the university. They fulfill the university’s mission. The institution does not exist for the sake of administrators. And yet Appalachian’s administration seems entirely focused on congratulating itself on its own (dubious) accomplishments. It does little to support students and faculty. Rheingans asked: “What do you do when leaders don’t lead?” He noted that when you’re told to “sit down and shut up”—as faculty regularly are—it usually means it’s time “to stand up and speak.”

Bailey Gardin, the current student body president, recalled the administration’s handling of the Black at App State Collective, which issued a series of demands in July 2020. Gardin described the meeting that the Chancellor held with students of color on July 21 to address these demands. He called it “one of the most traumatizing meetings I’ve ever been a part of.” Chancellor Everts packed the meeting with around 40 individuals whose involvement had not been announced to the students (and were loyal to her). The students of color were, moreover, prevented from speaking at the virtual meeting because they were muted by the administration. More recently, the administration has failed to produce a “demand tracker” to monitor its commitment to meet the demands. And last November, the administration suppressed a report by the Faculty/Staff of Color Affinity Working Group, most likely because it included information about negative experiences these faculty and staff had experienced. “Racist tactics of tokenization and gaslighting” were, Gardin stated, a hallmark of Everts’ administration.

Bekah Nielson, an App State student with the Climate Action Collaborative, expressed many students’ frustration with the university’s tepid climate goals. The university has pledged carbon neutrality by 2050, which is no more ambitious than the national goal. The administration has shown, Nielson said, a “lack of sustainability, accountability, [and] transparency.” She emphasized that in fighting for genuine sustainability, students were not “fighting against university, but fighting for our home.”

Stella Anderson, a professor of management, discussed university funding, emphasizing the importance of ensuring that public higher education was appropriately funded by the state. She noted current efforts to change the funding model that determines the allocation of state monies, but observed that this change may only be marginally beneficial to Appalachian. She emphasized the importance of funding the university’s core academic mission. She reminded the audience that Appalachian’s Athletics program is not self-sustaining, as it is funded largely by making students pay an athletics fee—a fee that all students must pay as a condition of attending the university.

Todd Carter, a newly elected member of the Boone Town Council, was the last panelist to speak. He emphasized the importance of cooperation between the town, the county, and the university, while noting the aggressive sustainability measures the town has pursued.

The tone of the meeting was refreshingly optimistic. It was evident that the faculty and students were deeply committed to Appalachian and to its educational mission. But it was equally clear how much they felt the university’s mission was stymied by Chancellor Everts’ administration.

Some faculty recalled, for instance, that they had recently conducted a survey of faculty about the university’s policies regarding the omicron variant. They communicated the results directly to the faculty. But on January 10, all seven of the university’s deans (Michael Madritch, Sandra Vannoy, Melba Spooner, Shannon Campbell, Marie Hoepfl, Marie Huff, Dean, and James Douthit) sent an email to students stating: “It has come to our attention that some faculty might be sharing misinformation about university COVID safety protocols, procedures and decision-making that are inaccurate and potentially harmful.” The deans were ordered to send this email by none other than Chancellor Everts.

More recently, Megan Hayes, the university’s chief communications officer, criticized the press release about the town hall itself. Hayes, who reports directly to Chancellor Everts, wrote the following to the town hall’s organizers (the email was shared at the meeting):

I read a news story in the Watauga Democrat this morning in which Faculty Senate, Staff Senate and SGA are described as “governing bodies” for the university.

I wanted to let you know our team is reaching out to the editor to request a correction, as this is not accurate.

Additionally, you may want to correct the graphic you are using to publicize your upcoming event on Feb. 20, as I am sure it is not your intent to mislead the constituencies you represent, the public or the media that your organizations hold governing authority, or that you represent the university in an official capacity.

 

In addition to being astonishingly petty, Hayes’ email is simply wrong. The principle of “shared governance” upon which American higher education is founded means, literally, that bodies like Faculty Senate participate in governance. In no way were any of these bodies pretending to be the university’s chief executive officer or governing board. This red herring of an argument simply shows the administration’s churlish need to suppress any voice that might contradict its own.

Of course, as several town hall participants indicated, the core problem is that Chancellor Everts, lacking any support on campus or in Boone, depends entirely on the support she receives from the campus Board of Trustees and the System Board of Governors. Every single member of these bodies (except for the SGA President, who is also a trustee) has been chosen directly or indirectly by North Carolina’s gerrymandered, Republican-controlled legislature. Objectively, Chancellor Everts serves North Carolina’s Republican politicians.

It was clear from Sunday’s meeting that this is not the last time the university’s faculty and students will meet to press for their vision of the university. 

Sheri Everts Accused of COVID Mismanagement

 

I've been hearing for literally weeks about AppState faculty's beef with Chancellor Sheri Everts about her lax policies regarding COVID, especially considering the current spike in Omicron which has coincided with the opening of the spring semester and in-person teaching. The faculty I hear from -- and see mentioned now in the press -- allege that Everts is unresponsive to faculty questions and complaints and -- worse -- simply absent from any collegial conversation about the best plague decisions. Faculty say Everts now goes into an automatic "defensive crouch" when challenged about anything -- which is just another form of hiding out.

What does the majority of faculty want? A recent faculty survey found that some 63.5% of the 441 faculty respondents said the university’s current COVID protocols will not allow the university “to continue to function normally, in a manner that permits them to provide a high-quality education to all of our students, without disruption, for the full spring semester” [reporter Joe Killian]. And...

Nearly 63% said they think it is either likely or very likely they will have to move their courses entirely online in the next few weeks due to COVID infections.

Overwhelming majorities also supported allowing faculty members to control the mode of instruction in their classes, requiring proof of vaccination or a negative PCR test for admission to all on-campus events and requiring all students, regardless of vaccination status, to undergo testing prior to the start of the semester.

The majority of respondents — 76% — said they would be willing to hold courses online for the first few weeks of the semester, until the current omicron-driven surge of infections peaks.

...so far the university’s administration hasn’t been willing to take any of the suggested steps.

AppState's protocol for COVID
accused of being mainly PR

Everts' fear of her own faculty -- or her ingrained disdain for them -- possibly goes back a couple of years (some would say farther than that):

Tensions between Everts and students and faculty at App State have been escalating since August 2020. At the time, the university’s Faculty Senate voted “no confidence” with regard to Evert’s leadership, over the campus’s handling of COVID-19. A no confidence vote is rare in UNC System history. [Joe Killian]

Killian also reports on an open letter that a prof of sustainable development (who also happens to be a former health economist with the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention) sent to all students, alleging that the university is “failing to provide the leadership, guidance and support that students, faculty and the broader community needs”; followed by a mass email response to students from Everts' office alleging that the prof was peddling "misinformation"; which provoked followup questions to Everts' office from the press and from faculty demanding "what misinformation?"; and then finally an attempt at explanation from Everts' flack sent to reporter Killian that does not pass the smell-test among faculty.

Stella Anderson, a professor of management, said that Everts' administration is the worst case of mismanagement she's seen in her 29 years at the university. “It’s an unmitigated disaster,” Anderson said. “The administration and leadership failures and bone-headed communication is really astounding .... I’ve been at the table for a lot. I know good management and leadership and I know when I’m not seeing it.”

The chair of the AppState faculty senate offered the best explanation for Everts' intransigence: political shit ineluctably rolls downhill:

“The era we’re living in now in North Carolina higher education history is truly a hegemony,” Dr. Louis Gallien said. “You have a majority of Republican legislators who appoint the Board of Governors. The Board of Governors in turn appoint the Boards of Trustees. The Board of Trustees and the Board of Governors choose the chancellor. So you have a hegemonic philosophy of leadership and management those groups have. And it is not totally in sync with traditional shared governance principles.”

Sheri Everts is not about to buck the real bosses.

Hegemony, incidentally -- the word -- is just a fancy academic way to say "the power derived from the inability of any group to think and act independently."

It All Comes Down to Sheri Everts

Last Wednesday, Oct. 27th, some ambitious faculty members at Appalachian State University -- alarmed by the chancellor's governing style and her administration's evident ambition to bend town government to the maximum benefit of ASU -- invited everyone from the university and everyone from the non-university community to come to a town hall in the county library and air both grievances and potential solutions for a major university's tendency to eat the town of Boone. The town hall was organized by ClimAct, a student environmental club, and the Appalachian State chapter of the American Association of University Professors (AAUP). Clark Maddux, American Studies specialist, presided.

Today the High Country Press published both a detailed account of the town hall and a response to the criticism submitted by Megan Hayes, Associate Vice Chancellor and Chief Communications Officer for ASU -- Chancellor Sheri Everts' flack. You have to scroll way down for Hayes's answer to the townhall, though you may end up wondering why she would have taken the time for this, pablum-stained wallpaper about how Chancellor Everts has lots of meetings with lots of university groups. And she'll keep on meeting.

In that same High Country Press article, and following Megan Hayes's non-answer to the mounting criticism, Clark Maddux answers Hayes:

“Whenever any faculty member, or group of faculty members, decides that we are going to do anything that could appear faintly critical of the chancellor, the Board of Trustees or the Board of Governors, we ask ourselves, do we need to hire a lawyer? And what is she or what is the board going to do in retaliation? That says a lot about the environment that she creates … She’s had six years to become a partner with this community. And all of the so-called conversations and listening sessions and programs that she holds have clearly not done that. She has not created a partnership with this community. And so I think it’s up to faculty who care about the community to do that.”

An environment of retaliation. 

I know faculty members who are visibly squeamish about any show of political thought -- even bumperstickers on their cars, or receiving email from hell-raisers like me. They often express outright fear that the administration will notice and come down on them. While well known members of the Board of Trustees feel perfectly free to strut their political stuff.

Town Hall Condemns Appalachian State’s Unresponsiveness to Local Concerns

 

What impact is Appalachian State having on Boone? 

This was the question explored by a town hall held last night in the Evelyn Johnson Room of the Watauga County Public Library. The event was sponsored by the Appalachian State chapter of the American Association of University Professors and ClimAct, a local environmental group. The room was packed, with over forty citizens in attendance and that many more joining via Zoom.

The town hall left little doubt that there is a lot of concern—from community members, students, and faculty—that the university may be adversely impacting Boone and the surrounding area. Kellie Reed Ashcraft of the Watauga Compassionate Care Initiative noted that Boone’s poverty rate is significantly higher than the state average. There was a lot of worry expressed about the university’s aggressive enrollment growth goals. Many noted that the town is increasingly full of shoddy housing and that it is expensive, too, forcing many people who work in Boone to seek housing elsewhere. Some students bemoaned that App State is becoming a degree mill, and that reckless growth is resulting in lower quality of students, diminishing the quality of an Appalachian degree. One participant quoted Edward Abbey to chastise the university’s priorities: “Growth for the sake of growth is the ideology of the cancer cell.”

Frustration was also expressed about the university’s lack of responsiveness to the Boone community, even to answer questions. At one point, the question was asked: “Who has even met Sheri Everts [the App State Chancellor]?” Only a few hands were raised. Many noted that the core problem is that Everts owes her $375,000 annual salary to the UNC Board of Governors in Chapel Hill—and that the Board is the only constituency she really cares about. Needless to say, the Board is appointed entirely by the Republican majority in the General Assembly.

Finally, some attendees pointed out that, on top of everything else, the recent revelations about App Pac and the lavish donations by two members of the App State Board of Trustees suggest that the university is now trying to buy the Boone Town Council. What a convenient way to get land owned by the university rezoned to meet its interests—and those of wealthy real estate developers.

Enough is enough, it was decided. App State used to be the pride of Boone. But, as one resident pointed out in one of the evening’s most moving testimonials, the university is now exploiting the local population, forcing out people who have lived in the region for generations.

The event’s organizers promised that more was soon to come.

AppState Denies Any Involvement in the Appalachian PAC

 

On Monday, Oct. 11, AppState political science major Adam Zebzda addressed a letter to the university administration "respectfully requesting" an investigation into the involvement of two AppState trustees in the launch of a political action committee (PAC) whose stated goal is to take over Boone town government for the betterment of the real estate industry and housing developers. I have a copy of that letter.

 

Zebzda wanted answers about whether "any Trustees violated North Carolina General Statutes or the UNC Policy Manual and Code, either explicitly or in spirit, which govern the political involvement of public State officials…."

 

Quickly the deputy general counsel for Chancellor Sheri Everts answered Zebzda in a two-page denial on Oct. 12, quick turnaround for a bureaucracy! (I also have a copy of that letter.) There's been no untoward political activity by the two trustees nor by Appalachian State University, wrote the deputy. 

 

Much of his denial seemed based on the photograph of the two trustees that was published on this site: 

 

The deputy counsel wrote: "Their only involvement seemed to be that they were photographed together. The photograph further illustrates that neither of these individuals wore any indicia of Appalachian State University affiliation and were pictured talking to each other and not candidates or officers of App-PAC."

 

The wording is interesting: "Their only involvement." The flat denial implied by that word choice gets undercut immediately by "seemed to be," which made me flash on the university's Latin motto: To Be Rather Than To Seem. The physical evidence in this case is a "seems," at least for the deputy counsel, and is utterly without substance. (But the involvement of high-ranking university officials in a PAC was never the implication of an otherwise innocent photograph. It's the stuff that stands well outside the view of any camera that concerns us. And the lawyer's argument is silly.)

 

None of it matters, anyway, because the deputy counsel hurries to his main point: The rules against political activity applies to employees, not to trustees (tiers of power):

 

"…this North Carolina law only applies to employees, as it is entitled Political Activity of Employees. Trustees are not Appalachian State University employees." 

 

Flatly stated, the two trustees are entitled to their political activity. I certainly agree with that. The question for me was always this: Does their political activity represent political policy for the university?

 

The deputy counsel says "no."

 

"To be clear, App-PAC is not affiliated with the University. Most importantly, the University is not affiliated, not associated, not connected and otherwise not part of the PAC in any way, especially when individuals, whether they be faculty, staff or students, are permitted to attend these types of political events on their own time."

 

I accept that categorial denial and wonder why the chancellor did not also say this at the ASU faculty senate meeting last week. I've apparently been roundly condemned on campus for publishing that Zoom clip of Chancellor Everts remaining mute (and not a little miffed) when asked the direct question about university knowledge of or involvement in the Appalachian PAC. If her silence did not signal guilt, then I have to assume it's just arrogance and irritation at being questioned about anything at all, ever.

 

That's now the corporate style at AppState.

 

And the overriding question behind all this controversy remains: What are AppState ambitions in Boone regarding real estate development, and what kind of levers of power can they marshal for those ambitions?

AppState Chancellor Stonewalls Questions About AppPAC

 

The footage below, shot with a cellphone during Monday's AppState faculty senate meeting on Zoom, captures two different moments when Chancellor Sheri Everts shrugged off the chance to say anything about the Appalachian PAC, which claims it will endorse candidates for the Boone town council who wish to advance "University prosperity." Warning: the sound quality is very poor, so turn up your volume.

At the beginning of the clip, a male questioner can be heard asking for any explanation of the AppPAC. Chancellor Everts maintains a stony if slightly irritated silence after the man mentions trustees Mark Ricks and Tommy Sofield. Then we hear a female voice asking the same question, getting nothing but silence and shrugs, and so she repeats the question. You can judge the chancellor's silence/curious lack of interest for yourself.

Sauce for the Goose Ain't Necessarily Sauce for the Gander

 

Guest Post by Mata Hari

Can App State trustees help "launch" a political action committee (PAC) designed to influence municipal elections in Boone? Especially in view of this: On August 26, ASU’s General Counsel, Paul Meggett, sent a harshly worded four-page document to faculty and staff warning against “Political Activities of Employees, Candidacy for Elective Office; Office Holding (Elective and Appointive Public Office) and Free Speech and Free Expression.” It stated the following (among other fine points):

“No employee may use his or her position, state or university funds, services (including mail or email service), supplies (including letterhead), equipment (including telephones and computers), vehicles or other university property to support or oppose a candidate, party or issue in an election involving candidates for office. See, N.C. Gen. Stat. §126-13 (applicable to SHRA employees); see, UNC Policy 300.5.1 (applicable to EHRA employees).”

There are perfectly sound reasons for such policies. But as Meggett also notes, being a “state employee does not mean you lose your constitutional rights to participate (or not participate) as you desire in the political process as long as such participation is not on work time and does not involve the use of university property.”

Were two AppState trustees violating at least the spirit of the "no politics" clause? Worth noting -- section 101.4 A 5 of the UNC Code (the governing document for the whole university system) clearly intends to keep service to the UNC System and electoral politics separate.

Ethics is as much about avoiding the appearance of conflict of interest as it is about breaking the law. Chancellor Everts and Provost Norris implied, at the Faculty Senate meeting on Monday, that they knew nothing about App Pac. Shouldn’t the Boone community be skeptical when the chancellor and provost say they never discussed with App State trustees a plan to elect a town council that is favorable to the university’s real estate interests?

Better Keep Your Children Indoors! The BOG Is Coming to Boone

UNC BOG Chair Harry Smith

The feudin', fussin', and fightin' Board of Governors (BOG) of the University of North Carolina System will hold its next meeting this Thursday and Friday on the campus of Appalachian State University (Plemmons Student Union). The BOG bears a certain justifiable resemblance to an institutional wrecking crew, chaired as it is by Uncle Fester lookalike Harry Smith.

Smith leads a band of hard-edged conservatives -- all appointed by the Republican overlords in the General Assembly -- and he's a bloodhound for sniffing out people who won't be missed. He just succeeded in getting rid of the chancellor of Eastern Carolina University, Dr. Cecil Staton, following closely his successful defenestration of UNC-Chapel Hill Chancellor Carol Folt and UNC System President Margaret Spellings.

Forcing out Dr. Staton at ECU in the last week opened a public fissure on the BOG. Member Steve Long has issued a public letter denouncing his chairman as a petty meddler who relentlessly grinds his axes to the detriment of higher education in North Carolina. According to Long, Smith's vendetta against Chancellor Staton consisted of a "long-running campaign of false accusations and irrational attacks" based on Smith's failure to reap a profit from the students at ECU: "Harry Smith has been seeking the Chancellor’s removal ever since Chancellor Staton and his trustees rejected in 2016 Mr. Smith’s proposal to buy an apartment complex near ECU if the University would change its housing policy." The sordid topic of coin in the age of the Trumpists.

Making a profit seems very much uppermost in the philosophy of Harry Smith, as is keeping the symbols of white supremacy manifest in an old bronze statue. Wonder how he feels about Chancellor Sheri Everts' successful application for certifying AppState student IDs for the purposes of voting. Is that a strike against her? Smith doesn't seem like the sort of political operative who would be interested in encouraging student activism at the ballot box. In fact, we wonder if any discussion will focus on the fact that 12 of the institutions in the UNC System just had their students significantly disabled from their access to the polls.

Thomas Shanahan: Free Sheri Everts!

ASU Chancellor Sheri Everts

News leaking out of Raleigh suggests that the issue of certifying university IDs for the purposes of voting is as FUBAR as anything has ever been under the ministrations of the Republican overlords in the General Assembly.

Because some of the universities (a numerical minority, as we understand it) in the 16-member UNC System can't meet the requirements of the "attestation" form -- principally in the matter of allowing "selfies" for the photo -- UNC General Counsel Thomas Shanahan is forcing all the universities to refrain from signing, which will inevitably disadvantage and potentially disenfranchise thousands of students who otherwise would qualify for using their student IDs.

Appalachian State University is one of those universities that meet the requirements of the attestation form, but Chancellor Sheri Everts is clinging to the Thomas Shanahan "company line" and refusing to sign. She's received hefty raises from the conservative corps running the Board of Governors, and she's not likely to step out of line in support of her own students' constitutional rights. Instead, she promises to help students get a free ID, we assume by giving them the address and open hours of the DMV or the local Board of Elections.

Shanahan seemingly wants changes made to the attestation form, which would require changes to the law itself, which the Berger/Moore overlords are not going to do. So it's very likely at the moment that every student at every UNC-affiliated institution is about to be disenfrancised from using their student IDs to vote. Most severely impacted will be the students with out-of-state drivers licenses and students with no drivers licenses at all.

Shanahan could free up Chancellor Everts to sign the attestation form for AppState. Why won't he? Or she could simply refuse to toe the company line. Why won’t she? Perhaps because if some of The Sixteen sign the attestation, it will establish the tilted ground of uneven treatment under the law, which will provoke more lawsuits.

'Course, not allowing any of The Sixteen to sign is going to play into an existing lawsuit that's already challenging the constitutionality of the entire photo ID law.

Memo to Thomas Shanahan: Putting the constitutional rights of thousands of UNC-system students in jeopardy will not save the university system from itself.

What Kim Strach Said to UNC's Thomas Shanahan on Thursday

SBOE Exec. Dir. Kim Strach

Early last week, UNC System General Counsel Thomas Shanahan -- having taken heat over his negative interpretation of his 16 universities' ability to sign an "attestation" form about using student IDs for voting, finally asked for an interpretation of the law from the NC State Board of Elections (SBOE). An interpretation by the SBOE stands as the final authority. It can only be challenged in the courts or through a re-write of the law.

Reproduced below is the three-page letter from State Board of Elections (SBOE) Executive Director Kim Strach answering Shanahan's interpretation of the attestation form. He's just wrong on all points save one. Namely:

1. Shanahan has asked: Are methods used to collect vital information from university employees (non-students) sufficient for issuing IDs? By Federal statute, info includes citizenship, date of birth, and Social Security numbers. Answer yes.

2. Are universities obliged to ask their students to verify -- prove -- their date of birth, citizenship status, and Social Security number in order to qualify for a photo ID? No. You're confusing voter registration with photo ID. Director Strach's exact words: "We do not view the statute to require the college or university to substitute its judgement for that of the elections administration apparatus whose role it is to monitor the voter rolls across the State."

3. Shanahan: What if not all students provide a SSN, date of birth, or citizenship status during the enrollment process? Don't chancellors have to sign “Under penalty of perjury"?  Can we re-write that "under penalty of perjury" part? Answer: No. There just has to be a process by which evidence of identity is requested. If you're satisfied with a student's identity sufficient to enroll him, you're good for issuing an official photo ID.

4. Are "selfies" submitted by the students sufficient for use on a photo ID card? No. Photographs must be taken by the institution or its contractors. (This ruling will affect half a dozen high enrollment institutions (including NC Central, UNC-Charlotte, UNC-Greensboro, Pembroke, UNC-Wilmington, and Western Carolina), which will need to change their procedures.)

5. Can an institution issue a separate and special photo ID for voting purposes if it wants to? Answer: Sure.

Burning Questions for Thomas Shanahan:

1. Will you share -- have you already shared -- this letter with the 16 chancellors? Because in the specific instance of Appalachian State University, Chancellor Everts' spokeswoman was still spouting two days ago what appear to be official negative talking points about student photo ids -- talking points that are now proven totally wrong for ASU students by SBOE's official ruling.

2. Did those negative talking points used by Chancellor Everts (and other chancellors?) come directly from Shanahan? ("There's just so many stumbling blocks to certifying student IDs for voting, and wouldn't it be okay just to send them down to the Board of Elections at the courthouse to have their photo taken and their voting ID made?") Kim Strach's letter clears those stumbling blocks (except for the issue of "selfies," which is just sensible).

3. Are you prepared to accept the reality that all 16 universities can't be uniform in their practices, and that that's okay? Only on the issue of "selfies" is there no flexibility for method and practice.

The Kim Strach letter dated last Thursday:

Group Petitioning ASU Chancellor to Sign "Attestation" Form

The Watauga Voting Rights Task Force (VRTF), the group that successfully sued in 2014 and again in 2016 to return early voting to the AppState Student Union, has mounted a petition to AppState Chancellor Sheri Everts, urging her to sign the Board of Elections "attestation" form which would certify student photo IDs as appropriate for the purposes of voting.

Taking her cues from the UNC Board of Governors (and specifically from UNC General Counsel Thomas C. Shanahan), Everts has been dragging her feet about the form and signaling that she has no intention of signing it. She got "cover" from Shanahan last Friday when he told a group from the Faculty Assembly that in his opinion no UNC constituent institution could sign the form.

The lawyers for the Voting Rights Task Force, among others, think that Shanahan is just wrong, that he has decided to apply a blanket disability because of some problems at a handful of colleges over official student photos. Those problems do not exist at AppState. Nor at a majority of the institutions including UNC-Chapel Hill.

Student Government at AppState is also getting active in this fight, which appears far from over as the March 15th deadline date looms closer.

Tom Shanahan, The Man at the Top of Disallowing UNC System Student IDs for Voting

In our attempt to discover what specific concerns AppState Chancellor Sheri Everts has with the "attestation form" discussed extensively down-column, we have been told multiple times by ASU's Chief Communications Officer that Chancellor Everts has never received the form. (For a university leader who has never received the form, she's not been shy in raising specific objections to various parts of the language in the form.)

What Everts' spokeswoman means, apparently, is that the form has never been officially delivered from the man who has been holding onto it, Thomas C. Shanahan, Senior Vice President and General Counsel for the UNC System. Has Shanahan failed to provide a copy of the attestation form to all the chancellors of the constituent universities? If not, how can those same chancellors assert the supposed ways in which their universities cannot comply with the form when/if they have not yet received it? And why haven't the chancellors simply asked for a copy? (We were able to get it in short order from the State Board of Elections and reproduce it once again below.)

Shanahan received the form from its authors at the State Board of Elections with a commitment it would be distributed to all the universities. Instead, Shanahan has kept it to himself (though clearly everyone on this green earth has seen it by now). He has then clearly issued talking points and orders to chancellors, generic talking points that obviously don't apply to all institutions.

(Note: When the voter photo enabling law was being discussed in the General Assembly, according to Gerry Cohen who was often in the room, he heard "representations" that "student IDs would comply" with the new requirement. Who made those representations? Someone from Tom Shanahan's office? Inquiring minds want to know.)

You have to ask yourself, "Why would Shanahan hold onto the form?" That question was partially answered on Friday when Shanahan told a gathering of UNC faculty that none of the constituent universities could meet the requirements. None? Shanahan emphasized the few institutions that allow students to submit "selfies" for the photo on their IDs, but that's not nearly all including AppState (which takes official ID photos at a secure location).

We hear that Shanahan is planning a press conference this week to announce his decision that no UNC System photo ID will work for voting. He's laying down his interpretation of the law in an authoritative way, backed by a conservative-majority Board of Governors who have their own authoritative issues and who have displayed open hostility to student rights including the right to vote and who apparently have no problem setting up the 16 chancellors as collateral damage.

People need to be at that press conference. We'll let you know when we see it announced.

AppState Hires Itself a Lawyer (With Bonus Intercepted Email)

ASU Chancellor Sheri Everts announced on Tuesday that she had hired Paul Meggett, "a former law professor and interim dean at UNC-Charlotte," as her general counsel (following the retirement of former counsel Dayton Cole). Everts also said that Meggett "spent more than a decade in a dual, in-house counsel role as associate general counsel for the UNC Health Care System and as Assistant University Counsel for the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill."

What she didn't say about Meggett appeared in an email from an ASU distinguished faculty member that went to several fellow faculty members:  

"Did you hear that the newly hired General Counsel at ASU - Paul Meggett - is coming from the position of Interim Dean of the Charlotte Law School, a for-profit school that closed last August due, in part, to multiple suits by former students and a suit from a former faculty member claiming that the school defrauded the government out of $285 million by "admitting hundreds of unqualified students, then manipulating records to keep them enrolled so the school could collect their government-backed tuition." Why is ASU hiring administrators - Terry Rawls was another - who come from for-profit institutions that have been in legal trouble? Something we should be concerned about?"

As a matter of record, while other law schools have closed in recent years due to declining enrollment and other difficulties, the Charlotte School of Law is the only one that has closed following actions by its regulators such as the NC Attorney General's office, the US Department of Education, and the American Bar Association. "Its parent company also owns two other law schools that are in the same death spiral."

Chancellor Everts' announcement said that Meggett was a "law professor and interim dean at UNC-Charlotte," implying (logically) that he was a law professor and interim dean of the law school at UNC-C. But UNC-C doesn't have a school of law.

Faculty at ASU are asking, "Was that deliberate obfuscation of Meggett's background" or an honest mistake? Or did Meggett misrepresent his background?

#FireFour

The only way we get rid of Bill Aceto and Nancy Owen on the Watauga County Board of Elections is to elect Roy Cooper as governor.

The only way we get rid of Stacy C. Eggers IV ("Four") as county attorney is to change the County Commission.

Below is the visible result of the latest Four Eggers directive to Aceto and Owen about the BOE:

Four advised his Republican puppets that they could legally cancel a regularly scheduled monthly meeting of the BOE. Raleigh experts in election law say he's wrong. The general counsel for the SBOE so far has remained silent.

When has Four Eggers been right? He was wrong about combining all the Boone precincts into one "super precinct." He was wrong about disenfranchising ASU students, first, by ordering no Early Voting site at all on the ASU campus in 2014, which Judge Stephens in Wake County slapped down as unconstitutional, and then he was wrong for pushing Aceto to choose Legends as the early voting site for the 2016 primary, which the SBOE slapped down in February, and then again he was wrong for insisting on Legends for this fall's election, which the chancellor slapped down yesterday. 

He was wrong about the SBOE's having jurisdiction over early voting in Watauga and was the laughing stock among lawyers last Thursday in Raleigh for even suggesting it.

He was wrong to get his own brother appointed chair of the Watauga BOE. He was wrong to run  both the BOE, via his brother, while also serving as county attorney. He was wrong to serve as attorney for both Watauga and the Town of Beech Mountain and to enter those parties into a notorious water deal that got slapped down by the County Commission after the citizens protested.

Aceto and Owen should be removed from office for failure to do their job and for intentional discrimination against a class of voters. Four Eggers should be fired for manipulating Aceto and Owen and for casting a pall of corruption over Watauga County for the last four years.

Aceto & Owen Boycott Their Own Meeting

At 5 p.m. today, Democrat Stella Anderson was at the regularly scheduled meeting of the Watauga Board of Elections, while Chair Bill Aceto and other Republican Nancy Owen boycotted. Now they're not doing their job at all ... out of spite? because the ASU Chancellor had just announced that the Student Union would be an Early Voting site.

Photo by Garrett Price, Watauga Democrat

Bill Aceto's Newest Letter to Chancellor Everts

Thanks to the Watauga Democrat for publishing on its site the three-pager signed by Bill Aceto, which reaches new heights of unintentional irony:

1. First paragraph misrepresents the motion that the State Board of Elections voted on, which was this:

“Move that we adopt the plan I will refer to as the Bill Aceto Plan with the following caveats: if the Chairman of the Watauga County Board of Elections cannot secure in writing from the Chancellor, or Counsel to the Chancellor, permission by the Appalachian State University to use the Legends site within five calendar days [making the deadline Tuesday, Sept. 13, 5 p.m.], then Plemmons Student Union will automatically be used. Further: If permission cannot be obtained from ASU within 5 days -- written permission by the Chancellor, or Counsel to the Chancellor, to the Chairman of the Watauga County Board of Elections -- then Plemmons Student Union will be substituted in all places where the Aceto Plan calls for ASU Legends.”

2. "tremendous partisan pressure" -- Since Aceto holds all the reins of power RE ballot access in Watauga County, I guess that would make him an expert on that particular subject.

3.  The Molly Hundley opinion. She spoke against the Student Union as an Early Voting site as though someone were forcing her to use that site. No one was (or is) forcing her.

4. Ha! He quotes at length a comment by "Mike D" posted on this blog. (Ah, shucks!) He does not put into his letter to Everts an anonymous comment in response to "Mike D," which I think is an appropriate response:

Anonymous said...

Mike D., you have really jumped the shark this time. What a load of fantastical crap ... "shadowy doorways" ... "speak-easy or an unlicensed physician or a fortune teller." Good lord, man. You're straining for crazy comparisons to prop up an indefensible attempt to make voting more difficult for ASU students. Just be honest about it. You and Aceto are perfectly willing to reduce the numbers of student voters to protect your favored office-holders or promote your favorite office-seekers.

 5. Aceto once again attacks former Watauga elections director Jane Anne Hodges, implying that her destruction of electioneering complaints is the reason no electioneering complaints exist (other than Anne Marie Yates' purely partisan comments): "Many of the written complaints regarding this site [Student Union] were not maintained by the previous county elections director, but the absence of these reports does not mean they do not exist." If there's one thing I've learned from Judge Judy, their absence does mean that they don't exist.

6. "the uncompromising insistence by Ms. Anderson" -- Is the uncompromising pot calling the uncompromising kettle black?

7. "desire to gain partisan advantage through a site" -- As opposed to your desire to gain partisan advantage through a site as far away from the center of student life as you can lawfully place it and still be on the campus?

8. "To yield to the very vocal and insistent demands of partisan activists demanding the Student Union site would make you the instrument of those partisan activists." Did Aceto just call Chancellor Everts a "tool"? I believe he did.

Those of us who have been fighting Bill Aceto and his boss Four Eggers and Four Eggers's baby brother Luke Eggers for over three long years to ensure fair and free elections in Watauga County know a tool when we see one. Judge Stephens of the Wake Superior Court could also recognize intentional discrimination, and that's why Bill Aceto is so desperate that he would sign such a nasty letter (whether he wrote it or not).