Interim UNC-Chapel Hill leader tries to address concerns about Silent Sam settlement
While questions still linger about the settlement between the UNC System and the N.C. Sons of Confederate Veterans on Silent Sam, UNC-Chapel Hill interim Chancellor Kevin Guskiewicz tried to offer some answers Friday.
In a letter to the campus community, Guskiewicz explained that members of the Board of Governors negotiated and approved the settlement, which included a $2.5 million payment for the SCV to preserve and display the Confederate statue, through its governance committee. That committee met in private to discuss the solution before the lawsuit was filed.
The settlement was also reviewed by the North Carolina Attorney General’s office, but Guskiewicz said the deal was not presented to him or the UNC Board of Trustees for approval.
The university was asked to transfer money to the system for the charitable trust that would hold the $2.5 million. The money came from “unrestricted accumulated earnings,” Guskiewicz said.
No state-appropriated funds, tuition dollars, student fees or current unrestricted gifts from donors were used for the payment, Guskiewicz said. This is how UNC pays for most legal settlements, he said.
The letter from Guskiewicz came about a week after the announcement of the settlement that some say poses a threat to campus safety and that prompted a protest on campus. Hundreds of students, faculty and alumni were outraged by the decision. Some said that it shows the university is supporting white supremacists instead of students.
Issues of racism persist, Guskiewicz says
Guskiewicz said he understands, appreciates and empathizes with those who oppose the $2.5 million payment that the SCV will use to preserve and display the Confederate monument. He reiterated that the goal of keeping the statue off campus was accomplished, but the work isn’t done.
“The settlement ensures the monument will never return to campus, but issues of racism and injustice persist, and the University must confront them,” Guskiewicz said. “I now want to focus on our shared values of diversity, equity and inclusion, and I will continue to reject and condemn those individuals or groups who seek to divide us. We have a lot of work to do to thoroughly address and reconcile with our past.”
Guskiewicz announced he will establish a fund that will “more comprehensively support the important work necessary to boldly transform our campus and build our community together.”
UNC spokeswoman Joanne Peters Denny said the university is still finalizing what that money will go toward. She didn’t provide any details on the amount of money, where it would come from or how it would be used.
Guskiewicz directed people to a frequently asked questions page that addresses the settlement.
On Friday afternoon, Guskiewicz said at a faculty council meeting that UNC knew there were multiple options being considered over the past several months. Campus leaders learned about the possibility of a settlement about a week before the lawsuit, he told faculty, adding that the only details he received in the days leading up to the settlement were about what the amount of the payment from UNC might be.
Lawyers question settlement deal
While it’s clear the UNC System and UNC Chapel Hill are trying to move past the issue, two lawyers are arguing that the board’s action was against policy.
Durham attorney Greg Doucette said a problem is that there was no vote by the full Board of Governors to approve the settlement or to refer the matter to the governance committee.
His interpretation of the UNC Policy Manual is that “only the full Board of Governors can settle potential litigation,” except in certain circumstances where it’s delegated to the governance committee, he wrote in a Twitter thread on the issue. Doucette argues the committee did not have “delegated authority to approve settlement,” he wrote.
Hampton Dellinger, former state deputy attorney general for North Carolina, also questioned the deal’s validity on Twitter.
“UNC rules say only the full Board of Governors (not a smaller committee) can settle a lawsuit that involves more than $. Silent Sam involves $ AND the monument. Is there any evidence the full Board approved settlement before it was reached? If not, how is deal valid?,” he wrote.
Five BOG members were tasked with finding a solution for Silent Sam, but they are not the members of the governance committee. Darrell Allison, Jim Holmes, Wendy Murphy, Anna Nelson and Bob Rucho were supposed to consult with UNC-CH leaders and present a plan to the full Board of Governors.
The group never held a public meeting to discuss the statue or what options it was considering and never presented a plan to the full board at a public meeting.
None of the board members have responded to requests for comment.
Nor have UNC System officials provided responses to questions about why a settlement was reached on a lawsuit that hadn’t been filed yet, how that agreement came about, how long negotiations had been happening between the system and representatives of the N.C. Sons of Confederate Veterans or what was discussed in the governance committee meeting.
This story was originally published December 6, 2019 at 4:02 PM.
