A range of public commenters used the board's allotted time to describe a campus climate they characterized as hostile to certain students and faculty and to press trustees for changes in university policy and practice.

Faculty member David Cisneros told trustees about a tenured colleague who, he said, was targeted online after citing a United Nations report in class; Cisneros said the instructor faced reprimand rather than institutional support and urged trustees to "materially support academic freedom for all members of the university community." He asked leadership to protect faculty and students who engage in disputed but legitimate academic topics.

Samantha Levy, a student and Hillel leader, said Jewish students and faculty face a hostile environment and that campus offices have not adequately addressed more than 60 complaints filed in the spring. She urged the board to take more robust action after what she described as cursory responses from the university's Title VI office.

Nicholas Dale, who identified himself as raising disability-discrimination concerns, cited state law and the Civil Rights Remedies Restoration Act (7.75 ILCS 60/30) and said he has filed multiple public-records requests and complaints about university rules and open-meetings compliance. He told trustees the university's self-insurance liability indicates it can pay claims related to discrimination.

Student organizers including Grayson Hodgson asked the board to adopt divestment measures, arguing that tuition and investment allocations should not support fossil-fuel companies. Hodgson cited a student referendum in which he said 73% of voters supported removing tuition-linked investments in fossil fuels and urged trustees to vote on the matter.

Chair Timothy Ruiz acknowledged that trustees do listen to public comments and said the board should do a better job of demonstrating follow-up; he and other trustees said many issues raised prompt behind-the-scenes inquiries of the president, chancellors and staff.

Why this matters: Trustees are the system's governing board and public comments reflect perceptions on campus safety, academic freedom and the university's obligations under federal civil-rights laws. Speakers requested both policy changes and clearer enforcement by administrative offices.

What to watch next: Speakers asked for concrete steps such as Title VI investigations, a clearer process for protecting faculty from harassment related to classroom content, and a formal board response to student referenda on divestment. Trustees did not announce immediate policy changes at the meeting.