In a statement sent to the University Board of Visitors Jan. 15, 201 faculty members condemned the Board for its actions over the course of the search process for the University’s 10th president, beginning with former University President Jim Ryan’s resignation in June. The letter stated that the Board failed to “protect the University from outside interference,” was improperly involved with Gov. Glenn Youngkin (R), engaged in opaque negotiations with the Justice Department and rushed the presidential search. The statement also calls for the Board to be held accountable for these actions, potentially through litigative measures, and for University President Scott Beardsley’s appointment to be rescinded.
“[The Board’s Dec. 19 appointment] confirms the Board’s indifference to good procedure, long-established academic norms, stakeholder judgment and any regard for the good opinion of all participants in the process,” the statement reads. “The Board has flouted its fiduciary duties to the University and has violated its own bylaws calling on it to protect the University from outside interference.”
Religion Prof. Charles Mathewes signed and sent the statement to the Board. He said that a core group of faculty members — some of whom belong to a group that has been producing statements since former University President Jim Ryan’s resignation in June — works alongside the Faculty Senate to express widespread leadership concerns that are felt among faculty members across schools at the University.
“We just want a University that runs really well, transparently and with the kind of decency and respectability that we say we expect of our students,” Mathewes said.
The University employs approximately 3,200 full-time faculty, therefore the 201 signatories make up roughly 6.3 percent of total full-time faculty.
The statement asks for a new presidential search to be conducted, citing what the faculty see as lack of candor and legitimacy of the Board. In addition, the statement asks for the governor, attorney general and legislature to investigate the Board’s actions and pursue litigation necessary to hold the Board accountable. Currently, the Board is composed of seven Youngkin appointees, and Gov. Abigail Spanberger (D) appointed 10 new members Saturday that are awaiting approval by the General Assembly. Incoming state leadership will constitute a trifecta of control by the Democrats — a majority in both legislative chambers, plus control of the Governor’s office. Five Board members recently resigned, including former Rector Rachel Sheridan and former Vice Rector Porter Wilkinson, after being called upon by Spanberger to resign.
The statement also notes the “improper” text communications among Board members and University leadership unveiled by The Jefferson Council — a conservative alumni group — Jan. 13. According to the statement, the texts show that Youngkin was improperly involved in the Board’s activities.
“[The texts] demonstrate that Board members abused their authority, failed to act transparently and willfully subverted the process at nearly every step of the way,” the statement read. “At every step the Board has said ‘trust us, we know what you don’t,’ but now we know what they said to each other when no one else was listening, and it turns out they knew their assurances were duplicitous.”
Prior to the Jan. 15 statement, 181 University-affiliated members signed a statement Nov. 21 that was sent via email to the Board, Interim University President Paul Mahoney, Interim Provost Brie Gertler, the presidential search committee, the Faculty Senate and Wahoos4UVA. The statement endorsed the Faculty Senate’s Nov. 14 resolution calling for the Board Rector and Vice Rector’s immediate resignation. The Faculty Senate’s resolution passed by a vote of 41 for, 17 opposed and two abstained.
In its Nov. 21 letter, faculty criticized the Board’s role in Ryan’s pressured resignation and its lack of transparency in the following months. Alongside Ryan’s Nov. 14 letter describing the events leading to his resignation, faculty signatories found the differing claims made by Ryan and Sheridan to be troubling.
“After months of stonewalling and misdirection by the Board leadership … we endorse the Faculty Senate’s call for the Rector’s and Vice Rector’s immediate resignation,” the Nov. 21 letter read. “There is no way the University can move forward in a productive way so long as they are at the helm.”
According to Mathewes, the group of 201 signatories would appreciate if the Board would respond directly to the group of faculty signatories. Mathewes said he believes the Board has dismissed faculty concerns throughout the presidential search process, and that the statement is attempting to serve as a voice for students, alumni, faculty members and politicians who recognize the Board’s “insane” behavior.
Mathewes said Beardsley is the fourth president he has seen during his time at the University, and that he has become familiar with the process of transitioning between presidents. He said he hopes the University will take steps necessary to correct its current leadership — a sentiment echoed in the faculty letter which asks the University and its Board return to accordance with its founding principles.
“Board members must abide by their obligations to the institution they profess to love and serve,” the statement read. “After the disruptive events of the past year, we must return the University to the path of excellence and honor that has guided it since its founding.”




