Following the abrupt resignation of former University President Jim Ryan June 27, 2025, University-affiliated groups were not hesitant to express their opinions. Several organizations of students, faculty, staff and alumni released statements and press releases overwhelmingly supporting Ryan and condemning the Board of Visitors, claiming the Board allowed the federal government to influence University politics. Approximately one year since Ryan’s resignation, and six months since the appointment of University President Scott Beardsley and the reconstitution of the Board, many groups still remain hesitant to fully trust University leadership, and are asking it to continue investigating the events of the last year.
While many groups at the time of Ryan’s resignation commended him for his service, other groups, such as The Jefferson Council, viewed Ryan’s resignation as necessary. The Jefferson Council said it was a step in the right direction for the University and stated Ryan’s leadership “eroded intellectual diversity.”
As the search for the University’s 10th president continued into the Fall 2025 semester, many of these groups expressed frustration with the Board, criticizing its alleged lack of transparency and consideration for faculty and student representation as the search committee vetted candidates.
In January, The Cavalier Daily interviewed Clay Dickerson, Class of 2026 alumnus and former Student Council president, Jeri Seidman, outgoing Faculty Senate chair, incoming faculty representative to the Board and associate professor of commerce, Walt Heinecke, past president of the University’s chapter of the American Association of University Professors and associate professor in the School of Education and Human Development, Ann Brown, co-chair of Wahoos4UVA, Class of 1977 School of Law alumna and Class of 1974 alumna, and Joel Gardner, Jefferson Council president, Class of 1974 School of Law alumnus and Class of 1970 alumnus, to hear why they viewed it as important for their respective groups to release statements throughout the events of 2025.
But how have the views of these groups changed over the last year?
Statements released since January
From the majority of University-affiliated groups, the release of statements in the past five months has slowed. The University’s AAUP chapter has not released a statement since Jan. 6, when the group rejected the naming of Beardsley as president, calling his appointment “illegitimate and politically motivated.” The Faculty Senate also has not passed a resolution since Jan. 15, when it called for then-Gov.-elect Abigail Spanberger (D) to review actions of current Board members and remove those who have not fulfilled their duties. The Faculty Senate also requested in this resolution for a reconstituted Board to review the presidential search process and “determine the best path forward.”
Student Council also has not passed a resolution or released a statement regarding University governance since Jan. 27, when the group passed a resolution to support Beardsley in the name of stability for the University. This resolution followed a meeting between Dickerson and Beardsley, in which Beardsley committed to allocating $500,000 to the Council’s Support and Access Services branch for an additional two years, which continues funding and support formerly granted by Ryan so the SAS branch is stable through 2031.
Some University faculty alleged that a quid pro quo had occurred, but Council leaders asserted that the resolution was drafted independently from Beardsley and before the meeting between Beardsley and Dickerson took place.
Wahoos4UVA organized in support of Ryan in May 2025 and released its first two statements May 16 and May 21, 2025. Beginning in June, the group released approximate weekly messages, but in a newsletter Jan. 22, Wahoos4UVA announced it would begin releasing these newsletters monthly. However, Brown noted the group is not on a tight schedule, and beginning Jan. 22 has released three newsletters. The first explained the “next chapter of Wahoos4UVA,” stating that it would shift to the monthly newsletters to allow time to evaluate the actions of the General Assembly and changing governance at the University before jumping to publish opinions on University happenings.
March 16, the group released a newsletter following the meeting of the full Board when the Board affirmed Beardsley’s appointment and charged the Audit Committee with a review of the presidential search. The Wahoos4UVA statement said the Board acted in “reverse order” of what the Faculty Senate requested. In its January resolution, the Faculty Senate asked the Board to “determine the best path forward” after reviewing the presidential search process — Wahoos4UVA said that therefore, the Board “determined a course of action before conducting a review of the process.”
Wahoos4UVA additionally sent Spanberger a letter May 29 following her veto of House Bill 1385 and Senate Bill 494 which would have extended board members’ term lengths and required university governance boards across the Commonwealth to solidify shared governance practices at their respective institutions. This letter asked Spanberger to instate protections to maintain academic freedom for public institutions of higher education in the Commonwealth, including by issuing an executive directive to board members and the State Council on Higher Education in Virginia for board policies to commit to shared governance and act in the best interests of their institution.
Wahoos4UVA issued its most recent newsletter Friday, addressing the letter to Spanberger. Friday’s release reiterates many of the points in the May 29 letter — “there are some steps forward the governor can take on her own in the meantime to advance at least some of the goals regarding the governance of Virginia’s public colleges and universities,” Friday’s release reads.
Of these five groups — the Faculty Senate, Student Council, the University’s AAUP, Wahoos4UVA and The Jefferson Council — The Jefferson Council has released the highest number of statements since January. Its website holds approximate weekly messages and articles, expressing its beliefs that the presidential search process followed precedent, there is declining diversity of thought and expression at the University and a need to oppose rising tuition, among other issues.
The decrease in statements does not appear to correlate with increased trust in governance
University-affiliated group leaders interviewed by The Cavalier Daily in June expressed differing views on whether University governance has made strides to address the turmoil of the last year. Nonetheless, they all agreed that the University has more work to do, notably in reviewing the presidential search process.
Having served as Faculty Senate chair for the past year, Seidman has been the voice of faculty both at the time of Ryan’s resignation and across these past few months as the new Board worked to establish itself. In January, Seidman told The Cavalier Daily the Faculty Senate passed an unusually high number of resolutions last year. She said that typically, senators prefer to meet in-person with University administrators and decision-makers to directly raise concerns. Because senators were not receiving responses from leadership that adequately addressed concerns in the way they hoped last year, the resolutions became necessary, Seidman asserted in January.
Approximately six months since Seidman shared those sentiments with The Cavalier Daily, the Faculty Senate has not passed any further resolutions. Seidman said the Faculty Senate sees the Board and Beardsley working to build a relationship with senators. She added that the absence of resolutions can be attributed to the group’s hope for the relationship to continue building.
“I'm seeing signs that [the Faculty] Senate will see more of [Beardsley] in the fall … I think [the Faculty Senate was] patient this spring in allowing him time to figure things out, get his feet under him, and I think that's why you didn't see resolutions,” Seidman said. “We were hopeful and optimistic that the relationship would be built, and I do think it is being built.”
The Board also invited the Executive Council of the Faculty Senate to dinner this summer, and Seidman said the conversations between the two groups were incredibly productive. She noted that collaboration between senators and the previous Board was more limited — the Faculty Senate only ever met with one or two Board members at a time, and conversations always remained limited to 10-15 minutes, Seidman said.
“There were conversations about trust, transparency and communication, and it was a really great dinner,” Seidman said. “I think [the Faculty Senate] Executive Council felt heard, and Board members seemed really engaged, and I think they learned a lot as well. It's just another example of how this Board is really working to reestablish trust, and I think they're getting valuable information out of it as well.”
Seidman expressed overwhelming optimism and satisfaction with the actions of the new Board. Further, she pointed out that the review of the presidential search — which the Faculty Senate requested in January — remains underway by the Audit Committee. She said that similar to the Board and administration’s work to establish relationships with University constituents, it seems to her that the Board is taking the request seriously and working towards “fulfilling” the review of the presidential search.
Michael Mitchell, Student Council president and rising fourth-year Commerce student, was unable to provide comment regarding Student Council’s current trust in University governance by time of publication. However, in a separate statement to The Cavalier Daily in June, he agreed with the sentiments expressed by Seidman that there has been stabilization amongst University leadership. He further emphasized there is work to be done to continue addressing the events of the past year.
“President Ryan's departure marked the beginning of a year defined by transition and confusion, but there has been a notable stabilization across the University's leadership, from the President's office to the Board,” Mitchell wrote in June. “That said, the University is still in flux, and the work of finding solid footing is not finished.”
For WahoosforUVA, Brown said that while the group has slowed its newsletters and turned its focus largely to Spanberger and the legislative session, important questions related to the University’s events of the past year remain unanswered. Brown said a primary concern of hers is that it does not seem the Board has established sufficient principles of shared governance with faculty members.
“From what I'm observing, [faculty] remain very concerned about the breakdown in shared governance that occurred during the course [of] last spring at the University, and through the summer, and then [into] the fall,” Brown said. “That has, from what I can observe, not been resolved.”
While Seidman expressed optimism that the Board’s review of the presidential search process will unveil valuable information and ways to improve future searches at the University, Brown remained apprehensive that the review has not been completed yet. She also underscored the importance of the Board working to provide the community with the “whole story” of the last year.
“We have lost sight of the concerns that were motivating all of us last [summer],” Brown said. “In November, we were finally able to hear from Jim Ryan himself … in an extensive letter to the Faculty Senate [with] the facts as he knew them. But … his recounting has gaps because he himself was never privy to some of the key events, and one of our concerns is that here we are nearly a year later, and we don't know the whole story.”
Heinecke echoed similar sentiments, saying that the Board has not addressed four issues the AAUP views as most prominent. These include that the Board’s vote in March 2025 to dissolve the Office of Diversity, Equity and Inclusion has not been reversed, the Board and Beardsley have not challenged the University’s Oct. 22 agreement with the U.S. Department of Justice, the Board has continued to support the compliance review by McGuireWoods LLP and — in the views of the University’s AAUP chapter — the belief that the hiring process for Beardsley was politicized.
“We expected there to be much more of a challenge from the new Board on the policies that were implemented and the actions that were implemented by the [old] Board, and in essence, we feel that the new Board has made some of the old Board’s problems their own,” Heinecke said.
To contextualize Heinecke’s concern for the actions of McGuireWoods, the University said it hired McGuireWoods in June 2025 to review University policies to ensure they are in compliance with federal civil rights law. However, invoices later received via a Freedom of Information Act request and given to The Cavalier Daily by an anonymous source in December revealed that the University paid the firm over $1.8 million for its services between April and August 2025 — suggesting the University hired the firm prior to June 2025.
Regarding the group’s overall trust in University governance, the University’s chapter of the AAUP rejected Beardsley’s appointment in its most recent press release Jan. 6. Heinecke said that largely, these feelings still stand among the group. He asserted that he does not see any indication that “anything [has] changed” within University governance that would prompt a shift from this position.
Gardner — who has praised the Youngkin-appointed Board — also said he does not have full faith in the current Board, reconstituted by Spanberger. Similar to Brown and Heinecke, Gardner said the Board has necessary events to address before its trust can be fully earned. While both Brown and Heinecke said the issues to resolve include the University’s lack of DEI initiatives and attack on Ryan’s leadership, Gardner said the Board primarily needs to address an alleged lack of diversity of thought and expression on Grounds and rising tuition. The Board’s Finance Committee recently approved an average increase of University tuition by 3.6 percent April 16, effective for the 2026-27 academic year.
“I have nothing negative to say about the membership of the Board as of yet … I think a lot of fine people were chosen to be on the current Board,” Gardner said. “But the issues that are of the greatest importance, I think, to our University in today's world — which includes affordability and includes … diversity of thought — are not going to be addressed.”
While these are issues Gardner said need to be addressed, he emphasized that he does not have faith the Board will take necessary action. He characterized Board meetings as “self-congratulatory dog and pony shows by the administration,” and he said the new Board will likely continue this practice.
Ultimately, the number of statements released from groups since January has decreased. However, group leaders mostly expressed that is because they still stand by their feelings from January, or because they wanted to give the new Board and University leadership time to settle into their positions. Seidman was the only interviewed group leader who said substantial progress has been made by the Board to regain trust and establish a relationship with University constituents.
Looking ahead, Brown reiterated that the “scars from the events of [the] last year” on the community are not healed, and that the Board must do serious analysis of the last year to bring full stories to light.
“If there is not some sort of formal analysis that establishes all the facts — not just bits and pieces — then we really are still in the dark about a series of events in the history of the institution that were extremely dramatic and damaging and traumatic, frankly,” Brown said.
Lauren Seeliger is a news editor of the 137th term and enjoys covering U.Va. Health and University governance. Lauren is a fourth-year Behavioral Neuroscience student from Fairfield, Connecticut.
Read More
Six months in, how does Scott Beardsley’s early presidency compare to Jim Ryan’s?
By Luca Bailey | 6 minutes agoHere is a closer look at how Beardsley’s early tenure compares to that of his predecessor, Ryan.
Batten Dean Ian Solomon announces departure for Rockefeller Brothers Fund
By Lauren Seeliger | 2 hours agoSolomon joined Batten in September 2019 as the school’s third dean, and in 2024, the University appointed him to serve a second, five-year term.
The “One Year Series” — unpacking a year at the University since Ryan’s resignation
By Grace Little | 11 hours agoJim Ryan, former University president and School of Law professor, resigned as president June 27, 2025.
