Categories
News

Higher ed scholar says Sullivan reinstatement ‘unprecedented’

Leaf to the back of University of Georgia sociology professor Joseph Hermanowicz’s 2011 book The American Academic Profession: Transformation in Contemporary Higher Education, and you’ll find a familiar name.

A few weeks ago, Teresa Sullivan’s contribution to the book, an essay on the institutional importance of university faculty that was written while she was still provost at the University of Michigan, might have been called thoughtful. Well-reasoned. Insightful, even.

Now, it’s hard to call it anything but prescient.

“As funding becomes tighter, and as the timeline for decision making grows shorter, decision making is likely to become more centralized, with fewer opportunities for input,” she wrote. “Under these conditions, administrators are likely to become more reliant on specialists in finance.”

But faculty input is key, Sullivan said—even though it’s increasingly under threat.

“Shared governance is the tenet of the academic profession that may be in the greatest jeopardy,” her conclusion reads. “Maintaining professional solidarity in the face of intellectual diversity and shifting loyalties between discipline and university may prove to be the most difficult task for the faculty.”

Professors at UVA, at least, have proved to be the exception. Their fierce, organized pushback in the wake of the forced resignation of their well-liked president gained national attention, and ultimately, their relentless pressure and ability to rally other members of the University community was the driving force behind the Board’s decision to reverse its decision and reinstate Sullivan.

But can they keep their momentum and spin a public victory into a more permanent expanded role in UVA’s governance?

Blindsided
It’s safe to say George Cohen had no idea what he was in for when he became chairman of the Faculty Senate on June 1. The genial law professor was nine days in and enjoying a family vacation in San Diego when the news of Sullivan’s resignation hit.

“I certainly spent more time in my hotel room on my iPad than I’d intended,” he said. Days later, he returned to a university already in an uproar, and presided over what was probably the most well-attended meeting of the Faculty Senate in UVA’s history.

The faculty, and especially the Senate leadership, spoke out early and forcefully against the ouster. They filled the Lawn for a series of protests and vigils. They held office hours to sign colleagues up for work groups and task forces. And they kept their departments’ students and alumni in the loop with a steady stream of e-mails.

Cohen said the scope and intensity of the reaction on Grounds was completely unexpected. But as details of the secretive ouster leaked out, he said, the faculty recognized that they could—and should—have a significant role in keeping pressure on the Board, because their positions gave them power others within the community lacked.

“We couldn’t really say everything about the people who talked to us and helped us, because they were in a more vulnerable position than we were,” he said. “Tenure is still a valuable thing. The faculty were the people who really could speak out on this issue, and we tried to do that in as respectful a way as we could.”

Ultimately, it worked, and now there’s a sense that those who want to see faculty play a bigger role in university governance have a chance to make a move.

Much of the anger over the secretive attempt to remove Sullivan was directed at UVA Rector Helen Dragas, who has since apologized for the way the Board of Visitors handled the affair. (Photo by Cole Geddy/UVA Public Affairs)

Shifting power

As the Board’s silent, unified stance on the Sullivan affair unraveled, some currently in power indicated they were open to change. Hunter Craig, who originally met with the rector and vice rector to accept Sullivan’s resignation before becoming a vocal supporter of her reinstatement, said he’d even give up his seat on the Board to make way for a faculty representative. It’s an idea many professors have echoed as a necessity in the future.
But John Thelin, a professor of higher education and public policy at the University of Kentucky, former chancellor professor at William & Mary, and the author of A History of American Education, said while many public universities have incorporated faculty representation into their governing boards, an appointment or two wouldn’t solve every problem.

“On the one hand, it’s a big gain, and it provides some continuity and formality, and it’s not going to be evaporated,” Thelin said. “It’s going to persist. But in some ways, those faculty members face a very hard situation. They can be coopted.”

Cohen agreed. The discussion now is about more than a representative on the Board, he said.

“We should take this opportunity to think as deeply and creatively as possible on the question of how the Board should be made up, how the Board should interact with the different constituencies of the University,” said Cohen.

It’s not something faculty can do alone, he said. Any change in Board rules, for instance, would require legislators to step in.

“So right now, we as the Faculty Senate are doing what we do best, which is try to figure out the pros and cons, do some research about what other places do, figure out what works and what doesn’t, try to come up with some proposals, and see what happens,” he said. The process has already started. Cohen said faculty members are signing up for workshops and scheduling symposia to talk governance in the coming months.

They could have an important leveraging tool at their disposal, Thelin said. Before Sullivan’s reinstatement, the Southern Association of Colleges and Schools put the UVA Board on notice, saying it had questions about UVA’s ongoing compliance with accreditation rules and calling into question the integrity of the Board. That should make UVA leaders nervous, Thelin said. The SACS is responsible for accrediting the University, and running afoul of its rules could have a serious negative impact on funding eligibility—not to mention the school’s reputation.

“Anything that would jeopardize the regional accreditation of the University is very high stakes,” Thelin said, and that might make Board members and state legislators more willing to entertain reforms.

Miracle on Grounds
Whatever the long-term effects on governance, Thelin said the turmoil at UVA was extraordinary. A president getting fired is nothing new, he said. Neither is faculty unrest. But a University community rallying around an ousted leader until there’s a reinstatement?
“As far as I know, it’s unprecedented,” he said.

Cohen seemed as surprised as anyone that he and the faculty he represents fought as hard as they did—and prevailed. But their message has remained the same throughout the last three weeks, he said, and it will guide them going forward.

“What we have been saying all along is that we understand change has to come, but let us be a part of the process,” he said. “Let us contribute. Let’s have the debate.”

Categories
News

Quoting Thomas Jefferson at UVA

The ever-quotable Thomas Jefferson had plenty to say during his lifetime about governance, transparency, and the future of the university he founded. No surprise, then, that his name and words have been invoked a number of times over the last three weeks by people on both sides of the debate on Grounds over Sullivan’s resignation. So who said what?

1. “The great object of our aim from the beginning has been to make this Establishment the most eminent in the United States.”

2. “…as new discoveries are made, new truth discovered and manners and opinions change with the change of circumstances institutions must advance also to keep pace with the times.”

3. “For here we are not afraid to follow truth wherever it may lead, nor to tolerate any error so long as reason is left free to combat it.”

4. “This institution of my native state, the hobby of my old age, will be based on the illimitable freedom of the human mind, to explore and expose every subject susceptible of its contemplation.”

5. “…Though you cannot see, when you take one step, what will be the next, yet follow truth, justice, and plain dealing, and never fear their leading you out of the labyrinth, in the easiest manner possible. . . An honest heart being the first blessing, a knowing head is the second.”

6. “It is pleasant for those who have just escaped threatened shipwreck, to hail one another when landed in unexpected safety.”

 

A. UVA faculty who are also alumni, in a letter to Governor Bob McDonnell on Thursday, June 21.

B. Faculty Senate Chair George Cohen, in a statement delivered before the emergency meeting of the Board on Tuesday, June 26.

C. Governor Bob McDonnell, in a letter to the Board of Visitors, Friday, June 22.

D. Rector Helen Dragas, in the initial press release announcing Sullivan’s resignation sent out Sunday, June 10.

E. President Teresa Sullivan, in a statement to the Board of Visitors at the start of its marathon closed session June 18.

F. President Sullivan, in her statement on the Rotunda steps on Tuesday, June 26.

 

Answers: 1. (D); 2. (E); 3. (A); 4. (C); 5. (B); 6. (F)

Categories
News

Bypass opponents study plans, await environmental assessment

After decades of controversy and an unexpected revival, the Route 29 bypass project hit a key milestone earlier this month with the Virginia Department of Transportation’s release of contractor Skanska-Branch’s detailed plans for the 6.2-mile route around the traffic-clogged arterial. And while the road is closer than it’s ever been to becoming a reality, bypass opponents are putting the plans under a microscope, and waiting for what may be a last chance to stall the project.

Jeff Werner, the Piedmont Environmental Council’s land-use field officer, has spent much of the last week-and-a-half poring over the plan, printing out and taping together the Skanska engineers’ detailed drawings of the road to get a better idea of what the project will look like.

A key concern is the northern terminus, he said, where the bypass will join up with Route 29 just south of Ashwood Boulevard and the Forest Lakes development. VDOT’s initial concept for a grade-separated interchange at the north end of the bypass, released in September of 2011, provided for more lanes of travel than the current plans, and that raises concerns of bottlenecks at one end of the roadway, Werner said.

The Skanska proposal provides two lanes for through traffic approaching the intersection from the south on Route 29, instead of three, as the original concept plans show. Vehicles exiting the bypass join northbound cars in a third lane, but the three abruptly become two north of a stoplight at Ashwood Boulevard. And the on-ramp for southbound bypass traffic is down to one lane instead of two.

“Given that saving time is the issue here, the question is, ‘What’s the clock running now for this trip?’” Werner said.

That concern and others will help fuel a continuing push to shift public opinion about the project, Werner added. But when it comes to a policy fight, opponents have only one real foothold: a pending environmental assessment.

Morgan Butler, senior attorney at the Southern Environmental Law Center’s Charlottesville office, said it’s been 20 years since VDOT conducted an Environmental Impact Statement, or EIS, on the complete project —a thorough examination mandated by the National Environmental Policy Act, or NEPA.

Since the project roared back to life last summer, there’s been an expectation that VDOT will reevaluate all the documentation from the EIS, in a process called an Environmental Assessment, or EA. The agency will have to determine if its old data still applies, and make its case for carrying on to the Federal Highway Administration. If the review shows there are a lot of new factors affecting environmental impact of the road, it’s back to the drawing board for VDOT.

“If FHWA determines that to be the case—and we think it clearly is, considering how outdated parts of the earlier studies are and how much work the community has put into developing less damaging alternatives for improving 29—then the project cannot proceed until the new information is thoroughly analyzed and considered,” Butler said.

If there’s a true revisiting of the impact of the project, agencies will have to use a whole new set of metrics, said Butler. “A lot of what we know about the environmental impacts of a project like this has changed,” he said, including the compounding effects of urban sprawl on the environment and human health.

Butler was careful to point out that legal action from his group and its allies is far from a given. Opponents can’t raise their shovels until the EA currently underway is complete and the FHWA has given its opinion on whether or not the old data is acceptable, he said.
“It would be like grading a test before it’s been turned in,” he said.

VDOT spokesman Lou Hatter said there will be a public information session* once the EA is completed, but it hasn’t yet been scheduled. The Commonwealth Transportation Board has indicated it will likely be in September.

In the meantime, many in Charlottesville will keep scrutinizing the plans, trying to make sense of the pages of maps and grade diagrams. To Werner, the picture that’s emerging is one of a project that’s going to cause more problems than it solves. But he’s worried the wheels of bureaucracy will keep grinding.

“You would hope people at the FHWA would say, ‘This isn’t a good way to spend $200 million in federal dollars, and we need to take a hard look at this,’” he said. “But on the other hand, there’s this tendency to say, ‘Well, they’ve checked off A through Z.’”
Whatever the outcome of the EA, Butler said a close to the seemingly endless controversy is probably near. “I think this whole saga is about to reach a critical stage,” he said. “I don’t think it’s going to drag on for years and years.”

*This story originally reported that there would be a public hearing on the Environmental Assessment once it’s filed. VDOT actually plans to hold a public information session, not a hearing.

Categories
News

Dragas claims concerns justified Sullivan's ouster; faculty remain unconvinced

Supporters of UVA President Teresa Sullivan gather at the third rally on the Lawn in less than a week. A rising tide of anger over the Board of Visitors’ decision to force Sullivan’s resignation has led to demands for her reinstatement and for more faculty input in University governance. (Photo by Cole Geddy/UVA Public Affairs)

In the two weeks of turmoil that have followed the surprise announcement that UVA President Teresa Sullivan would step down in August, the University community has tried to understand why the Board of Visitors decided to force a popular president out of office just two years after appointing her.

The closest they’ve gotten to an answer is a 10-point list released by Rector Helen Dragas last Thursday, detailing serious challenges the University faces. As Sullivan’s supporters rallied for her reinstatement, they criticized the rationale offered for her ouster for raising more questions than it answers—and for its long delay in coming.

Dragas’ list outlines the “very high hurdles” the University faces: declining state and federal funding, no existing plan for online learning, a medical center and financial aid program that are sucking up resources, a need to retain faculty and land big gifts, and a lack of accountability for academic quality.

The implication, of course, was that Sullivan wasn’t cutting it as a top administrator. “We deserve better—the rapid development of a plan that includes goals, costs, sources of funds, timelines and individual accountability,” Dragas wrote.

But in the months before she was forced to resign, Sullivan had offered her own explanations of the University’s challenges and detailed her plans to meet them. In a memo penned in early May and in recent interviews, she beat the Board to the punch on a number of issues, and supporters say her shrewd take undermines critics’ condemnation of her leadership.

On numerous occasions this spring, Sullivan addressed the difficulty of recruiting and retaining faculty—a key concern listed in Dragas’ statement. In her memo, Sullivan acknowledged that the University’s recruitment process is “less than adequate,” and in a Q&A with UVA Today in March, she said stagnating compensation was making it harder to hold on to professors.

“We’re asking a lot of loyalty from that faculty member to stay here when they’re leaving money on the table,” she said. “So that’s certainly a risk.”

As she later pointed out, Sullivan just oversaw the first faculty pay raise in four years, but she said the issue is about more than bigger paychecks. In May, she suggested that fellowships designed to help faculty improve their teaching, coupled with an emphasis on marketing the University’s best qualities, could make it a more attractive employer.

Dragas also implied Sullivan’s fundraising skills were lacking. There have been a few big donations to fund new squash courts and a center for the study of yoga and other contemplative sciences, she said, but there hasn’t been “a specific vision and plan” for going after major gifts to support “central institutional priorities.”

Sullivan seemed to anticipate that dig. In her own statement in the wake of her forced resignation, she reminded the Board that she had overseen a 15.6 percent increase in giving since her arrival in 2010. “Fundraising takes time,” she wrote. “A new President first has to meet donors and establish trust and rapport.”

Sullivan’s May memo also explained her budget reforms, which are already in motion: she implemented an “internal financial model” that pushed financial decisions from central administration down to the deans of the University’s schools, encouraging accountability, she said, and allowing leaders to put their heads together and collaborate on cost-cutting and shared projects.

In her statement last week, Sullivan unapologetically called those cost-saving measures “small bets,” doubling down on her commitment to incremental change. Dragas has insisted rapid, sweeping reforms are necessary at UVA, but Sullivan has stuck to her guns: a slow approach is the sensible way to trim waste and plan expansion at a great institution, because “no single initiative will do serious damage if it doesn’t work out.”

(photo by Dan Addison/UVA Public Affairs)

As for concerns over having enough resources to support the medical center and AccessUVA, the school’s financial aid program—both of which divert a lot of resources from the rest of the University—Sullivan’s memo points out that separate strategic planning efforts to tackle both have been underway since 2010. And while Sullivan hasn’t publicly supported the kind of online learning initiatives Dragas has said will be important in the future, she did give reasons for her caution: “Online instruction is no panacea,” she said last week. “It is surprisingly expensive, has limited revenue potential, and unless carefully managed, can undermine the quality of instruction.”

The fact that the ousted president was already tackling many of the Board’s stated concerns—and, judging by her own surprise at being forced out, hadn’t been told to redirect her efforts—has led some Sullivan supporters see Dragas’ detailed statement as a brush-off at best.

It didn’t satisfy Darden professor Elizabeth Powell, who joined a number of faculty members in calling for Sullivan’s reinstatement at a Sunday rally on the Lawn. “What I’m concerned by is the generality of [Dragas’] analysis,” Powell said—they’re the same concerns every big state school is facing.

And Powell echoed a criticism shared by many of her colleagues in recent days: The explanation is incomplete. A list of concerns is one thing, but it doesn’t answer their key question—what was their president doing that was so wrong it called for her dismissal after only two years?

“My fear is that it’s a post-hoc rationale,” Powell said, a document drawn up to justify a decision already made by a handful of Board members behind closed doors. And if those who unseated Sullivan did have good plans for strengthening the University, the feeling is their top-down approach set them back severely.

“The behavior of the Board discredits any strategy that they’re putting forth,” said Powell.

 

Soundboard coverage of UVA president Teresa Sullivan’s resignation by C-Ville Weekly on Mixcloud

 
Categories
News

Atlanta developer snaps up Landmark for $6.25 million

After years of stalled construction and creditors’ squabbles, the Landmark Hotel property got a new owner last week. (Photo by Ashley Twiggs)

The shell of what was to be the Landmark Hotel was sold at auction in a Charlottesville courtroom last week to a property developer from Atlanta who paid $6.25 million for local investor Halsey Minor’s failed project, and hopes to turn it into one of a string of boutique luxury hotels.

The auction, agreed to by creditors owed large sums on the long-stalled Downtown project, took less than five minutes. John Dewberry, owner of Dewberry Capital, appeared in person to place the winning bid, beating out only one other participant, J.B. McKibbon. Former Minor partner Lee Danielson, expected to make another attempt at owning the property, failed to provide evidence he had the financial backing to support the minimum $3 million bid and never made it to the table. Omni Hotel Group parent company TRT Holdings met the minimum, but declined to move forward with the auction once Dewberry upped the ante to $3.5 million.

A former quarterback for Georgia Tech who was born in Waynesboro and used his Canadian Football League signing bonus to fund his first real estate venture, Dewberry, now in his late 40s, said his firm has primarily built shopping centers and urban high-rises. He and his brother have amassed a fortune in Atlanta buildings, and have laid claim to much of the property along the city’s famous Peachtree Street. The company made a move to get into the boutique hotel market several years ago when Dewberry bought a hurricane-battered and long-neglected building in downtown Charleston. He’s moving ahead on that hotel, he said, and hopes to start work on the new Charlottesville project within a year.

But the company has seen one hotel purchase turn out poorly. Dewberry bought a downtown Atlanta property owned by Wyndham in 2003, hoping to renovate and rebrand it, but the deal ultimately failed.

“We were in the process of considering developing it into a three-star hotel when the economy went south,” said Brandon Hatfield, Dewberry’s senior vice president of finance. “There were issues with the project altogether, and we felt there was no need to chase good money after bad to try to reinvest dollars in the hotel,” he said. The company’s lender foreclosed on the property last year.

Hatfield said Dewberry’s new push is based on a totally different business model. Instead of acquiring big existing hotels or building smaller ones from scratch, the company is focusing on buying up blighted, abandoned projects in strong markets—like Minor’s Landmark—and picking up where the last owner left off.

“With the amount of money you have to put into it per key, boutique hotels don’t make a lot of sense for ground-up development,” Hatfield said.

Dewberry, who visits Charlottesville frequently and is kept appraised of development news by his golf buddy, local realtor Stephen Mclean, said the Downtown Mall property had piqued his interest years ago, but the legal quagmire surrounding the Landmark turned him off.

“I’m the kind of guy who’s happy to step outside and settle it in an alley,” he joked, “but I hate lawsuits.”

Dewberry said he plans to pour millions more into the project, and add several dozen more rooms to the original 100-room concept. Hatfield said Dewberry’s initial assessment of an additional 55 rooms seemed high, but confirmed the company would attempt to squeeze in more keys to the existing floor plan.

“There’s no difinitive number, but we’re going to review the existing building envelope and see if there’s an optimal number of rooms,” Hatfield said.

Categories
News

Sullivan reinstated in unanimous Board vote

In a unanimous vote Tuesday afternoon, UVA’s Board of Visitors reinstated Teresa Sullivan as president of the University.

The vote came more than two weeks after the surprise announcement of Sullivan’s resignation June 10, and just over a week after a divided Board voted to appoint an interim president, who then stepped aside as anger mounted on Grounds over the secret ouster.

But the spirit was one of unity as Helen Dragas, the embattled Rector who orchestrated the forced resignation, entered the meeting alongside Sullivan and took a seat next to Heywood Fralin, the only Board member who voted against installing an interim leader last week.

Fralin introduced the Board’s resolution reinstating Sullivan, and before the room voted, Dragas urged unity—and indicated she’d changed her mind.

She said she’d spoken with Sullivan before the meeting, and the two agreed that “it’s time to bring the UVA family back together.”

Each Board member then voted in favor, many adding brief statements. “With high honor and great pleasure, yes,” said Hunter Craig, one of the three members who requested the emergency meeting to reinstate the president.

As cheers rose from the Twitter-following crowd assembled outside, Sullivan herself addressed the Board.

“I do not ask that we sweep any differences under the rug,” she said. “All of us want only one thing: what’s best for the University.”

The cheers grew louder when she emerged with the Board, and after an introduction from Fralin, addressed the crowd as president once again.

“My family and I could not have imagined the events of recent weeks when we moved here 22 months ago,” she said. “I am not good enough, I am not wise enough, and I am not strong enough to do everything that needs doing at UVA on my own. But you have shown me beyond a shadow of a doubt that I am not alone.”

Faculty Senate calls for vigil on Lawn during Board vote

UVA Faculty Senate Chair George Cohen has sent a message the University community calling for another show of support outside the Rotunda during tomorrow’s planned meeting of the Board of Visitors, where a vote on the status of President Teresa Sullivan is planned—and a reinstatement is expected by many.

Cohen said the outcome of the meeting wasn’t certain, but called tomorrow’s decision by Board of Visitors members "the most important vote they will cast during their service to our great University."

The tumultuous two weeks have tapped "an extraordinary strength within our own community," he said. "These new bonds will sustain us as we continue our support for the reinstatement of President Sullivan, and as we begin to focus on future work that will be needed to make the University stronger and better than ever."

Cohen asked supporters to show up for a silent vigil at 2:30pm, half an hour before the meeting is scheduled to begin. "We intend to be a silent force of support for President Sullivan, as well as for members of the Board."

The full text of his e-mailed message is below.



Dear Colleagues,

President Sullivan’s reinstatement is our focus for the next 36 hours.

We pledge to follow her example of dignity and grace in the face of crisis, and we ask you to do the same.

While the outcome of tomorrow’s Board meeting is by no means certain, we want to allow members of the Board the ability to make a thoughtful and well-reasoned decision. It will be the most important vote they will cast during their service to our great University.

As a result of this untenable situation, we have found an extraordinary strength within our own community to move the University of Virginia forward. These new bonds will sustain us as we continue our support for the reinstatement of President Sullivan, and as we begin to focus on future work that will be needed to make the University stronger and better than ever.

Tomorrow we will gather on the Lawn beginning at 2:30 p.m. and remain until the Board meeting concludes. We intend to be a silent force of support for President Sullivan, as well as for members of the Board.

Let us all join together to FILL THE LAWN WITH GRACE AND DIGNITY from the Rotunda to Old Cabell Hall.


George Cohen
Chair, UVa Faculty Senate

Sullivan supporters rally again to demand reinstatement

Critics of the effort by UVA’s Board of Visitors to push out President Teresa Sullivan again rallied University faculty, alumni, students, staff on the Lawn Sunday afternoon in another show of support for a key demand: the reinstatement of the ousted president.

About 1,500 people—only slightly smaller than the crowd that showed up Monday afternoon when the Board last convened—turned out to hear UVA professors speak on the Rotunda steps about the recent turmoil on Grounds. A rally organizer said via e-mail that 6,500 more tuned into a live streaming broadcast of the event online.

The speakers, who included professors from 15 schools and departments as well as students and elected officials, reiterated criticisms leveled at the Board over the last two weeks, blasting both the secretive process by which Sullivan’s ouster was orchestrated and the application of what many believe has become a corporate, top-down approach to University governance.

Both the sign-toting crowd and the speakers on the steps expressed pride in the way the school community has come together both to support Sullivan and reject an approach to running the University they see as undemocratic.

“This is the happiest moment of my career at the University of Virginia,” said Thomas Jefferson Memorial Foundation Professor Peter Onuf, a history instructor who is, a colleague pointed out, the one person on Grounds designated to speak for the frequently invoked founder. “If I were Thomas Jefferson, I’d be looking at you today and saying, ‘This is what I envisioned.’”

If the mood was more optimistic than at the other recent Rotunda rallies, there’s good reason. Sullivan supporters on the Board successfully scheduled an emergency meeting for Tuesday, at which its members are expected to vote on whether to reinstate the president. An anonymous source on the Board told a Washington Post reporter that those in favor of returning her to her office have the eight votes they need to succeed.

The rally came at the end of a weekend that started with Virginia’s governor wading into the controversy. Robert McDonnell issued a statement demanding the Board take decisive action Tuesday—regardless of its ultimate decision. If they didn’t, he said, he’d ask them all to resign.

"The time is now for finality and closure," McDonnell said. "The Board has called a meeting for this Tuesday. Following that meeting, I call upon all in the UVA community, from the Board members, to administration, to faculty, staff, students and donors to address the presidential decision and its aftermath with a respectful and measured approach, rather than with the frenzy that has accompanied much of the last twelve days. The University must move forward." 

Zeithaml steps aside, ends negotiations with UVA Board of Visitors

UVA interim president Carl Zeithaml is stepping aside, he announced in statement emailed to press this morning, saying "trust cannot be restored in our community until the President Sullivan’s status is clarified and ultimately resolved."

Zeithaml said he would cease negotiations with the University’s Board of Visitors over the terms of his interim presidency, and end all activities associated with the role he agreed to take on earlier this week.

He signed off of the message by identifying himself as Dean of the McIntire School.

The full text of his statement is below.

Dear University colleagues:

I am grateful for the trust that members of the University’s Board of Visitors expressed in asking me to serve as interim president during this extraordinarily difficult time in the life of our University. I made the decision to accept this transition role because of my love for U.Va., as well as my desire to help in a time of crisis.

In the three days since I accepted this position, I have talked to many in our community about what transpired on Grounds while I was out of the country on University business, and I received a great deal of input from numerous colleagues, including members of the faculty. I deeply appreciate and respect this input.

Clearly, we agree that the University and its reputation have been damaged these past 13 days, but that together we can mend the harm done and move our great University forward. Trust, one of our core institutional values, has been compromised.

There is an enormous groundswell of support for Terry Sullivan’s reinstatement as our president, and I understand that the Board will meet next week to consider this possibility. As a result, I am suspending any further negotiations with the Board regarding my status as interim president, as well as any activities associated with this role. In the meantime, I will return my focus to the McIntire School.

Trust cannot be restored in our community until the President Sullivan’s status is clarified and ultimately resolved.

With kind regards,
Carl Zeithaml
Dean of the McIntire School of Commerce

UVA interim president explains decision to step aside

In a press conference on Grounds today, Carl Zeithaml further explained his announcement that he’ll be stepping out of his role as interim president of UVA until the Board of Visitors reaches a decision on whether to reinstate Teresa Sullivan.

Zeithaml said that after talking to members of the UVA community following the board’s early-morning vote to appoint him Tuesday, he came to the realization that any efforts on his part to try to restore trust in University leadership would be "premature"—at least until the Board meets again Tuesday for what is expected to be a vote on reinstatement. He said he told Rector Helen Dragas as much in phone conversations Thursday night.

"I don’t want to do this job unless I’m bringing my colleagues across the University with me," Zeithaml said. "I think if I’m going to do this job, I’ve got to have legitimacy with all constituent groups."

He said he took Dragas at her word that she felt her much-criticized behind-the-scenes ouster of Sullivan was the best thing for the University.

"I understand right nw that everyone is trying to do the right thing," he said. "I really believe that."

He said he’ll reassess his role after the Tuesday vote. 

"If President Sullivan is reinstated, I will be extraordinarily happy to work with her," Zeithaml said, "and I will be very happy to return to the McIntire School in what I know will probably be a very, very interesting fall semester."

He declined to say whether he wanted to see the Board reinstate Sullivan, but did say he hoped its members would take into account the passionate response the situation inspired among the University’s faculty, alumni, staff, and students.

"I’d like to see the Board take that input and consider what’s best for the University of Virginia," he said.