WVU Board of Governors backs Hutson in split leadership vote

Jun. 13—MORGANTOWN — If it was a power grab — as one outgoing member suggested — it was a successful one.
In Gordon Gee's final meeting as the school's president, the West Virginia University Board of Governors voted 9-6 Friday to select Robert "Rusty " Hutson Jr. as the body's next chairman, effective July 1.
Hutson, who joined the BOG in September after being appointed by former Gov. Jim Justice, was selected over sitting Chairman Richard Pill.
The co-founder and CEO of Diversified Energy Company, Hutson is a former chairman of the Fairmont State University Board of Governors.
His selection ran counter to the recommendation of the BOG's nominating committee, which tapped Pill, Vice-Chair Patrice Harris and Secretary Robert Reynolds to keep those positions for the coming year.
Following the vote for chairman, Harris declined the nomination for vice-chair and nominated Reynolds, who was unanimously approved.
After Charles Capito and Susan Lavenski refused nominations for secretary, Paul Mattox accepted and was approved by the body.
Mattox, a former state transportation secretary, was reappointed to a newly created seat on the BOG by Gov. Patrick Morrisey in May after his previous seat was eliminated by legislation.
The selection of BOG leadership occurred in the first meeting since the West Virginia Legislature stripped faculty, staff and student representatives of voting power.
Based on comments offered during the meeting, all four backed the Pill, Harris, Reynolds leadership team.
While the discourse remained civil, there was an undertone of friction throughout the meeting as seemingly innocuous comments about "transparency " and "honor " landed as clear references to the recent public infighting surrounding, among other things, the process for selecting the university's next president.
Frances "Frankie " Tack, attending her final meeting as a faculty representative, offered the most pointed remarks, explaining that the BOG has "weathered an array of dysfunctional practices " in the past year.
She predicted those practices would continue Friday, explaining it was "unprecedented " for the body to not follow the recommendation of the nominating committee when selecting leadership. Further, Tack said the body traditionally promotes leadership — from secretary, to vice-chair to chair — from among experienced members for the sake of continuity.
"So what's changed in the 2024-2025 year ? In a word, membership, " she said, later adding, "If there are attempts to nominate officers other than those the BOG members of the nominating committee have vetted and voted to bring forward to this board, you will know a power grab is being attempted ... "
Hutson later countered that his interest in leading the body shouldn't be viewed as an indictment of Pill's leadership.
"It's about whether I feel like I can add value to a very challenging time moving forward, that my skill set may be different than what Rick's is. It has nothing to do with whether I think Rick's done the best job or I could do the best job, " he said. "It has to do with the way I feel like the board can be managed going forward — and the challenges, and the issues that I believe are going to be on the horizon. That's all it's about."
Almost lost in the proceedings was the fact the meeting was the last in Gee's tenure. He'll leave the university on July 14. Incoming President Michael T. Benson starts the following day.
Pill was overcome with emotion in expressing his gratitude for Gee's efforts at WVU.
In his final president's report — which took place prior to the selection of leadership — Gee spoke glowingly of Pill, Harris and Reynolds, and cautioned the body against allowing division to fester within the board, particularly in a time when the public regard for higher education is on shaky ground.
"I make a plea to all of you today to think about the fact that the university is more important than you. You have individual interests, but the university is more important than any one person. The university is certainly more important than me, " he said.

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Learn with AIFact CheckingText to SpeechAI Summary

Related Articles

Washington Post

an hour ago

• Washington Post

With fateful decision, Trump gambles his presidency on war

President Donald Trump's decision Saturday to strike Iran's nuclear enrichment facilities was an extraordinary bet that he could eliminate a nuclear program that has bedeviled multiple presidents while avoiding another long-running Middle East conflict of the sort he and his supporters have long denounced. What happens next will have profound consequences for his presidency. If Iran is sufficiently weakened that it cannot meaningfully retaliate, Trump will have delivered a blow against a longtime adversary that will send a message to China, Russia and other global rivals that he will not shy from using military power when necessary.

Yahoo

an hour ago

• Yahoo

MAGA largely falls in line on Trump's Iran strikes

President Donald Trump's sudden announcement Saturday night that he bombed three Iranian nuclear sites has Republican skeptics of U.S. military action against Iran largely falling in line. The prospect of strikes against Iran had sparked backlash from Democrats and days of infighting within Trump's MAGA coalition, but after the president posted on Truth Social that the U.S. has bombed Iran, several GOP critics cheered the strikes as a limited action. Several top Democrats denounced the strikes as illegal and warned they could drag the U.S. into another Middle East war. The prospect of U.S. strikes on Iran had sparked debate between Republicans pressing for the U.S. to aid in regime change and isolationist voices who warned a full-scale war would betray Trump's 'America First' approach. 'Iran gave President Trump no choice,' Charlie Kirk, a conservative activist and critic of GOP war hawks, said on X. 'For a decade he has been adamant that Iran will never get a nuclear weapon. Iran decided to forego diplomacy in pursuit of a bomb. This is a surgical strike, operated perfectly. President Trump acted with prudence and decisiveness.' Former Florida Rep. Matt Gaetz, Trump's one-time pick for the attorney general post who had warned of the Middle East conflict turning into another drawn out war for the U.S., said on X that the president's strike didn't necessarily portend a larger conflict, and likened it to the strike of Iranian General Qasem Soleimani during Trump's first term 'President Trump basically wants this to be like the Solimani strike — one and done,' Gaetz wrote. 'No regime change war. Trump the Peacemaker! Some Republicans had expressed doubts that bombing Fordow (also known as Fordo) would end the threats, including Sen. Tim Sheehy (R-Mont.), a member of the Senate Armed Services Committee. But after the strikes, Sheehy called Saturday's military action the 'right decision.' 'To the naysayers out there, this isn't starting a war, this is ending one,' he said. 'Iran has been at war with America for 46 years. The Iranian people should rise up and put an end to this murderous regime.' Democrats, meanwhile, were largely unified in opposition to the strikes, arguing Trump lacks the legal authority even if the destruction of Iran's nuclear program is a positive goal. Trump shocked Washington and the country with a post revealing that U.S. aircraft had already bombed three Iranian nuclear sites at Fordow, Natanz, and Esfahan. The move drew recriminations from critics — and even some allies — who argued Trump had no legal authority to launch the offensive strikes against Iran's nuclear program. Top Democrats on the House and Senate Intel Committees — Rep. Jim Himes (D-Conn.) and Sen. Mark Warner (D-Va.), both members of Gang of Eight — were reportedly not briefed before the attacks on Iranian nuclear sites. 'According to the Constitution we are both sworn to defend, my attention to this matter comes BEFORE bombs fall. Full stop,' Himes said on X. House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries slammed Trump's strikes as reckless and unauthorized, demanding a full classified briefing for Congress and warning it risks 'a disastrous war in the Middle East.' 'Donald Trump shoulders complete and total responsibility for any adverse consequences that flow from his unilateral military action,' Jeffries said in a statement. Jeffries and Democrats were not briefed before the strike, according to a person familiar with the situation, though some were notified shortly before Trump's first Truth Social post. Shortly before the announcement, Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer received a perfunctory notification without details. Trump's fellow Republicans who'd pressed for the president to join Israel's military operations against Tehran quickly cheered the decision. Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.), one of the Senate's most hawkish Republicans, said the bombing was 'the right call,' and that 'The regime deserves it.' Some hawkish Republicans argued ahead of the strikes that Trump had a historic opportunity to set back Iran's nuclear program despite potential retaliation from Iran against America's bases and allies in the Middle East. 'Iran has waged a war of terror against the United States for 46 years,' Senate Intelligence Committee Chair Tom Cotton (R-Ark.). 'We could never allow Iran to get nuclear weapons. God bless our brave troops. President Trump made the right call and the ayatollahs should recall his warning not to target Americans.' House Speaker Mike Johnson was briefed on the strikes ahead of time, a person with direct knowledge of the matter told POLITICO. In a post on X, Johnson called it 'America First policy in action.' 'The President's decisive action prevents the world's largest state sponsor of terrorism, which chants 'Death to America,' from obtaining the most lethal weapon on the planet,' he wrote. Still, the attack left some MAGA isolationists distressed. And it could ramp up pressure for votes in the House and Senate on war powers legislation on Iran when Congress returns next week. Longtime Trump ally Steve Bannon, who has been wary of U.S. military involvement, was livestreaming on his show as the president made the announcement. Bannon argued that Trump should use his address Saturday evening to "talk to MAGA" to explain why he opted to attack Iran. 'This is not Constitutional," said Rep. Thomas Massie (R-Ky.) on X following the president's post. The Kentucky lawmaker has clashed with Trump and is one of the most vocal Republican detractors of U.S. involvement in Iran. This week, Massie, along with several House Democrats filed a House resolution seeking to block U.S. involvement in the conflict. 'While President Trump's decision may prove just, it's hard to conceive a rationale that's Constitutional,' conservative Rep. Warren Davidson (R-Ohio) tweeted. 'I look forward to his remarks tonight.' Progressive Rep. Ro Khanna (D-Calif.), one of the Democrats who teamed with Massie, said lawmakers should "immediately return to DC" to approve their resolution "to prevent America from being dragged into another endless Middle East war." It's unclear what legal justification the administration is using to support its attack on Iran, an ambiguity that could fuel attempts to rein Trump in. Across the Capitol, Sen. Tim Kaine (D-Va.) has planned to force a vote on his own resolution to block action against Iran without congressional authorization and could do so as soon as this week.'The American public is overwhelmingly opposed to the U.S. waging war on Iran,' Kaine said on X. 'And the Israeli Foreign Minister admitted yesterday that Israeli bombing had set the Iranian nuclear program back 'at least 2 or 3 years.' So what made Trump recklessly decide to rush and bomb today? Horrible judgment.' Independent Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders, who is pushing his own Iran legislation, slammed Trump's strike in a stop at his 'Fight Oligarchy' tour in Tulsa, Oklahoma. The crowd chanted 'No more war' in unison with raised fists as Sanders passionately called into question the president's legal authority for hitting Iran. 'Not only is this news that I've just heard this second alarming, that all of you have just heard, but it is so grossly unconstitutional,' Sanders said. 'All of you know that the only entity that can take this country to war is the U.S. Congress. The president does not have the right.' Nicholas Wu, Jordain Carney and Meredith Lee Hill contributed to this report

Bloomberg

an hour ago

• Bloomberg

Israel Awakes to a New Reality After US Strikes Iranian Sites

Israelis woke up to a new reality Sunday after President Donald Trump confirmed that the US bombed Iran's three main nuclear sites, diminishing a threat they've considered existential for decades. The US attack was embraced across the Israeli political spectrum, lauded on hastily assembled TV panels as a historic symbol of unprecedented US-Israeli cooperation at a time when the Jewish state has been shunned by others for its war in Gaza.