One April day in 1993, a state police helicopter suddenly appeared over Virginia State University and then came in for a landing on the campus.
Out popped an unexpected visitor: the governor of Virginia.
He was not in a good mood.
He strode in, unannounced, to a meeting of the school’s board of visitors and gave the university’s governing body a piece of his mind, as only Gov. Douglas Wilder could. He also demanded that all the members resign.
They did, and Wilder soon picked an almost entirely new board (a few members were reappointed).
The backdrop for Wilder’s intervention: Virginia State, at the time, had a history of financial problems. Wilder had worked to install the state treasurer as the new VSU president — that was already an unusual level of gubernatorial involvement. Then Wilder felt that some board members weren’t sufficiently supportive of the new president, so he wanted to clean house to give the president a fresh start.
Wilder’s actions in remaking the leadership of Virginia State 33 years ago probably rank as the most dramatic example of a governor getting involved in how to run a state university. Still, there was a clear policy rationale for his actions: to make sure the school was on a firm financial foundation.
It’s against that backdrop that we must weigh Gov. Abigail Spanberger’s decision last week to fire the rector of the Virginia Tech Board of Visitors, Roanoke lawyer John Rocovich.
Here are some points to consider.
1. Board appointments have always been political
Rhetorically, both parties adhere to the quaint notion that board of visitors appointments are nonpolitical when, in fact, they’re all political. They’re not political in the sense that governors are naming visitors with a specific agenda on whether English professors should teach that Hamlet’s Gertrude was a knowing accomplice or an unwitting victim, but they do all tend to be people of influence with the governor and often campaign contributors. Years ago, I interviewed former Gov. Linwood Holton; he told me he had wanted to be the first governor to appoint a Black member to the University of Virginia Board of Visitors but never had a chance because he had too many campaign supporters to reward first.
When Jim Gilmore was governor, he personally interviewed prospective board members to make sure they were in alignment with his agenda. That became a campaign talking point for Mark Warner in 2001, who said he wanted to depoliticize appointments.
There’s a counterargument to be made that, given how much state funding universities receive, board appointments ought to be political. Nobody really wants to make that argument on the record, but if you think everything in politics happens on the record, then let’s talk about some bridge investments you might be interested in. Perhaps more accurately, both parties really do think board appointments should be nonpolitical, but they define that in different ways.
2. To fire a board member is very rare — and to fire a rector might be unprecedented
Wilder, in 1993, didn’t fire any board members at VSU. He asked them to resign, and they did. In this case, Spanberger — through her secretary of the commonwealth — asked Rocovich to resign. He didn’t. So she fired him.
That makes his removal unprecedented in many ways. When Glenn Youngkin was governor, he removed one of his own appointees from the University of Virginia board, but that came after Bert Ellis had been involved in multiple well-publicized controversies, including what Inside Higher Ed described as an incident where he “insulted university staffers.” More specifically, at one point, he sent a text message to several other board members calling one high-ranking staffer a “numnut.”
I’ve been unable to find any other instances where a governor fired a board member; on the infrequent occasions when a board member was removed, the board member simply acceded to a request to resign. Here we have Spanberger firing a board member who wouldn’t resign — and a board member appointed by a previous governor of a different party. Rocovich was also the rector, not an ordinary member. Plus, he is a prominent figure, both as a Republican donor and a fundraiser for Virginia Tech. He is not some random board appointee. That brings us to this.
3. We don’t know why Rocovich was ousted
When Youngkin removed Ellis from the University of Virginia board, it followed several well-publicized incidents involving Ellis in conflict with people at the school. Spanberger’s removal of Rocovich was completely unexpected, so we don’t know what precipitated it.
That’s an essential part of the controversy here. This is where we must first delve into the finer points of the law.
State law spells out four reasons a governor can remove someone from a college board: “malfeasance, misfeasance, incompetence, or gross neglect of duty.” In layman’s terms, these are all bad things. State law doesn’t say a governor can remove a board member over a political dispute; the board member has to have done something bad.
The law goes on to say “the Governor shall set forth in a written public statement his reasons for removing any member.”
Spanberger’s terse letter to Rocovich said, “Your conduct has violated the Code for Conduct for Commonwealth Appointees to Boards, Authorities & Commissions, the Virginia Tech Board of Visitors’ Code of Ethics and the governing statutes requiring board members to act in accordance with the best interests of Virginia Tech.”
Those may be the topline reasons, but we still don’t know the specific reason why Rocovich was removed. That’s become a point of attack for Republican legislators: “Governor Spanberger should immediately provide evidence for her strong accusation,” said state Sen. David Suetterlein, R-Roanoke County, in a statement about Rocovich’s removal. “Unless she has actual evidence that speaks to some action contrary to his six decades of service, Governor Spanberger needs to end this terrible episode.”
State Sen. Mark Obenshain, R-Rockingham County, used similar language: “Governor Spanberger has publicly identified no conduct that appears to satisfy that legal standard. If grounds for removal exist, Virginians deserve to know what they are. Transparency is not optional when the law itself requires specific reasons for such an extraordinary action. … I call on the Governor to publicly state the specific reasons for this action and allow the public to judge whether they satisfy the requirements of Virginia law.”
Spanberger’s removal of Rocovich reveals a heretofore unexplored area of the law: The governor can accuse a board member of actions that impugn the member’s character — “malfeasance, misfeasance, incompetence, or gross neglect of duty” — without having to support that charge because state law goes on to say “the Governor is the sole judge of the sufficiency of the cause for removal.”
No one seriously believes that Rocovich was incompetent or neglected his duties, so that leads people either to assume the worst or simply to conclude that he was ousted for purely political reasons that are being dressed up with the vague requirements of the Code of Virginia. That is clearly where the speculation has centered; that Rocovich’s offense was being a Republican with a strong personality and distinct conservative views (and perhaps distinct views on how the school’s presidential search should be conducted). It’s possible there’s some personnel thing here that maybe shouldn’t be talked about publicly. The governor could have hinted that, but didn’t. When Tech President Tim Sands announced his retirement, U.S. Sen. Tim Kaine, D-Virginia, wondered if Sands had been pushed out so that a Republican-dominated board could pick his successor before Spanberger appointees become a majority on the board. That’s never been proven, but suspicions remain in some quarters. Ultimately, we don’t know and may never know what led to this.
4. This is unusual because Virginia Tech usually isn’t very politicized
Even in normal times, the University of Virginia is a much more politicized campus than Virginia Tech is. The only other time that Tech has become embroiled in gubernatorial-level controversy was in 1986, when there was a scandal emanating out of the athletic department (the “land swap scandal,” for old-timers) and Gov. Gerald Baliles used his commencement speech to deliver a stern message to the board of visitors that they either needed to make academics their top priority or be replaced. None were, but some didn’t get reappointed when their terms came up.
5. This further politicizes board appointments
Spanberger and other Democrats may think otherwise, but that’s not how Republicans see this. They see a Democratic governor unilaterally removing a prominent Republican for no reason. That’s the kind of thing that will be remembered.
“What makes this decision especially disappointing is that Governor Spanberger campaigned on a promise to depoliticize higher education governance and to reduce executive involvement in the affairs of Virginia’s universities,” Obenshain said in his statement. “Removing the sitting rector of Virginia Tech without publicly stating a lawful basis appears inconsistent with those commitments. This issue is bigger than any one individual. The precedent established today will apply to future governors and future boards at every public university in Virginia.”
If Virginia elects a Republican governor in 2029, will we see that new chief executive remove some of Spanberger’s board appointees? Unless there’s more information forthcoming, the precedent has now been set.
6. Spanberger is not afraid to act
Whatever Spanberger’s reasons, whether justified or otherwise, she acted decisively. This comes against the backdrop of other things the Democratic governor has done recently, such as vetoing 31 bills passed by a Democratic-controlled General Assembly — including some of her party’s top priorities, such as collective bargaining for public employees and legal retail cannabis sales. In those cases, she said she supported the concept, but objected to the details. Regardless, she was not afraid to anger those in her own party.
One frequent criticism of Spanberger is that she hasn’t communicated well with legislators; she just acted and told them later. That was also the case here; at least some legislative leaders learned of Rocovich’s ouster when they were contacted for comment by journalists. Legislators never like it when they hear things that way, especially if they’re members of the same party and are thrust into the position of defending a gubernatorial action they know nothing about. Nonetheless, it’s clear that Virginia has a chief executive who isn’t afraid to make controversial decisions.
We have more political news and analysis every Friday in West of the Capital, our weekly political newsletter. Sign up for it or any of our other newsletters here:
