House Bill 1374 Would Eliminate the Alumni BOV Majority

For most cadets and alumni, until the turmoil of the past four years, the Virginia Military Institute Board of Visitors (BOV) was a group appointed by the Governor that carried out tasks on their behalf. Until the realization began to emerge during the period of the State's Special Investigation and Equity audit under former-governor Northam in 2020, most alumni/ae passively handed over their voices to the Alumni Agencies. The recent controversies over the Institute and Alumni Agencies supporting legislation that could reduce or eliminate their voice on the board prompted cadets and alumni to take a fresh look at the BOV. To provide an important perspective for measuring the proposed changes, The Cadet looks back on the board's evolution from 1879 to the present, noting that it occurred not by chance but by design. When the Governor of Virginia and the General Assembly created VMI's BOV in 1837, two years before VMI officially began in 19839, it kept the formula simple: the Governor would appoint nine "fit and proper persons," and the adjutant general would join them to "constitute a board of visitors." Vacancies were to be "immediately communicated … to the governor." There were no alum quotas. No residency splits. No legislative confirmation. No nomination lists. Just an executive appointment and a military officer embedded in the structure. Nearly two centuries later, arithmetic defines the same: 17 members; 16 appointed by the Governor; the adjutant general as an ex officio nonvoting member; 12 alumni split into eight Virginia residents and four nonresidents; four nonalumni Virginia residents; and an Alumni Association that may submit "not more than three nominees for each vacancy." Between those historical bookends lies a long legislative march — one that repeatedly rebalanced executive power, legislative oversight, and alumni/ae influence, but always focused on VMI, governed by Virginia and increasingly by those who lived the VMI experience — until now. Governance by VMI's Founders In "History of the Virginia Military Institute", his personal account of VMI's founding, Maj. Gen. Francis H. Smith provides rare details of the BOV's membership from 1839 to 1890. Up until the 1888 – 1889 Members, Generals, and Colonels dominated the board's military experience membership, with those without significant military experience chosen, such as J.T.L. Preston, S.H. Letcher, and others directly involved in VMI's creation, either at the institute or in the General Assembly. Members also included graduates of other institutions like West Point, because VMI's own graduates were too young or not yet established enough for the gubernatorial appointments. The Governor of Virginia formed VMI's first board in 1837, but delays in starting the Institute required a new BOV when VMI commenced operations in 1839. The First Board consisted of the Visionaries who created the school. Col. Claude Crozet was educated at France's École Polytechnique, one of the most prestigious scientific and military academies in Europe, where he received advanced instruction in mathematics, engineering, and artillery science. He served as an officer under Napoleon before emigrating to the United States, later becoming a professor of engineering at the United States Military Academy at West Point. Appointed Principal Engineer of Virginia's Board of Public Works, he directed major infrastructure projects, including the Blue Ridge Tunnel. His elite scientific education and instructional experience profoundly shaped the conception of VMI, particularly its emphasis on engineering, applied science, and disciplined military training modeled partly on West Point. Hugh Barclay, Esq., was trained in the law through the traditional apprenticeship system, supplemented by classical education, the standard path for attorneys in early-nineteenth-century Virginia. His grounding in legal principles, statutory interpretation, and property law prepared him to manage complex public matters. As a leading Lexington attorney, Barclay played a critical role in converting the Lexington Arsenal into a legally chartered state institution. His educational and professional background ensured that VMI's founding documents, governance structure, and property arrangements complied fully with Virginia law. Gen. Thomas H. Botts was a senior brigadier general in the Virginia militia, entrusted with district-level command authority over regimental organization, officer appointments, inspections, and readiness reporting to the governor and Adjutant General. His experience administering Virginia's militia laws gave him practical knowledge of command structure and state military governance. As an original member of the Board of Visitors, Botts helped translate the Commonwealth's existing militia framework into the regimental system adopted at VMI, ensuring that the new Institute would operate in harmony with Virginia's defense structure and produce disciplined, properly trained officers. Gen. Charles P. Dorman was a high-ranking Virginia militia officer with district command responsibilities that required organizational oversight, logistical coordination, and enforcement of military discipline. As a founding Visitor, Dorman helped shape the Institute's strict chain-of-command structure and regimental organization, ensuring it mirrored the Commonwealth's existing military hierarchy and contributed meaningfully to statewide defense readiness. Gen. Peter C. Johnson held the rank of brigadier general in the Virginia militia, supervising multiple regiments and coordinating training compliance within his district. His duties required inspection authority, logistical oversight, and communication with state military leadership, demonstrating both administrative and strategic capability. In the creation of VMI, Johnson supported the concept of a state-sponsored military school that would elevate professional standards among officers, and his participation on the inaugural Board helped ensure the Institute's structure reflected established militia hierarchy and statutory authority. Dr. Alfred Leyburn was formally educated in medicine, completing the rigorous scientific and clinical training required of physicians in the early nineteenth century. A respected physician and civic leader in Rockbridge County, Leyburn brought intellectual credibility to the Board. In helping establish VMI, he advocated for strong academic instruction alongside military discipline, reinforcing the Institute's identity as both a scientific and military educational institution. James McDowell, Esq. attended a classical school at Greenville, a private school at Brownsburg, Washington College (now Washington & Lee University) in Lexington, and Yale College, before graduating from Princeton University in 1817. His classical education emphasized philosophy, rhetoric, mathematics, and the moral sciences before he read law to enter the legal profession. He went on to serve in the Virginia House of Delegates, as Governor of Virginia (1843–1846), and later in the United States House of Representatives. His academic formation and legal training equipped him for high public office and legislative leadership. As a founding Visitor of VMI, McDowell's political authority and intellectual stature provided legitimacy to the Institute and strengthened its standing within the Commonwealth's government. Gen. Bernard Peyton, Adjutant General of Virginia, ex officio, received a Virginia education typical of the Commonwealth's civic and military leaders before serving in the War of 1812, where he gained firsthand combat experience. Appointed Adjutant General of Virginia in 1834, he oversaw statewide militia administration, including officer commissions, inspections, and enforcement of military regulations. His administrative expertise, grounded in both education and active service, positioned him as a key figure linking the Commonwealth's militia system with the newly established Institute. In his ex officio capacity during VMI's founding, Peyton ensured that the school's organization and regulations aligned with Virginia military law, integrating it formally into the state's defense structure. John T. L. Preston, Esq. was educated at the University of Virginia, where he received a rigorous classical and legal education shaped by Jeffersonian academic principles. His studies emphasized law, political philosophy, and the sciences—disciplines that influenced his vision for a state-supported military institute grounded in both intellectual and technical instruction. Preston drafted and championed the legislation establishing VMI, drawing inspiration from the United States Military Academy at West Point and European military-scientific academies. His academic formation and legal expertise were central to conceptualizing and sustaining the Institute's educational and military framework.Capt. John F. Wiley served as a company commander in the Virginia militia, directly responsible for drilling, equipping, and disciplining citizen-soldiers in accordance with state regulations. His operational-level command experience gave him firsthand knowledge of the strengths and weaknesses of Virginia's militia training system. As a founding Board member, Wiley contributed practical insight into how a state military institute could standardize officer preparation, strengthen discipline, and improve the effectiveness of local militia leadership throughout the Commonwealth. The VMI BOV evolved alongside VMI, starting with membership by its founders and culminating in the Institute maturing into citizen-soldiers capable of governing itself. At its founding, Virginia Governor Campbell (D) was the first to call out the potential dangers of politicizing the BOV. In 1839, he wrote, "The failure of governors in recent years to recognize that a soldier's job is for a soldier and not for pleasant political supporters accounts for most of the ills the Institute has suffered." In the Institute's early years, Campbell strongly opposed treating VMI's Board as if the Institute were just another Virginia Institution of Higher Education (IHE). He opined on the impact of this approach in his observation that: "Real soldiers have been sorely hampered to the injury of the Institute, and in several cases splendid soldiers have been repected as candidates for the office of superintendent or have been discouraged after appointment because the Boards have wanted to run the Institute as they have seen fit instead of as experienced soldiers would have." This structure endured as VMI graduated cadets who would one day be capable of replacing them with alumni governance. The first class of cadets graduated from VMI on July 4, 1842. This inaugural class generally matriculated between the ages of 16 and 22. During the Civil War era, of the approximately 1,930 VMI alumni living at the beginning of the War (1861-1865), 1,827 served in some capacity (94.7%) for both the Union and the Confederacy. Of those who served, 240 died. The 19th century: Executive control, then legislative consent A decade after the founding act, the 1849 Code trimmed the board to the adjutant general and eight other persons, with appointments allocated geographically across Virginia's "grand divisions." The statute eventually added the Superintendent of Public Instruction as an ex officio member, with William Henry Ruffner as the first in 1870. The model held through mid-century revisions. The Governor appointed; geography constrained the picks; alumni/ae identity remained legally invisible. That changed in 1887, when the Code introduced a new phrase: appointments were to be made "with the advice and consent of the Senate." The following year's Extra Session recast the board at 11 members — the adjutant general and superintendent of public instruction as ex officio members, plus nine gubernatorial appointees "subject to confirmation by the senate." The change also introduced BOV Member terms ranging from 1 to 3 years, eliminating the continuity that VMI's founders had brought. For the first time, the board's legitimacy was subject to both executive appointment and legislative confirmation. By the mid to late 1800s, as the Institute's earliest classes matured and the Governor began the practice of appointing graduates to the board, a tradition that eventually became a legal requirement. This approach replaced the continuity in preserving and protecting the VMI ethos lost to term rotations by deliberately placing the Institute's governance in the hands of those who lived and controlled it as cadets. During that period Alumni had no statutory foothold. That changed in 1936. The 20th century: Alumni enter the statute Up to 1936, the Virginia Military Institute (VMI) had graduated approximately 2,500 to 3,000 cadets, as total alumni numbered over 4,000 by the start of World War II in 1939. An amendment to the statute required the Governor to appoint from "a list of eight persons … submitted … by the alumni association," and directed the Governor to certify certain vacancies to the association. The Alumni Association had entered the law. In 1944, alumni identity became numeric. The board expanded to 12 members — 10 appointed by the Governor — and the statute required that "not less than four or more than eight" of the appointive visitors "be alumni." A year later, the General Assembly refined nomination timing, requiring lists "on or before the first day of April." By 1946, the board had grown to 13 members, with 11 appointed by the Governor and confirmation still required. Then came the decisive turn. In 1960, the statute expanded the board to 15 members and declared: "At least ten … shall be alumni of the Institute." Recognizing the reach of the growing alumni ranks across the nation, the statute created two seats for "nonresident alumni". This ensured that those bringing experience from outside Virginia did so with a grounding in the VMI experience, ethos, history, and culture. For the first time, alumni were guaranteed a supermajority. Eight years later, lawmakers required that "at least three … shall be non-alumni," while leaving the adjutant general as the sole ex officio member. The board had become a negotiated coalition: alumni guaranteed dominance, nonalumni guaranteed presence to bring fresh outside ideas, and appointments made by the Governor and confirmed by the Senate. The modern formula: Fixed ratios and residency math In 1975, the General Assembly slightly tightened the Alumni Association's influence, limiting nomination lists to "not more than three names for each vacancy." Four years later, lawmakers locked in the modern structure. The 1979 act set the board at "seventeen visitors, sixteen … appointed by the Governor," with "twelve … alumni" and "four … not … alumni," and required confirmation "by the General Assembly." The following year, residency splits, phasing from nine resident alumni down to eight, preserving four nonresident alumni seats. By 2020, the Code printed the current structure: 17 members; 16 appointed by the Governor; the adjutant general as an "ex officio nonvoting member"; 12 alumni — "eight … residents … four … nonresidents" — and four nonalumni Virginia residents. The Alumni Association "may submit … not more than three nominees for each vacancy." Also at this time, former Governor Northam initiated the controversial Equity Audit and Investigation into VMI. Starting with replacing the Superintendent, the new BOV and VMI leadership embarked on large changes to the VMI culture and operations, including the Ratline, Corps System, and the Honor System that applied VMI's Honor Code. The alumni-controlled Board at the time realized the risks and dangers of forcing ideologies on VMI cadets and the VMI ethos. Quietly, and unknown to most alumni and cadets, Virginia State Senator Tommy Norment (R) proposed and secured the passage of Senate Bill 994, VMI. VMI's honor code and system became statutory: The Institute shall be grounded in a strict code of honor and high academics, shall uphold a strict military structure, and shall remain solely an undergraduate degree-granting institution of higher education. All cadets shall participate in one of the Reserve Officers' Training Corps (ROTC) programs at all times while attending the Institute. What began as a simple appointment statute had become a carefully engineered identity matrix. The alumni-controlled BOV could now protect the vmi experience and Honor Code. More importantly, it could safeguard the Corps-run Honor System that enforced the honor code and governed the VMI experience, as long as they maintained the majority. A proposed rewrite Today, a substitute measure titled "HOUSE BILL NO. 1374" would revise that formula again and shift the authority of what defines "a strict code of honor and high academics", "a strict military structure", and if VMI remains "solely an undergraduate degree-granting institution." As covered in The Cadet, proposed House Bill 1377, which VMI and the Alumni Agencies fully support, would conduct a study, controlled by General Assembly appointees, to recommend changes to those areas and any other areas the study group deems appropriate. The proposal would require that "no more than eight shall be alumni of the Institute," [emphasis added] that "at least six shall be nonalumni residents of the Commonwealth," and that "at least five shall have United States military experience," applying to appointments made "on or after July 1, 2026." Historically, those changes would be significant. Since 1869, all non-alumni were required to be Virginia residents. Since 1960, the statute has guaranteed an alumni majority. Since 1979, it has fixed alumni at 12 of 16 appointive seats. Since 1980, it has hard-coded alumni residency splits. Capping alumni at no more than eight -although no alumni are required to be on the BOV under the bill - will end the guaranteed alumni majority for the first time in more than six decades and could eliminate all alumni representation on the board altogether. Raising non-alumni minimums and adding a military-experience floor would introduce qualifications not previously embedded as multi-seat numeric requirements in the membership. Removing the requirement for non-alumni to be Virginia residents opens VMI governance to those with no ties or loyalties to Virginia. Why membership math matters Board composition is not symbolic. It determines who hires leaders, sets policy, allocates resources, and defines institutional culture. In 1839, the legislature entrusted the school to an executive appointee and to a military officer to guide it. By the late 19th century, it insisted on legislative confirmation. By the mid-20th century, it formally empowered alumni. By the late 20th century, it translated identity into fixed ratios and residency formulas. Every revision in the statutory chain reflects a judgment about which voices should dominate when values collide: executive authority, legislative oversight, alumni stewardship, statewide representation, or professional experience. The board's history is written not only in speeches and traditions, but also in numbers — numbers that have been recalculated repeatedly since the spring of 1839. Now, in the 21st Century, HB1733 seeks to reset the BOV to eliminate the required role for alumni/ae and reduce the Virginia residence role and numbers to levels below those of 1839. According to Del. Sam Rasul (D), Chair of the House education committee, VMI is already moving to implement changes, as it did before the previous Equity Audit under former Governor Northam. "VMI has new leadership," said Rasoul. "And that leadership has said, 'yeah, we agree some things need to change, and we're ready to work together to get that done,' so it's the best of both worlds." This substantiates statements by VMI officials to various cadet and alumni gatherings that include potentially renaming the chapel in honor of Jonathan Daniels; a wall around Virginia Mourning her Dead to contextualize it away from the Civil War to all alumni killed in the nation's wars; renaming buildings and streets to remove those linked to the Civial War era; a "bigger" trubute to Lt. Gen. Wins; and more. As previously reported in The Cadet, during one of his recent presentations, the Superintendent told the Corps, "I'm not concerned about statues and portraits and whatnot. And if I had to move those all, get rid of that, move forward, I will to protect what are the core values of VMI." HB1733 changes who protects and determines those core values. VMI and its alumni/ae agencies support the change and justify it as aligning VMI with other Virginia Colleges. None, however, are Senior Military Colleges (SMC) like VMI. By comparison with other SMCs, the nearest peer public institution is The Citadel whose BOV consists of the Governor, the Adjutant General and the State Superintendent of Education as ex officio members and "eleven others who shall be graduates of the college, seven of whom are to be elected by joint vote of the General Assembly as hereinafter provided, three of whom are to be elected by such means and methods as may be determined by the Association of Citadel Men or any succeeding organization of Citadel men". [emphasis added] HB1733 could result in no alumni representation on the VMI board, and the alumni have no authority to directly select BOV Members. In Virginia, the closest is Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University (Virginia Tech). Unlike VMI, Virginia Tech has both a Corps of Cadet and a non-cadet student population, but the statute requires "Of the 13 members appointed by the Governor, at least 10 members shall be residents of the Commonwealth, and at least six members shall be alumni of the University." [emphasis added] This statute guarantees 10 alumni, while HB1733 does not require any for VMI. What is clear is that if HB1377 passes, VMI alumni will lose the required supermajority on the board and possibly any representation, although they contribute over 40% of VMI's funds, over 40% of the Superintendent's salary, as well as 100% of his bonuses if the same approach is used as with his predecessor. Any requirement for some members to be Virginia residents is also lost. What is also certain from the bill is the loss of the 2020 "fail-safe" change to the statute, as potentially the definition of what constitutes "a strict code of honor and high academics," and a "strict military structure" will be defined by those who never attended VMI, are non-Virginians, or both. What remains unanswered in the current debate over VMI's BOV structure is why such changes are necessary and the specific problems they will solve. To date, neither the Bill's Chief Patron, the legislature, VMI, nor VMI's Alumni Agencies has addressed those. The current situation brings some back to the observation of Gov. Campbell in 1839: "…as time goes on, the experimenting and compromising with fundamental and unchanging principles of discipline become ever more costly with loss of efficiency and just at the time they are most needed to make of the Institute a model for the country as a whole, which is suffering sorely from progressive education." As of the publication of this issue of The Cadet, HB1374 was referred to the Senate Committee on Education and Health, where it is currently in the subcommittee on education, and HB1377 was referred to the Senate Committee on Finance and Appropriations. VMI and its alumni agencies continue to support both bills. Reference records for this article can be downloaded from the online version of the article at https://www.cadetnewspaper.com. UPDATE March 3, 2016: After the publication of this article in The Cadet, the Virginia Senate subcommittee considered a revision to the legislation that would require eight members of the Board of Visitors be alumni. This adjustment appears to be a direct response to the sustained scrutiny from alumni, cadets, citizens of Virginia, and other stakeholders. While this modification may appear substantive, it is not. VMI and its Alumni Agencies fully endorsed the original language. Those advancing this proposed change demonstrate a readiness to make limited, largely cosmetic revisions to secure passage while preserving their broader objectives. As the original article details, the key point that remains unchanged is that even if the Bill is amended, the majority of the Alumni on the VMI Board would be eliminated. At the Senate hearing, VMI's Superintendent testified in support of the Billand VMI's Alumni Agencies continue to support it. Please consider supporting The Cadet through a donation at: www.thecdetfoundation.org. The cadet remains independent of both VMI and its Alumni Agencies. All funds go to support our programs governed by a Board of ONLY cadets and alumni.