.jpg)
New VMI Alumni Group Asks Board For Answers
Retired Maj. Gen. Cedric T. Wins said the Virginia Military Institute board of visitors’ decision to remove him as superintendent was driven not by performance, but by politics and ideology — a charge that has so far gone unanswered by the board.
In a statement released last Thursday, Wins said he was “disappointed” by the board’s 10-6 vote not to renew his contract and argued that the decision “was not based on my performance or the tangible progress we achieved.” Instead, he called it “a partisan choice that abandons the values of honor, integrity, and excellence upon which VMI was built.”
Now, some VMI alumni and supporters are demanding answers of their own.
A group called “In Alma Mater’s Name” has gathered more than 650 signatures on an open letter to the board of visitors, calling for transparency and a written explanation by March 21. The letter describes the vote as a “hastily scheduled, closed-door session” that offered little opportunity for public input and asserts that Wins “has executed his duties with distinction, integrity, and results.”
In his statement last week, Wins detailed accomplishments from his tenure, which began in 2021 under a storm of difficult circumstances: a pandemic, enrollment concerns, and intense public scrutiny.
Among the accomplishments Wins cited were a 50% increase in state funding and more than $321 million secured for facility upgrades. He secured a reversal of a decadelong decline in admissions, as well as a $3.8 million grant aimed at boosting Pell Grant enrollment. His tenure, he said, also included salary adjustments designed to improve pay equity across the VMI workforce and an expansion of scholarship opportunities, including the “Call to Duty” program, which awarded $2.4 million to 172 cadets. He also noted the historic appointment of VMI’s first female regimental commander in 25 years, and a five-star ranking from Money Magazine — the only senior military college in the country to receive that distinction.
“I placed the right emphasis on repairing the culture and climate and charting a way forward for VMI,” Wins wrote. “Unfortunately, the winds of resistance by the few have drowned out those who desire to bring the Institute into the 21st century.”
He warned that the board’s decision “undermines the rich legacy of VMI for political gain” and risks pulling the institution backward: “Instead of advancing this school … we risk returning to an obsessive focus on our distant past believing it will produce tomorrow’s leaders of character.”
The board of visitors has not publicly explained the vote. Board President John Adams has not responded to multiple requests for comment. An auto-response from his email address indicates that he is traveling until March 15. New board member Jonathan Hartsock, who was appointed shortly before the vote and is the only current board member from Lexington, declined to comment and referred questions back to Adams.
The board’s silence has fueled further frustration among at least some in the VMI community — and added weight to the open letter now circulating among alumni and supporters.
The open letter from In Alma Mater’s Name (found at www.inalmamatersname. org/homepage) urges the board to answer four specific questions: Why was Wins dismissed despite his performance record? What was the process behind the decision? What is the board’s plan for the institute’s future leadership? And will the board commit to transparent governance moving forward?
The letter praises Wins for preserving VMI’s core military and academic traditions while modernizing its infrastructure and leadership culture. It highlights recordbreaking fundraising efforts, improved recruiting and retention, and major academic investments, and it accuses the board of ignoring this progress in favor of decisions made “without transparency or explanation.”
The petition also notes Gov. Glenn Youngkin’s influence over the board, with 13 of 16 voting members appointed by him, including two reappointed after previously resigning during earlier controversies over race and leadership at the institute.
The Rev. Reginald A. Early, president of the Rockbridge County NAACP and a longtime supporter of Wins, told The News-Gazette in a phone call that he agrees with the superintendent’s view that the decision was political — and went further.
“I do. And I think it was racist as well,” Early said in an interview Monday. “It wasn’t like some seem to think, that he was incompetent. He exceeded what he was supposed to do.”
Early described Wins as a capable leader who brought professionalism and vision to the role. “I found him to be a personable individual, as well as his wife. I found him to be a person of accomplishment in the military, reaching the rank of general, major general. And I was impressed with him when he shared his goals with me as president of the Rockbridge County NAACP in terms of addressing the issue that was at the forefront of VMI relating to racism and sexism.”
Wins’ accomplishments during his short tenure were not just limited to the minimizing of social scandal, Early pointed out. “He brought millions of dollars to the institute …. The new construction was done under his tenure. And enrollment was up to par. So, I just don’t get it.
“His strategic plans were very impressive. Very impressive,” he said. “A reasonable person or a reasonable board would be impressed and would want to keep him on to continue the magnificent work he was doing.”
Early said the board’s silence only raises more questions.
“I think it’s interesting that they don’t want to talk about the decision that they made,” he said. “I would think that they would be willing to explain their decision.”
The next board of visitors meeting is scheduled for May 1-3. It remains to be seen whether they will call a meeting before then to discuss future plans for the institute’s leadership.
Wins is expected to remain in his position through the end of his current contract, which runs through June 30, 2025.
“I remain committed to serving this Institute and guiding its cadets until my tenure ends,” he wrote. “We must proactively commit to giving valor and right action precedence over ideology and political expediency.”
