By SUSAN JONES
A court filing by the Pitt Board of Trustees and its current chair, John Verbanac, in response to a suit filed by Emeritus Trustee John Pelusi in December says that Pelusi’s repeated requests for information — particularly about Pitt Athletics — are inappropriate and disruptive.
Pelusi, who had served as a voting trustee with various titles for 30 years and had met the 12-year limit for term trustees, transitioned to the non-voting emeritus status at the end of June 2024.
“The transition to a non-voting status was a significant change for Pelusi and one that he has yet to fully grasp,” the response to the suit said.
Pelusi, who was a co-captain of Pitt's 1976 national championship football team, said in his suit that he had concerns about: Pitt’s Name, Image and Likeness policies; challenges associated with the House vs. NCAA settlement that requires schools to pay former and current college athletes; and the firing of former Pitt Athletic Director Heather Lyke in September. Pelusi was on the search committee that brought Lyke to Pitt in 2017.
The Board of Trustees said in its response that the 36 voting members of the Board of Trustees are responsible for directing, managing and overseeing the affairs of the University, as outlined in the University of Pittsburgh Commonwealth Act of 1966.
“Pelusi is no longer part of, and is not entitled to participate in, that process. Pelusi's privileges as an emeritus trustee are limited to attending board meetings as an observer at the discretion of the board chairperson, and to serve as a non-voting member on certain committees, subject to the discretion of the chairs of those committees. Pelusi has refused to recognize this fundamental change in his role at the University, and he has improperly interfered with the ability of the 36 voting members of the Board of Trustees to efficiently carry out their management and oversight responsibilities.”
Pelusi’s suit took particular issue with Lyke’s firing, saying that the University risks losing multiple large donations because of how the situation was handled. The board response said Pelusi’s efforts are “wholly improper attempts by Pelusi to inject himself into administrative decisions at the University that fall squarely within the discretion and control of the chancellor.”
It went on to say that “As the University's chief administrative officer, all administrative decisions related to the University, including decisions related to personnel retention and contracting, are vested with the University chancellor. It is inappropriate for any Trustee — voting or emeritus — to interfere with the administrative decisions related to the University that are properly vested with the University chancellor.”
The board and Verbanac also refute Pelusi’s allegation that he was repeatedly denied information. “To the contrary, the chancellor, Chairperson Verbanac, and other members of University leadership have conversed with Pelusi at length, on numerous occasions since he became an emeritus trustee, including telephone calls and at least one in-person meeting with the chancellor, about his purported ‘concerns’ giving rise to the present complaint,” the filing said.
It also pointed out that Chancellor Joan Gabel met with the board, including emeritus trustees, in executive session on Sept. 10, 2024, to address concerns about the personnel changes in the athletic department. Pelusi was present, and emeritus trustees were able to ask questions at that meeting.
In a letter Verbanac sent to on Nov. 4, Pelusi's privilege of attending meetings as an emeritus trustee was temporarily suspended because “he engaged in inappropriate and disruptive conduct that directly interfered with the ability of the voting members of the board to efficiently carry out their fiduciary duties and oversight responsibilities to the University.” He also lost access to the portal connected to those meetings.
Pelusi’s suit seeks an injunction allowing him to participate in board meetings and access the financial and management-related information he requested.
The response filing said Verbanac made the decision to suspend Pelusi after he consulted the board’s bylaws and the chairperson of the Governance, Nominating, and Trusteeship Committee, and eventually the members of that entire committee.
Verbanac offered to meet with Pelusi before the Dec. 3 to 5 meetings of the board and its committees to try to resolve these issues and to discuss the “‘disconnect’ between the board's expectations of Pelusi in his capacity as an emeritus trustee and Pelusi's understanding of the same.”
Pelusi refused this meeting. In his suit, Pelusi said he would only participate if the meeting included the entire Governance, Nominating and Trusteeship Committee.
In their response, the board and Verbanac said that despite the “extreme logistical challenges” of scheduling a meeting with Verbanac, Gabel and the full Governance committee, “the chairperson and the board secretary made special efforts to accommodate Pelusi's demand.”
The response went on to say that in a Dec. 2, 2024, email sent by his counsel, Pelusi indicated that his availability to meet “was almost exclusively limited to periods of time past business hours, including as late as 9 p.m.”
A hearing on Pelusi’s injunction request is scheduled for February in the Allegheny County Common Pleas Court.
Susan Jones is editor of the University Times. Reach her at suejones@pitt.edu or 724-244-4042.
Have a story idea or news to share? Share it with the University Times.