Please ensure Javascript is enabled for purposes of website accessibility

Scout Motors picks Charlotte for new corporate headquarters

Summary

  •  selects Charlotte for its corporate headquarters.
  • EV maker investing $2.3B in  production center.
  • New HQ strengthens coordination between South Carolina and North Carolina sites.
  • Production expected to begin in 2027, creating 4,000+ South Carolina jobs.

After investing over $2 billion in South Carolina, an electric vehicle manufacturer has chosen to cross state lines for its corporate headquarters.

Scout Motors, which is building a $2.3 billion production center for its all-electric SUV and pick-up in the Midlands, will locate its corporate hive in Charlotte.

The news comes just two months after Scout announced it would also build a $300 million supply park near its production center in Blythewood.

Location was the main draw for Scout in choosing to cross the state line for its corporate operations.

Scout said the decision followed a comprehensive, multi-state evaluation process as Scout Motors sought the right location to serve as the long-term center of gravity for the company’s corporate operations. Charlotte stood out for its combination of workforce strength, business climate, livability and strategic location.

“Charlotte is well known as the home of strong global brands, and we’re thrilled to welcome Scout Motors to that list,” said Charlotte Mayor Vi Lyles in the release. “This project is a major  milestone for the city and will serve as a catalyst for continued revitalization in a part of our city that’s seeing new life through infrastructure and development. We can’t wait to see the impact this innovative company’s investment will bring to our city.”

Just over an hour north of the company’s production center that is under construction in Blythewood, Scout says the Charlotte location will further cement its presence in the Carolinas and enable seamless coordination between manufacturing, corporate and technical operations.

The Scout Motors headquarters will be at the Commonwealth development in Plaza Midwood.

Construction is progressing rapidly at Scout Motors’ production center, with initial production targeted to begin in 2027, according to the release. Once it reaches full capacity, the Production Center is expected to create more than 4,000 jobs in South Carolina and attract additional suppliers and economic opportunities to the region.

The  will serve as the home base for executive leadership, research and development, finance, IT, sales, marketing, and other key corporate functions. Scout Motors will begin establishing its Charlotte presence gradually, with plans for initial staffing and office development beginning in 2026 and full headquarters operations scaling up in the coming years.

Housing inventory rises in major Virginia markets

SUMMARY:

  • rose year-over-year in Northern Virginia, and Central Virginia
  • In Northern Virginia the total sold dollar volume climbed to more than $1.3 billion
  • Median price in Hampton Roads was $362,000

Inventory grew year-over-year in Northern Virginia, Central Virginia and Hampton Roads in October, providing home buyers with more options.

Northern Virginia

The Northern Virginia Association of Realtors reports that there were 1,427 homes sold in October, a 7.5% increase over October 2024. The total sales volume was $1.3 billion, a 16.5% increase compared with October of last year. Pending sales increased by .08% year-over-year to 1,352.

“The growth we’re seeing in both sales and dollar volume is a sign of steady confidence in Northern ,” NVAR CEO Ryan McLaughlin said in a news release. “Even as buyers adjust to hovering around six percent, the fundamentals of our market — strong employment, desirable communities, and economic diversity — remain incredibly solid.”

The association says the median sales price rose to $750,000, up 4.9% from last year, which the association says underscores “continued buyer demand for well-priced, move-in-ready homes across the region.”

The association reported active listings jumping 42.2% year-over-year, with 2,562 properties listed in October.

Homes spent an average of 27 days on the market, up 42.1% from last year, which the association calls “another indicator of returning balance.”

The immediate impact on housing from the federal government shutdown, which began Oct. 1, has been limited, according to the association.

“While we’re monitoring how the shutdown may affect buyer confidence and transaction timelines, Northern Virginia’s housing market remains steady,” McLaughlin stated. “Northern Virginia’s strong base of public- and private-sector employers can help mitigate some of the short-term effects that often accompany a federal shutdown.”

NVAR reports home sales activity for Fairfax and Arlington counties, the cities of Alexandria, Fairfax and Falls Church, and the towns of Vienna, Herndon and Clifton.

Hampton Roads

According to the Real Estate Information Network (REIN), Hampton Roads saw active listings, median selling prices and pending sales increase year-over-year in October.

Hampton Roads saw 2,099 closed sales in October, down less than 1% year-over-year.

In October, the month’s supply of inventory (MSI) — a measure of how many months there would be homes on the market if no new inventory were added — was 2.68, up from 2.35 during October 2024.

Active residential listings rose to 5,571 from 5,472 in September and up 16.9% year-over-year from 4,765 during October 2024.

“An ample supply of homes presently on the market provide today’s buyers with an array of choices,“ said Barbara Wolcott with Berkshire Hathaway HomeServices RW Towne Realty and president of REIN’s board. “The combination of increased supply and lower mortgage rates gives buyers significant incentive to act quickly.”

The median selling price for October was $362,000, down from $365,000 in September but a 2.26% increase year-over-year.

October’s pending sales stood at 2,162, down from 2,270 in September, but up 4.3% from 2,072 in October 2024.

Homes spent a median of 30 days on the market in October, up from 27 days in both September and October 2024.

Founded in 1969, REIN is a regional multiple listing service that covers an area stretching from east to Virginia Beach and south across the North Carolina border.

Central Virginia

The Central Virginia Regional Multiple Listing Service divides its data between single-family homes and condos and townhomes.

In the region, there were 1,344 closed single-family home sales in October, down 2.5% from the 1,379 sold at the same point in 2024. For condo/townhomes, there were 266 sales, up 0.4% from October 2024’s 265.

Pending sales for single-family homes increased 10.6% year-over-year from 1,316 in October 2024 to 1,456 in October 2025. For condo/townhomes, there were 245 pending sales last month — a 9.9% increase from October 2024.

Single-family homes spent 31 days on the market in October —up from the 30 days on the market the previous year. Meanwhile, condo/townhomes spent 39 days on the market, up from the 37 reported in October 2024.

The median sales price for single-family homes was $415,000 in October of this year compared to $391,692 in October 2024. But the median sales price for condo/townhomes dipped .04%, from $372,000 in October 2024 to $370,345 this year.

Single-family homes for sale in October totaled 2,974, a 3.8% year-over-year rise from 2,864 homes, while the number of condo/townhome units for sale totaled 788, a 24.1% rise from October 2024’s 635 units.

The CVR MLS includes data for the cities of Richmond, Petersburg, Hopewell and Colonial Heights and the counties of Amelia, Charles City, Chesterfield, Dinwiddie, Goochland, Hanover, Henrico, King & Queen, King William, New Kent, Powhatan and Prince George.

Norfolk State receives record $50M gift from MacKenzie Scott

Norfolk State University announced Thursday that philanthropist, billionaire and early contributor has donated $50 million to the university — the largest gift in the school’s 90-year history.

The donation comes two weeks after Scott’s record-setting donation of $50 million to Virginia State University, the state’s other public historically Black university, or HBCU.

will use the unrestricted gift, Scott’s second eight-figure award to the university, to support student scholarships, faculty research, athletics and strategic initiatives. In 2020, Scott donated $40 million to , its previous record donation.

The ex-wife of Amazon founder and former CEO Jeff Bezos, Scott was involved with the e-tail giant from its start, contributing to its original business plan and its first freight contract. She is a published author, and following her 2019 divorce from Bezos, she had $35.6 billion in Amazon stock and became one of the world’s wealthiest women.

In 2020, she made $30 million donations to Hampton University and Virginia State University.

The university, which announced the donation Friday, expects to add funds to an endowment to generate revenue for scholarships in perpetuity, and that scholarships will be awarded beginning in fall 2026.

The university says the gift “will catapult State to its next level of excellence,” and President Javaune Adams-Gaston thanked Scott for the “enormous vote of confidence” she placed in the institution.

According to NSU spokesperson Stevelynn Adams, Scott’s first gift to the university was used to increase student scholarships, purchase property near the campus for expansion, establish faculty research and performance awards, and increase the school’s scholarship endowment. The university states that the new gift demonstrates a positive return on the 2020 investment.

Founded in 1935, NSU is a public university based in Norfolk. There are 6,557 students enrolled at the college this fall, comprising 5,828 undergraduates and 729 graduate students.

William & Mary to be U.S. hub for AUKUS submarine pact

SUMMARY:

  • will host the United States’ Center of Excellence for to support production
  • The center will be part of U.S.-U.K.-Australia trilateral nuclear sub alliance dubbed AUKUS
  • Specifics on the center are still being developed

William & Mary is stepping into a new role as the nation’s academic hub focusing on the development of nuclear-powered submarines between the U.S., the United Kingdom and Australia.

The university will be the U.S. academic base for nuclear submarine technology, with counterparts in Sheffield, England, and Adelaide, Australia, as part of AUKUS, a trilateral security alliance formed in 2021 among the three countries.

Newport News-based shipbuilder Huntington Ingalls Industries, parent of Newport News , is also involved in AUKUS, having been awarded in March a contract from the Australian government to develop and run a new pilot program that will build a submarine supply chain between the U.S. and Australia.

The AUKUS agreement, established under former President Joe Biden, calls for the U.S. and the U.K. to share nuclear propulsion technology with Australia, whose Navy is set to acquire at least eight nuclear-powered submarines, including three to five Virginia-class submarines in the 2030s.

Early in President Donald Trump’s second term, Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth said he would continue the nation’s involvement in AUKUS, but in August, the DOD changed course, announcing it would review AUKUS by this fall.

Lawmakers from both parties have urged the White House to continue the partnership, and the Japanese news outlet Nikkei Asia reported Nov. 8 that the Pentagon is likely to conclude its review in December with an endorsement of the pact.

‘s new role in AUKUS was first referenced publicly Oct. 29 by the Alliance as part of its regional “Playbook” strategy to grow the area’s economy. According to the alliance, the AUKUS Center of Excellence at W&M is envisioned as a hub that helps the U.S., U.K. and Australia tackle shared challenges in building and sustaining nuclear-powered submarines.

“William & Mary’s designation as the U.S. academic home for the AUKUS initiative underscores the vital role of in advancing innovation and security,” William & Mary Provost Peggy Agouris said in a statement. “This Center of Excellence brings together dedicated expertise to address complex global challenges and prepare the next generation of leaders who will shape the future of maritime defense and technology.”

W&M’s Whole of Government Center of Excellence, which serves as a hub for the campus and the broader defense community, will lead the initiative.

Kathryn Floyd, director of the university’s Whole of Government Center of Excellence, said in an interview the new center will be a research and development hub for emerging technologies and supply chains. A lot of the specifics are still in motion, she added, noting that the U.K., Australia and U.S. officials will be determining over the next year what W&M’s center will do.

Floyd said that the broad parameters of the center will include connecting private investment with defense industry needs, exchanging expertise and best practices to advance submarine production, workforce training, supplier growth and innovation.

The center will also help streamline approval processes for submarine components and key technologies, thereby accelerating production, and it may also play a role in building a workforce pipeline, particularly in identifying gaps and connecting regional partners, she added.

Many of the W&M center’s programs and partnerships and some of its day-to-day functions are still being defined, Floyd said. “I think we’re going to see who has what, where are the gaps and what needs to be built in that space.”

Other W&M partners include its military and veteran affairs team, the university’s vice provost for research, the Reves Center for International Studies, the College of Arts & Sciences’ public policy program, the Batten School of Coastal & Marine Sciences, the Virginia Institute of Marine Science and the W&M School of Computing, Data Sciences and Physics, among others.

“William & Mary, with its global reputation for excellence and deep ties to international partners, is the perfect home for the U.S. AUKUS Center of Excellence,” President and CEO Doug Smith said in a statement. “Hampton Roads is at the forefront of shaping global security, and this partnership brings together the intellectual power and connections of one of the world’s great universities with the industrial strength of America’s military metro.”

Youngkin responds to Spanberger on U.Va., blasting ‘hyperbole and factual errors’

Summary:

  • says Gov.-elect ‘s letter to U.Va. board is filled with “factual errors”
  • Governor’s letter alleges “evidence is compelling” that U.Va. under “repeatedly ignored the law.”
  • Tim Heaphy, U.Va.’s former legal counsel, says Youngkin’s assertion is “factually unfounded.”

Updated Nov. 17

Gov. Glenn Youngkin wrote a heavily critical letter this week to Gov.-elect Abigail Spanberger in response to her letter attempting to delay hiring of the University of Virginia’s next president until she takes office in January 2026.

Her Nov. 12 letter to the U.Va. was “riddled with hyperbole and factual errors and impugns both the Board of Visitors and the presidential search underway,” Youngkin wrote in his Nov. 13 letter to Spanberger, a U.Va. alumna.

“I am advised that this was likely the first time in the history of our commonwealth that a governor-elect attempted to interfere with the governance of a university and the fiduciary duties of individual board members,” Youngkin wrote. “Surprisingly, you have reached conclusions before you or your transition team have taken the time to learn all the facts surrounding the resignation of former U.Va. President Jim Ryan and the settlement agreement with the U.S. .”

Ryan resigned as president in late June, citing federal pressure in his decision to leave. The DOJ’s civil rights division had launched a probe of the university, alleging that Ryan was slow-walking the dismantling of U.Va.’s diversity, equity and inclusion programs after its board voted to dissolve such initiatives in March.

The governor wrote to Spanberger that the “DOJ did not randomly or without a predicate select U.Va. when it started its formal investigation. The evidence is compelling that the university had repeatedly ignored the law.”

Youngkin also wrote that a former general counsel for the university, whom he does not name, “confirmed in a public speech that the university ‘had some programs that crossed the legal line … we have, in certain schools or certain departments, numerical formulas and that was against the rules.'”

However, Youngkin received pushback Friday in the form of a letter from , who served as the university’s state-appointed legal counsel from 2018 to 2022. Heaphy wrote that Youngkin incorrectly cited part of Heaphy’s September presentation to U.Va. faculty members in Youngkin’s letter to Spanberger.

Obtained by WRIC 8 News, Heaphy’s letter says that Youngkin’s assertion that the university broke federal law “is both factually unfounded and legally incorrect.”

Heaphy continues, saying that Youngkin omits the word “historically” that precedes the line “had some programs that crossed the legal line.” Heaphy writes that these programs were established before he and Ryan were employed at U.Va., and “when we learned of those programs, we didn’t ignore them but rather took steps to ensure they were modified to comply with the law.”

Upon taking office in 2022, Attorney General Jason Miyares fired Heaphy, who also was lead investigator for the U.S. House of Representatives’ Jan. 6 committee.

University governance dispute

Youngkin’s three-page letter also alleges that “neither the DOJ nor the current board leadership made Jim resign. His resignation took place under the leadership of Rector Robert Hardie, who was appointed by Governors Kaine, McAuliffe and Northam, and his resignation was encouraged personally by Rector Rusty Conner, who was the rector during Jim’s hiring.”

The governor wrote that Conner and Hardie, who completed his term as rector July 1, days after Ryan’s resignation, “persuaded” the U.Va. president to “advance his previously planned resignation by several months,” referring to Ryan’s acknowledgement in his June 26 resignation letter that he planned to step down at the end of the 2026-27 academic year.

However, Ryan wrote in his own letter Friday to U.Va.’s Faculty Senate that Youngkin’s characterization of his resignation was “inaccurate,” saying the same about a recent letter from Rector Rachel Sheridan. Ryan also alleged that the governor and U.Va. board members appointed by Youngkin, including the current rector and vice rector, may have driven the push for his resignation, rather than the DOJ.

Conner, an attorney who served on the board from 2014 to 2022, wrote in an email Saturday that he advised Ryan just before his resignation. “I ultimately concluded that he had little choice but to resign because he had no support from the Board of Visitors (if they were even aware), no ability to retain counsel (those decisions are made by the attorney general), no funding to contest the actions of the DOJ, and thus no ability to prevail.

“He would be alone in fighting the DOJ,” Conner added. “And as a consequence, many dedicated university employees would likely lose their jobs if research funding were curtailed as was represented to be threatened.”

However, Conner denied any implications that he advised Ryan to resign over the meat of the DOJ’s complaints. “My reasoning had absolutely nothing to do with whether I thought he could conform the university’s policies to what the DOJ’s guidance would require, and any representation to that effect is simply fabrication,” he wrote. “One of the ironies in all of this which calls into question the events leading to his resignation is that the university has represented in entering into the agreement with the DOJ suspending the investigations that nothing in the university’s policies would need to be altered because all necessary changes had been made under Jim Ryan.

One simply cannot have it both ways: Jim had to resign because he was incapable of making the necessary changes, and then claiming nothing has to change when entering into the DOJ agreement because all necessary policy changes had been implemented,” Conner wrote. “Moreover, it was also represented that the DOJ had agreed to seven conditions if Jim were to resign that were described as ‘extremely favorable,’ including no financial penalty and the termination of all investigations. So I was of the view that Jim should resign upon receipt of the acknowledgement by the DOJ to the seven conditions, which was also represented as being forthcoming.”

Hardie did not respond to a message seeking comment about the governor’s letter Friday.

U.Va.’s board is made up entirely of Republican Youngkin’s appointees, and Spanberger, a Democrat, wrote that its actions over the past six months have “severely undermined the public’s and the university community’s confidence in the board’s ability to govern productively, transparently and in the best interests of the university.”

She asked for the board’s presidential search committee, which is set to meet next week with a group of finalists for in-person interviews, to “refrain from rushing this search process and from selecting the finalists for the presidency or a president until the board is at full complement and in statutory compliance, meaning that I have appointed and the General Assembly has confirmed new board members.”

Youngkin’s office did not immediately respond to a request for comment Friday.

Ex-U.Va. president alleges board members ‘complicit’ in exit

Summary:

  • Former U.Va. president says governor, board members may have driven resignation, not the
  • wrote letter alleging two former rectors “persuaded” Ryan to resign
  • BOV’s , Rachel Sheridan and Porter Wilkinson allegedly dealt directly with DOJ, Ryan writes

Former president Jim Ryan on Friday sent a 12-page letter to the university’s Faculty Senate detailing his sudden resignation, his first public accounting of the events leading up to his departure announcement June 26.

In the letter, he alleges that the push for him to resign as president may not have come directly from the U.S. Department of Justice but instead may have been driven by Gov. Glenn Youngkin, members of the university’s , the university’s lawyers “or some combination of that group,” he writes.

“It’s not as if the has been shy about calling for resignations,” Ryan writes. “Forcing university presidents to resign, moreover, has not been part of the playbook of the Trump administration; as far as I know, I am the only university president in the country who has been forced to resign as part of a supposed deal with the Trump administration. At the very least, we had board members who were apparently more complicit than other universities.”

Ryan also alleges that two recent letters by Youngkin and U.Va. Rector Rachel Sheridan addressing his resignation are “inaccurate” and that he released his own account to correct the record.

Youngkin wrote in a Nov. 13 letter to Gov.-elect Abigail Spanberger that “it’s clear that neither DOJ nor the current board leadership made Jim resign. His resignation took place under the leadership of [U.Va.] Rector Robert Hardie … and his resignation was encouraged personally by former Rector Rusty Conner, who was the rector during Jim’s hiring.”

Youngkin wrote that Hardie and Conner “persuaded” Ryan to “advance his previously planned resignation by several months because they believed he could not fully implement what they assumed would be included in the settlement agreement.”

However, Ryan’s letter alleges that three board members — Sheridan, the university’s rector as of July 1; Porter Wilkinson, vice rector as of July 1; and Paul Manning — kept Hardie, other board members and Ryan in the dark about specific negotiations, including the parameters of an external compliance review as part of the university’s agreement with the DOJ.

The governor’s office, Hardie, Conner and Manning did not immediately respond to requests for comment Friday. A U.Va. spokesperson declined to comment beyond Sheridan’s and Ryan’s letters.

Ryan writes that Sheridan, before becoming rector, advised Ryan to talk to an attorney friend, Beth Wilkinson, without telling Ryan that she had hired Wilkinson to advise the board, and that Hardie, still rector at the time, had not been informed of that decision.

On June 24, two days before he resigned, Wilkinson “told me that I was going to be kicked out one way or the other, and that if I didn’t resign, the board would fire me,” Ryan writes.

The former president notes that Harmeet Dhillon, associate attorney general for the DOJ’s civil rights division, “emphatically and publicly stated” twice that “neither she nor her DOJ colleagues demanded my resignation or offered some sort of quid pro quo,” Ryan writes. “This is not consistent with what I was told by [board members] Rachel [Sheridan] and Paul [Manning], but I was never in the room when these conversations took place.”

Ryan’s letter says he never spoke directly to the two DOJ attorneys conducting the civil rights investigation into U.Va., and that three members appointed by Youngkin — not including the then-rector, Robert Hardie — dealt directly with the federal prosecutors.

Hardie’s term as rector ended June 30, four days after Ryan’s resignation.

Spanberger’s transition team released her Nov. 12 letter to the U.Va. board, made up entirely of Youngkin appointees, asking them to delay the university’s hiring process for Ryan’s replacement as president until she takes office and has the opportunity to appoint members to the U.Va. board.

Ryan wrote that his letter, addressed to the faculty senators, is “not a direct response or a point-by-point rebuttal” of Sheridan’s and Youngkin’s letters, “which I do not think present an accurate accounting of my resignation.”

On the day that Ryan resigned, he writes, he received a call from Sheridan and two attorneys who attended a meeting with prosecutors and told him that “the only offer on the table was that I needed to resign by 5 p.m. that day or the DOJ would basically rain hell on U.Va.,” including that the DOJ “would extract/block hundreds of millions of dollars from U.Va. before they would even negotiate.”

In June, Manning shared with Ryan that he had heard from Youngkin and Sheridan “about the need for me to resign,” Ryan writes.

A few days earlier, Manning had “encouraged me to hang on,” Ryan’s letter says, but at a June 16 lunch, Manning “told me he had a different answer now and thought I should resign. He told me that, as a friend, he did not want me to go through the ordeal of trying to fight the federal government, and he was worried what the DOJ — and other agencies — might do to U.Va., especially with respect to research funding.

“He also told me that I would likely be blamed for the losses,” Ryan writes. “It was unclear to me whether this conversation was Paul’s idea, or whether he was carrying water for the governor and Rachel.”

Ryan concludes, “What is not clear to me … is whether the threat was real, or whether the idea came from the board members who spoke with the DOJ lawyers, our own lawyers, the governor, or some combination of that group.”

Rector Sheridan’s letter

Ryan’s letter comes a day after Sheridan sent a lengthy missive to the Faculty Senate about her and other officials’ roles in the university’s dealings with the U.S. Department of Justice, which under President Donald Trump has threatened pulling federal funding from universities it views as noncompliant with Trump’s executive order to dismantle diversity, equity and inclusion programs.

The bulk of Ryan’s letter was written over the summer “so I would have a record of the events while they were fresh in my mind. I was never sure if I would release it publicly, but I thought there might be a legislative hearing or inquiry that would require me to respond, and I wanted to make sure my memories were freshly recorded,” he added.

“I think it is time to set the record straight, which will hopefully enable U.Va. to make all necessary changes in order to end this chapter and begin a fresh, new chapter in the history of a remarkable university,” Ryan wrote.

Sheridan’s letter to the Faculty Senate says that she and Wilkinson, now the rector and vice rector of U.Va.’s board but at that time the chair and vice chair of the board’s Audit, Risk and Compliance Committee, were asked by Ryan in early June to speak directly with DOJ prosecutors investigating U.Va. — an assertion Ryan’s letter contradicts. He writes that he didn’t know why Sheridan and Wilkinson were tapped to deal directly with Justice Department attorneys.

Sheridan wrote that by mid-June, having received five letters from the DOJ’s civil rights division and hearing prosecutors’ statements at a June 3 meeting, “the gravity of the situation was apparent to everyone in U.Va. leadership.”

During the week of June 16, she added, “I received a call from fellow board member Paul Manning, who informed me that he had met with President Ryan, and that President Ryan had confidentially indicated that he was contemplating announcing that he would resign the presidency sooner than he had previously planned.”

Ryan, Sheridan noted, eventually stated in his departure letter that he planned to resign the presidency at the end of the 2025-26 academic year. Sheridan added that she and Manning met with Ryan on June 20 to discuss “the timing and consequences” of his resignation, and that they advised him to bring in an attorney to advise him.

“Following the conversation,” Sheridan wrote, “President Ryan called Mr. Manning to discuss the call and his potential resignation, and asked Mr. Manning to call the DOJ to confirm explicitly what [DOJ] officials had previously implied: that they did not trust President Ryan to faithfully implement any resolution of the pending investigations.”

She added that she and Manning told Ryan “multiple times that we would not be supportive of any potential efforts by the board to remove him.”

Ryan’s version of events

In Ryan’s Nov. 14 letter to faculty senators, he says that Sheridan reached out to him several days before the June 3 U.Va. Board of Visitors meeting and let Ryan know that she and Wilkinson were invited to attend a meeting with the DOJ attorneys.

“Why they alone were asked to meet with the DOJ remains unclear to me; it also remains unclear whether Rachel and Porter suggested that the current rector and vice rector should join them at the meeting,” Ryan wrote — differing from Sheridan’s version of events, in which she wrote that Ryan suggested that she and Wilkinson attend the meeting.

“I offered to join that meeting but was told I was not invited,” Ryan’s letter says. “I offered at a later time to go meet with the DOJ lawyers but was told by Rachel and Porter that that would be supremely unpleasant and would likely lead to a bad outcome. All of which means that I never once spoke directly with the DOJ lawyers; everything was communicated through Rachel, Porter and later another board member, Paul Manning.”

He added that Sheridan “reported to me after the meeting that the DOJ lawyers were very upset and that they basically insisted that I would need to resign in order to resolve the various inquiries and avoid the federal government inflicting a great deal of damage to U.Va. I found that a little shocking but also a little hard to believe.”

Ryan alleged in the letter that U.Va.’s deal with the DOJ was presented to him before his resignation as “blanket immunity,” but that after he submitted his resignation letter to Hardie, “that part of the agreement with the DOJ was that U.Va. would undertake an external compliance review … to ensure we were following the law.”

He added that “that piece of the agreement was not conveyed to me until after my resignation,” and that an external review shared with the DOJ “did not sound like blanket immunity to me, nor much different than the path we were headed down already,” before the board members told him that he was being pushed to resign.

“My chief of staff suggested to Robert Hardie that he should hold off on accepting my resignation until this was settled, but Robert indicated that the governor’s office was instructing him to accept the resignation on behalf of the board as soon as possible so that it would be irrevocable and the deal with the DOJ could be completed,” Ryan wrote.

 

Novo Nordisk chair touts OTC future for Wegovy as top investor tightens grip

Summary

  • New chair plans to add pharma and OTC expertise to ‘s board.
  • Governance overhaul gives the 77% of voting rights, prompting minority investor pushback.
  • Sorensen’s dual role as company chair and foundation chair raises concerns over concentrated power.
  • Restructuring follows resignations amid disputes over governance and comes as sales growth slows.

COPENHAGEN (Reuters) -Newly-elected chairman of Wegovy-maker Novo Nordisk, Lars Rebien Sorensen, said on Friday he plans to enhance the board’s pharmaceutical and over-the-counter experience following a board overhaul at an extraordinary shareholder meeting.

The shake-up, concluded on Friday, handed unprecedented power to the Novo Nordisk Foundation, sparking protests from some minority investors over governance concerns. The foundation wields 77% of Novo’s voting rights, despite owning only about 28% of its share capital.

Sorensen, who chairs the Foundation, was installed as new Novo Nordisk chair during the meeting, giving him a dual role unprecedented in the firm’s history and raising concerns about him amassing too much power.

“I would like to make myself redundant as quickly as possible,” said Sorensen, a former CEO of Novo Nordisk, adding that the foundation would resume operating at arm’s length from the company once a successor is elected. He plans to stay in the role no more than 2-3 years, he said.

The restructuring follows the abrupt resignation last month of former chairman Helge Lund and other independent board members, who stepped down citing disagreements with the foundation over governance principles. Sorensen said the Foundation sought greater changes to stabilize the company and ensure long-term growth.

While the revamped board secured over 90% approval at the meeting, some key minority shareholders either protested or abstained, citing fears of excessive consolidation of decision-making power under Sorensen’s dual role.

FOCUS ON PHARMA AND CONSUMER MODELS

Sorensen emphasized his desire to bring in board members with recent pharmaceutical or over-the-counter (OTC) experience, particularly as the company shifts toward a direct-to-consumer, cash-paying model.

“We would like to strengthen the board with some qualifications, preferably with recent pharma experience, perhaps even OTC experience,” he said.

The company has faced challenges, including slowing sales growth for Wegovy, its blockbuster obesity drug that last year helped Novo Nordisk become Europe’s most valuable firm.

Competition from Eli Lilly and compounding pharmacies, coupled with supply constraints, has eroded Novo’s first-mover advantage in the weight-loss market.

Sorensen has criticised the old board for not acting quickly enough to stem the decline in its key U.S. market. He pushed over the summer to speed up the naming of a new CEO, Mike Doustdar, who is spearheading a tough round of layoffs globally, and entered a dramatic bidding war for Metsera, though lost out to Pfizer.

“The new Novo is more raw. All the execution that has been lacking for many years is now happening in no time, and we should probably expect more to come,” said Lars Hytting, head of trading at Denmark-based ArthaScope, which holds Novo shares.

Sorensen’s dual role is seen as a test of the foundation-ownership model designed to provide stability and used by other big Danish firms like Maersk and Carlsberg.

(Reporting by Jacob Gronholt-Pedersen, Stine Jacobsen and Louise Rasmussen, editing by Terje Solsvik and Elaine Hardcastle and Louise Heavens)

 

Union Pacific, Norfolk Southern shareholders OK merger

Summary

  • Nearly 99% of both railroads’ shareholders approved the proposed $85 billion merger.
  • The deal would create the first coast-to-coast U.S. rail network with 50,000 miles of track.
  • The must still approve the merger after a rigorous review.
  • Supporters include major unions and shippers, while chemical makers and BNSF warn of competition risks.

OMAHA, Neb. (AP) — Shareholders of and backed the railroads’ proposed $85 billion merger to create the nation’s first coast-to-coast rail network.

Roughly 99% of both railroads’ shareholders voted to support the largest in history Friday, but the U.S. Surface Transportation Board must still approve it before the deal can be completed.

Union Pacific CEO said, “Our shareholders see the value and understand this merger will unlock new opportunities to enhance service, growth and innovation.”

Vena has said that he hopes to file the formal merger application either in late November or early December, and that will initiate the lengthy review process.

The merger has picked up the support of the largest rail union and hundreds of shippers, but chemical manufacturers and competing railroad BNSF have raised concerns about whether the merger would hurt competition and lead to higher rates. President Donald Trump said after meeting with Vena in the Oval Office that the deal sounds good to him.

Vena has argued that the merger is great for America because it would enable the railroad to deliver goods more quickly and help the companies that rely on its deliveries of raw materials and finished products.

The proposed merger announced this summer was designed to link Union Pacific’s vast rail network in the West with ‘s rails that crisscross the Eastern United States. The combined railroad would include more than 50,000 miles of track in 43 states with connections to major ports on both coasts.

The railroads argued that this merger would streamline deliveries of raw materials and goods nationwide by eliminating delays when shipments are handed off between railroads.

The STB will closely scrutinize the merger to determine if it can meet the very high bar the board established for railroad deals after previous consolidation in the industry led to massive backups and snarled traffic.

Many investors believe that if the deal is approved, CSX will need to find a merger partner so it will be able to compete effectively. But the other major railroads — BNSF, CPKC and Canadian National — have all said they believe forging cooperative agreements between railroads makes more sense than a merger. But CSX still went out and hired a new CEO with a background in mergers this fall to lead their railroad.

Vena and Norfolk Southern CEO have both said they are optimistic that this deal will get approved under Trump’s pro-business administration. The Surface Transportation Board is supposed to be indenpendant, but Trump fired the only board member who opposed Canadian Pacific’s acquisition of Kansas City Southern railroad two years ago. That should allow Trump to appoint two new members of the five-person board although Robert Primus has sued to challenge his firing.

Union Pacific offered $20 billion cash and one share of its stock to complete the deal. Norfolk Southern shareholders would receive one UP share and $88.82 in cash for each one of their shares as part of the deal that values NS at roughly $320 per share. Norfolk Southern closed at just over $260 a share earlier this month before the first reports emerged speculating about the deal that includes a $2.5 billion breakup fee.

Texas judge weighs Paxton bid to block Kenvue dividend

Summary

  • Texas AG asks a judge to block ‘s $398 million dividend and restrict marketing.
  • Kenvue argues the request is unprecedented and lacks legal basis.
  • Paxton alleges Tylenol poses risks during pregnancy; medical groups dispute the claim.
  • Kenvue and J&J say the injunction would damage business operations and exceed Texas jurisdiction.

Carthage, Texas (Reuters) -A Texas judge on Friday began considering state Attorney General Ken Paxton’s bid to block Kenvue from paying a $398 million dividend to its shareholders and from marketing Tylenol as safe for pregnant women.

Paxton, a Republican who is running for a U.S. Senate seat in 2026, sued Kenvue on October 28, accusing it of concealing the risks to children when pregnant women use the popular medication.

Judge LeAnn Rafferty in the Panola County courthouse in Carthage, Texas, near the Louisiana border, opened the hearing by allowing Kenvue’s lawyer to present the first statement.

The lawsuit was filed five weeks after Republican President Donald Trump and U.S. Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. repeated the scientifically unproven claim that using Tylenol during pregnancy can cause autism.

It is unusual for a local court, applying state law, to exercise power over issues fundamental to a multinational company’s business model, including its ability to communicate with the public and pay shareholders.

Kenvue has repeatedly said Tylenol is safe. The dividend payout is scheduled for November 26.

A source familiar with the matter said Kenvue is preparing for the court to grant the temporary restraining order on the dividend and plans to seek a mandamus – an emergency appeal used to correct a “grievous error” – at an appellate court to stay it. He said the appeal could be granted in as little as 24 hours.

“The state is asking you to do something totally unprecedented today. What they’re asking you to do is something that no judge anywhere in the country has ever done before,” Kenvue lawyer Kim Bueno told the court.

PAXTON IS ALIGNED WITH TRUMP’S AGENDA

Paxton has aligned himself with Trump’s agenda, and is challenging incumbent John Cornyn in next year’s Republican primary for a U.S. Senate seat.

Republicans traditionally presented themselves as preferring smaller governments that were less likely to interfere in the decisions of businesses and consumers. That stance has shifted somewhat during the Trump era, with Republican officials wading more aggressively and regularly into decisions on health and tariffs, for instance.

Paxton is also suing , which made Tylenol for six decades, accusing it of spinning off Kenvue in 2023 to shield itself from liability.

J&J has also defended Tylenol’s safety, and doctors and medical societies view acetaminophen products such as Tylenol as the best option for treating fever and pain during pregnancy.

Concerns about Tylenol have been an overhang for Kimberly-Clark’s planned $40 billion takeover of Kenvue, which was announced six days after Paxton sued.

That merger would let the maker of Kleenex and Huggies diapers expand into higher-margin categories such as skin care and pain relief, by acquiring Kenvue brands including Band-Aid, Johnson’s Baby shampoo, Listerine and Neutrogena.

‘TSUNAMI OF ILLEGALITY’ IF PAXTON WINS

In court papers, Paxton said Kenvue must conserve cash because it risked insolvency if forced to pay billions of dollars in Tylenol cases and international lawsuits claiming that baby powder containing talc causes cancer.

Paxton said the public interest supports an injunction because of “the wealth of evidence demonstrating that prenatal Tylenol exposure causes autism and ADHD.”

He also said the U.S. Constitution supports restricting Kenvue from touting Tylenol’s safety, because the First Amendment lets states regulate “misleading” commercial speech.

In September, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration told doctors to alert patients to what it said was growing evidence linking Tylenol to autism. Medical societies dispute a Tylenol link to autism.

The agency is considering new labels for Tylenol and generic versions.

Kenvue and J&J contended in court filings that giving Paxton what he wants “would constitute a tsunami of illegality that would tarnish the credibility of .”

They said Rafferty has no jurisdiction over the spinoff because it occurred outside Texas and involved two New Jersey companies, and cited a May decision from the Texas Supreme Court that said state laws generally don’t apply elsewhere.

The companies also said paying a dividend would not irreparably harm Texas because Kenvue is not insolvent.

Paxton, they added, cited no court that ever blocked manufacturers from talking about and selling products the FDA deemed safe, or blocked public companies from paying regular dividends.

“The state’s motion is a thinly veiled attempt to prop up a politician’s unfounded claims that lie well outside the mainstream of scientific thought, resurrect the Tylenol product liability litigation, generate headlines and ultimately enrich private plaintiffs’ lawyers,” the companies said.

Kenvue and J&J were likely referring to Keller Postman, a law firm helping Paxton in the Tylenol case.

(Reporting by Jonathan Stempel and Sheila Dang; Additional reporting by Patrick Wingrove in New York and Tom Hals in Wilmington, Delaware; Editing by Noeleen Walder, Bill Berkrot and Paul Simao)

 

US House report accuses China of minerals market interference

Summary

  • alleges manipulates global prices.
  • Report recommends price controls, oversight of reporting agencies and a minerals czar.
  • Lawmakers cite risks to U.S. jobs, miners and .
  • China denies accusations, saying it supports stable global supply chains.

(Reuters) -China has sought to manipulate global critical minerals prices for decades, using its control as an economic weapon to expand its manufacturing sector and its geopolitical influence, a U.S. House of Representatives committee said on Wednesday.

The allegations, contained in a 50-page report from the bipartisan U.S. House Select Committee on China and reviewed by Reuters, add to a series of missives from Washington criticizing Beijing’s sway in critical minerals markets.

President Donald Trump and his predecessor, Joe Biden, have in recent years sought to crimp China’s dominance in the critical minerals sector.

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS INCLUDE MINERALS PRICE CONTROLS

The committee’s legislative report aims to codify presidential orders into law with an array of recommendations including price controls and expanded government oversight of price reporting agencies.

In a statement to Reuters, the Chinese Embassy in Washington said “there is nothing credible about the committee,” adding that China is committed to “upholding the security and stability of global production and supply chains.”

“We hope the relevant U.S. politicians view China in an objective and reasonable light, proceed from the common interests of China and the U.S., head toward the same direction with China and promote the development of the China-U.S. relations based on mutual respect, peaceful coexistence and win-win cooperation,” said spokesperson Liu Pengyu.

China had previously accused the U.S. of distorting and exaggerating Beijing’s export controls and of stirring up panic over the issue.

“China has a loaded gun pointed at our economy, and we must act quickly,” said Congressman John Moolenaar, a Michigan Republican and chair of the committee.

A chemist by training who previously worked at Dow Chemical, Moolenaar added that Beijing’s practices had “caused American job losses, driven American miners out of business, and jeopardized national security.”

The report, compiled by committee staff, was also endorsed by the ranking Democrat, Congressman Raja Krishnamoorthi of Illinois.

It alleges that China’s role as the world’s largest processor of many critical minerals has made it nearly impossible for the United States and allies to determine the true price of certain metals, including rare earths.

The report also suggests that the London Metal Exchange, where many minerals are traded, is susceptible to influence from Beijing, as it is owned by the Hong Kong Exchanges and Clearing.

“The LME advertises itself as showing prices that ‘properly reflect global supply and demand.’ However, with the (Chinese government) looking over HKEC’s shoulder, it is difficult to determine whether the prices it publishes accurately reflect global supply and demand.”

The LME said it is subject to the laws and regulations of the United Kingdom, where it is based.

“All of the LME’s key prices are determined on the basis of transparent trading activity from an international participant base,” a spokesperson said.

REPORT ALLEGES CHINA TARGETS PRICING OF RARE EARTHS

The House committee’s report, based on published reports and data, also alleges that China has specifically targeted the lithium and rare earths industries, raising and lowering prices to bolster its own economy.

“Each time lithium prices rose, the PRC government took action to bring lithium prices back down,” the report said.

The cited issues with pricing in September when it sought an equity stake in Lithium Americas.

The report offers 13 policy recommendations, some of which Trump has already taken. It also aims to spark broader dialogue about China’s presence in the minerals markets rather than seek to address every concern.

“One single policy will not completely address the serious challenge the United States faces on critical minerals, so we must simultaneously pursue multiple policy prescriptions,” it said.

One of those recommendations, the creation of a “critical minerals czar,” was instituted by Trump earlier this year. The report also suggests the creation of a U.S. minerals stockpile, which the administration has indicated it is open to.

(Reporting by Ernest Scheyder in Houston and Pratima Desai in London; Editing by Veronica Brown and Edmund Klamann)