|
Getting your Trinity Audio player ready...
|
by WILL FOLKS
***
Less than seven weeks after announcing Michigan State University (MSU) president Kevin Guskiewicz as its next leader, Clemson University is back to the drawing board after the mercurial higher educrat reneged on the agreement.
According to a terse statement issued by the school on Monday (July 6, 2026), its board of trustees was notified that same day that Guskiewicz had “chosen to remain at Michigan State University for personal reasons.”
“The national search had a robust pool of candidates, and the board will be meeting soon to determine next steps,” the statement concluded.
Clemson announced it was hiring Guskiewicz on May 27, 2026. He was supposed to have replaced former president James Clements, who resigned last December amid the school’s worsening fiscal situation and criticism of his proximity to several insider land deals.
Guskiewicz agreed to a five-year deal that would have paid him $1.216 million annually from Clemson’s foundation. Palmetto State taxpayers would have picked up another sizable chunk of his compensation.
***
According to a since-deleted press release, Guskiewicz was supposed to bring a “student-focused vision centered on access, workforce readiness and public impact” to Clemson, with board members praising his efforts at MSU to “strengthen campus culture.”
Not everyone was on board with that “culture,” though. State representative April Cromer – a leader of the conservative Freedom Caucus – criticized the board’s decision to hire Guskiewicz as being inconsistent with the “values of the people funding it.”
Cromer was one of numerous Palmetto politicos concerned with the incoming leader’s support of left-leaning woke ideology. She referred to Guskiewicz’s decision to remain in East Lansing, Michigan as “a gift and a redemption opportunity for Clemson’s board of trustees.”
“The board now has another chance to prove it understands what the people of South Carolina expect from our flagship university: a leader who respects the values and character of our state rather than seeking to change them; who will restore an uncompromising focus on academic excellence; who understands Clemson’s serious financial challenges and has the experience, ability, and a credible plan to fix them; and who has the courage to put an end to the woke agenda that has distracted universities from their core mission,” Cromer said.
Speaking of Clemson’s core mission, the school is in the midst of a major financial crisis – one which may have played a part in Guskiewicz’s decision to stay put. As we reported earlier this year, Clemson’s budgeted operating expenses for the 2027 fiscal year are currently 8% higher than actual expenses for the current year.
“Expense growth is stabilizing but still outpacing revenues,” the school’s chief financial officer, Rick Petillo, told trustees. “After several years of expense management, expense and revenue growth remain mismatched.”
And that was after the school engaged in extensive cost-cutting…
***
RELATED | CODE ORANGE
***
Subsequently, FITSNews reported extensively on financial issues associated with the school’s Public Service Activities (PSA) division – including allegations that school leaders improperly restricted funds earmarked for agriculture, public health, research, and statewide regulatory enforcement.
Clemson’s board of trustees chairwoman, Kim Wilkerson, didn’t do much to instill confidence in a recent guest column published in The (Charleston, S.C.) Post and Courier.
“The best measure of Clemson’s strength is not found in a ranking or balance sheet,” Wilkerson wrote.
Maybe not… but steadily deteriorating finances and getting jilted by your presidential pick are not encouraging signs.
This is a developing story… please check back for updates.
***
ABOUT THE AUTHOR…
Will Folks is the founding editor of the news outlet you are currently reading. Prior to founding FITSNews, he served as press secretary to the governor of South Carolina. He lives in the Midlands region of the state with his wife and eight children.
***
SOUND OFF…
Got something you’d like to say in response to one of our articles? Or an issue you’d like to address proactively? We have an open microphone policy! Submit your letter to the editor (or guest column) via email HERE. Got a tip for a story? CLICK HERE. Got a technical question or a glitch to report? CLICK HERE.
3 comments
Probably for the best, Clempson should be led by a hard science/engineer professional, not an athletic tape monkey.
can Clemson afford a hard science/engineer professional?
Guskiewicz is making just over a million at MSU and was offered just over $ 1.2 million to take over Clempson. By comparison, Dr. Amiridis – with a PhD in Chemical Engineering, substantial private industry work, two decades at USC as a professor, then dean of the College of Engineering and Computing at USC, 7 years or so as the chancellor of the University of Illinois and the university’s provost makes $1.3 million with an additional $350k in supplemental pay and bonuses for meeting specific objectives.
Clempson can afford a professional.
Instead, they tried to hire a “feel good guy” with a very flexible set of principles (he’s run hot and cold on a variety of “social issues” depending on which way the wind blows. The DEI office at Michigan was closed during his tenure because of legislative mandates, but all of the people and propaganda are still there, he pulled the same stunt at UNC while he was the chancellor). His degrees are in athletic training (he does have a PhD in “sports medicine” (AKA athletic training). He has never had meaningful employment outside of the university environment.
The story is he decided to bail on Clempson because of issues with the board and their interference in the day-to-day operations of the university. Since we find ourselves in an ongoing problem (the university’s finances and lack of a leader), that the board seems to be in the middle of, AND the board is comprised of illegally appointed and illegally tenured members, it seems to me the place to start is the board.