|
NEWS News in Brief Beyond the Burg Police Beat Street Beat Under the Microscope OPINIONS Letters to the Editor Staff Editorial VARIETY That Guy – That Girl Horoscopes Comics Confusion Corner Behind Closed Doors SPORTS From the Sidelines Home Field Advantage REVIEWS Film Music Dining Arts On Campus Critical Condition ABOUT US Subscribe Advertise Archive |
Blair '68 to resign from BOVIn an e-mail to the College community, Robert Blair ’68, a member of the College’s Board of Visitors, has announced his resignation. In the e-mail, released to Student Assembly President Zach Pilchen ’09 and SA Vice President Valerie Hopkins ’09, Blair said that he was “one of several” BOV members who argued for the contract renewal of former College President Gene Nichol. Nichol resigned last Tuesday after BOV Rector Michael Powell ’85 told him on Feb. 10 that his contract would not be renewed. Powell said that the BOV had reached a unanimous decision. “Although no vote was taken, one was not required if the contract was not to be renewed,” Blair said. “Those for renewal were given ample opportunity to argue their points. We ultimately found ourselves in the minority.” In an e-mail to The Flat Hat, Powell said that, while there was no official vote, he had spoken to the board about holding a unified position. “As I have said there was not a vote, only a discussion and a consensus,” Powell said. “At the end of the discussion it was decided what course to take. Then there was a discussion about speaking with one voice and whether anyone objected to describing our decision as unanimous. I did not hear any objection and believe other board members understood this. I deeply regret if I misunderstood Mr. Blair’s intent.” Powell also said that the BOV valued Blair’s membership and is sorry to lose him. Blair said that his resignation is due in large part to many BOV members’ negative reactions to Nichol’s presidential accomplishments. “There has been an incipient effort by some members of the Board of Visitors to pick apart President Nichol’s accomplishments,” he said. “To what end? They gained their stated objective.” He also criticized the board for a lack of professionalism. “I have also seen mean-spirited communications that are not worthy of the professional deliberations of any managing board, but most especially not the Board of Visitors of William and Mary,” he said. “Such communications call into question the real motivation for the initial decision not to renew the President’s contract.” When asked about the board’s conduct, Powell said he had received hundreds of e-mails and is uncertain of what Blair was referring to. Blair attributed the board’s behavior as a response to Nichol’s resignation e-mail, which was sent to students less than an hour after Nichol told Powell of his resignation. In the e-mail, Nichol said that the BOV offered his family “substantial economic incentives” if he agreed, in the words of the BOV, “not to characterize [the non-renewal decision] as based on ideological grounds.” “Would I have refrained from some of what Mr. Nichol said?” Blair wrote, “Certainly, but then I knew more than he. Several of us Board members are actually baffled by the surprise of other Board members regarding the content of the President’s message. President Nichol is a proud, intelligent and charismatic leader and visionary who demonstrated his love for the College in many ways while being under relentless, vicious attack since the Wren Cross decision. That he held his tongue for so long is remarkable.” He said that he and other BOV members — who remain unnamed — fought for Nichol’s renewal because of the progress Nichol brought to the College, especially in regards to diversity. Blair noted that, in praising Nichol, he is not maligning the achievements of former College President Timothy Sullivan, who retired in 2005. “President Nichol increased diversity without reducing the opportunities for others,” he said. “Specifically, he achieved that without taking away from the rights of Caucasians or Christians, regardless of what vocal and forceful groups have alleged in attacking President Nichol, often in some of the most un-Christian language imaginable.” Blair also stressed the importance of keeping the College secular and public. “William and Mary is not a private, religious school,” he said. “It is a public university that must be open to all who qualify for admissions based upon academic achievement and other accomplishments.” Blair also praised Nichol for Gateway William and Mary, a program that provides financial assistance and debt relief to low-income Virginia residents. He acknowledged that Sullivan envisioned the program, but that Nichol was fundamental in its implementation. “I believe that Mr. Sullivan strongly wanted to provide access for those who were socio-economically disadvantaged. Mr. Nichol boldly created and gave Gateway William and Mary its name, funded it through the College’s budget process, and put the program in place.” Blair also criticized “detractors” who have criticized the program for being “affirmative action in disguise.” “I have been assured that students benefiting from Gateway share one common denominator, socio-economic status,” he said. Blair also credited Nichol with recruiting former Chief Justice Sandra Day O’Connor as College Chancellor. Blair closed his e-mail saying that he hopes the board will conduct their meetings with students and faculty this Friday in a “professional and civil manner.” “I place my trust and hope for the future of the College in the hands of our incredible students and our esteemed faculty,” he said. Flat Hat News Editor Austin Wright contributed to this report. This article has been updated to correct an error. |
||
The Flat Hat The Student Newspaper of the College of William and Mary since 1911 |
Seed Newsvine
This is appalling. If Powell willfully misled the W&M community about the unanimous support for not renewing Nichol, then he should resign as Rector.
— Faculty member Feb 19, 08:22 PM #
Well, there clearly was not unanimity. Mr. Blair’s resignation reveals that. It also proves what I hoped was not true of Rector Powell. Can anyone respond to this latest news with anything but sadness? It reveals all of the actors in this tragedy to be childish and common men and women, undeserving of the trust given to them. Not one person given responsibility for the College’s future has shown statesmanship during the past 8 days. Mr. Blair reveals himself to be another fitting leader to the William & Mary of 2008: he thinks — no, feels —it is more important that the community know of his good intentions (I QUIT!) than for it to begin healing under his selfless leadership. I would say “good riddance,” but I wonder whether there will be anyone left to pick up the pieces after the dust settles.
— Jay Trickett '03 Feb 19, 08:32 PM #
Friday, Feb 12, Flat Hat:
FH: Was the BOV’s vote unanimous?
Powell: I think it’s fair to say that it was unanimous, yes.
In no uncertain terms, the BoV has lied to the College community. I think, at this juncture, it is equally important to point out the Interim President Reveley has – according to active faculty members – resigned from the Diversity Committee, which President Nichol co-chaired, and whose meetings he ALWAYS attended. As an early act by Pres. Reveley this gives us serious reason to call into question his, and the BoV’s sincere commitment to diversity, which Rector Powell’s letter indicated would be: “ We agree unflinchingly with the President’s efforts to make William and Mary a more diverse educational environment. His achievements in this area will be the most enduring part of his legacy” (Powell’s recent letter to the College). Early indications suggest this is NOT a priority of the new administration, and Robert Blair’s letter leads us to have doubts about the commitments of the BoV to these policies, as well.
— local dude Feb 19, 08:36 PM #
Friday, Feb 12, Flat Hat:
FH: Was the BOV’s vote unanimous?
Powell: I think it’s fair to say that it was unanimous, yes.
In no uncertain terms, the BoV has lied to the College community. I think, at this juncture, it is equally important to point out the Interim President Reveley has – according to active faculty members – resigned from the Diversity Committee, which President Nichol co-chaired, and whose meetings he ALWAYS attended. As an early act by Pres. Reveley this gives us serious reason to call into question his, and the BoV’s sincere commitment to diversity, which Rector Powell’s letter indicated would be: “ We agree unflinchingly with the President’s efforts to make William and Mary a more diverse educational environment. His achievements in this area will be the most enduring part of his legacy” (Powell’s recent letter to the College). Early indications suggest this is NOT a priority of the new administration, and Robert Blair’s letter leads us to have doubts about the commitments of the BoV to these policies, as well.
I think the opportunity and justification for the faculty to act on it’s recent resolution to consider a vote of no confidence is explicitly provided in this recent turn of events
— local dude Feb 19, 08:40 PM #
I am shocked, shocked that the “unanimous” vote was all fly spray.
— John Hempel '71 Feb 19, 08:41 PM #
Why do so many of the Nichol supporters not give their names in comments to Flat Hat articles? What is appalling is the cowardly way in which most supporters express their belief in a man that lacks the professionalism, integrity, capabilities to be President of W&M. The defacing of historic buildings shows how far some people will go for their ideology, i.e. there are no bounds. Shameful!
— John Moore Feb 19, 08:49 PM #
“Why do so many of the Nichol supporters not give their names in comments to Flat Hat articles?”
While I agree that posting anonymous comments can often be cowardly, to be fair, Nichol attackers seem far more likely to hide behind a fake name. A quick search shows 64 anonymous comments by “MacSuile” alone. I would wager that single person has posted more anonymous comments – many of them vicious personal attacks – than all of the Nichol supporters combined. And he has not been the only one by any means.
— Max Fisher Feb 19, 09:17 PM #
I’m old and have gray hair and have written my share of widely distributed public announcements in my time, and I wanted to share some observations about this article:
Blair writes “Those for renewal were given ample opportunity to argue their points. We ultimately found ourselves in the minority.”
Blair also says he is confident that that BOV did not base the non-renewal decision on ideology.
OK. Good so far. They had a chance to speak their minds and the issues were not in fact ideological. Once Nichol supporters realized they were hugely outnumbered, a vote wasn’t even taken (potentially a result of Powell using Roberts Rules of Order to prevent a vote – no motion to vote would have passed). But for Powell to call that “unanimous” is like when Sadaam announced that he won 100% of the vote.
But reading between the lines, this is where I think Blair (somewhat like Nichol) takes a few nasty parting shots at the BOV:
Blair closes his e-mail saying that he hopes the board will conduct their meetings with students and faculty this Friday in a “professional and civil manner.” Considering that it was likely students that defaced the Wren with graffiti, Blair’s urge for civility and professionalism suggest that there might be alot of sparks flying behind the scenes of the BOV.
But when he omits the BOV from the list of groups that he trusts with the future of the college, that says it all: “I place my trust and hope for the future of the College in the hands of our incredible students and our esteemed faculty,” he says.
In a way, this is an exciting time to be at W&M. You are, in my opinion, on the front lines of a cultural battle. I encourage you all to study the issues, listen, and ask alot of questions. You may end up being much more valuable alumni than average because you’ll be more knowledgable about college policy and procedures, will follow the BOV closely (I’m not sure I even knew what they did when I was here), you’ll hopefully engage and challenge the college policies and direction, and will ultimately have many valuable learning experiences as a result of this process that can benefit you later in life.
Who has handled themselves in a way that you respect and would want to emulate? Who do you not ever want to be like? If you where in Sam Sadler’s shoes, what would you do? How can Glenn George continue to do a great job teaching at the Law school with all this crap going on? What do I need to do as a soon-to-be alumni to influence the college? How have other schools confronted these same issues and what can we learn from their experience? Is it possible for me to meet individually with a BOV member, or have a group ‘adopt’ a BOV member so we can get to know them and where they stand? Why isn’t pint night every day?
— Joe Towney Feb 19, 09:56 PM #
Nichol opponents post anonymously because we’ve seen what happens to his enemies who refuse to sign “loyalty oath” petitions. Chairpersons get demote, replaced by a guy who started the petition and your department is put into receivership. As for Blair he seems to want to live in both camps. And let’s not forget who divided the W&M commnunity into those camps in the first place: Gene Nichol. At least Blair give Sullivan some of the credit Nichol tried to steal for diversity issues.
— bonus deal Feb 19, 10:04 PM #
Apparently, Bob failed to convince the vast majority of the BOV that Gene Nichol should be retained despite his lies and admitted management and leadership failures. Then, Bob quit rather than face the heat of his Board’s collective decision.
Sounds a little like Nichol’s sudden decision, quitting in the middle of the semester and leaving the College in a tough spot. Despite his professed “love” for the College, Nichol showed his true stripes and acted in an entirely selfish way.
I guess Bob and Gene are two peas in a pod.
— Alumnus Feb 19, 10:33 PM #
Alumnus (note, this is in response to the ANONYMOUS anti-Nichol post),
First of all, there is no indication that pro-Nichol members of the Board were found to be in the “vast” minority as you imply. For all we know, there was only a one or two person difference.
You also show that you failed to even read the article in full. Mr. Blair explicitly states that he did not resign because of the decision, but because of the behavior by some members of the Board afterwards:
“There has been an incipient effort by some members of the Board of Visitors to pick apart President Nichol’s accomplishments,” he said. “To what end? They gained their stated objective.”
He also criticized the board for a lack of professionalism.
“I have also seen mean-spirited communications that are not worthy of the professional deliberations of any managing board, but most especially not the Board of Visitors of William and Mary,” he said. “Such communications call into question the real motivation for the initial decision not to renew the President’s contract.”
— Dave J. '09 Feb 19, 11:15 PM #
Can’t wait to read the e-mail from Mr Blair.Just like “Big Nick”, Blair is doing his best to damage W&M out of spite.
Bonus deal – you sound like an untenured faculty person who is terrified by the politically correct cabal of faculty and administrators [and the W&M thought police] – and I don’t blame you.To quote a letter from 2004 to the VA Gazette, “it is refreshing to read an admission from any professor of the College of W&M about not only bias but being embarrassed by that bias.The challenge for W&M is to act to correct its political and socialistic bias so students get a liberal arts education in the classical sense.Unfortunately, the professor admitting the problem was forced to use the anonymity of the “Last Word” for fear of reprisal.”
Mr Blair may be highly principled but by announcing his resignation at this time and in this manner he demonstrates a contempt for W&M that is beyond belief.The BOV is supposed to care about W&M, not their personal political philosophy. Blair gets an “F” in love for W&M.
— Jeff '62 Feb 19, 11:19 PM #
Mr. Blair — since you are such a fan of Mr. Nichol, perhaps you will hire him and get him away from the College. Many of us would be eternally grateful to you.
— Alice'73 Feb 20, 12:55 AM #
What I found interesting was that Blair criticizes the BOV for their behavior at the same time he acknowledges it was due to Nichol’s parting shots. But doesn’t it seem like he excuses Nichol’s parting shots because he knew Nichol had an ego?
I agree that that Nichol nor the BOV have been completely professional, but that struck a chord with me.
— chris Feb 20, 01:17 AM #
Chris,
Thats not at all what he said. Mr. Blair’s point was that the BOV should not have been surprised by Nichol’s e-mail, given the attacks he and his family have taken over the last couple of years.
Alice ’73 and Jeff ’62, the College has changed in tremendous ways since you were students here. Mr. Blair’s e-mail expressly stated his deep love of the College and his belief that the BOV’s actions were done without an ideological bias, and that it was only the mean-spirited and unprofessional communications of some of the Board’s members — including kicking the President while he is down — that led him to resign.
— Dave J. '09 Feb 20, 01:25 AM #
Ok, I guess I misread it. But it seems to me the BOV did not want to get into the specifics of the nonrenewal and that they have been forced to release more details by the students/faculty/alumni who supported Nichol’s renewal. It seems like the BOV was not going to come out of this unscathed no matter which decision they made.
It is sad that there is such polarity on the issue. It has certainly been an extremely difficult week for all involved.
— chris Feb 20, 01:43 AM #
I think that the best strategy for W&M at this point is to go private. It would eliminate the crazies on the right in Richmond from meddling in our school’s policy, discourage the kool-aid drinking lefties who likely wouldn’t want to pay higher tuition, and, as statistics prove, increase the enrollment of out-of-state (read:more qualified) students. Financially, this would work out a lot better too, as we would no longer be at the mercy of tight fisted politicians. Can you really blame them though? Compared to UVA, we are at this point a complete embarassment.
— Adrien Feb 20, 03:12 AM #
the bizarre thing was, there was no reason for Powell to say the decision was unanimous. Even if it wasn’t, it wouldn’t have made the decision less legitimate. Especially since even Blair is suggesting that the ideological/political things had nothing to do with the non-renewal.
I guess it could be construed that although there was opposition at first, if nobody made a motion to vote to renew his contract then in that sense it was unanimous. It is a fair question for Blair – if he supported Nichol till they end, why didn’t he even move to vote on the renewal? Seeing no move to vote, I guess you can’t blame Powell for calling it unanimous. But if he knew some were opposed, you’d think it would be smarter in the long run to recognize that it wasn’t.
Maybe the word is that they reached a “consensus”. It just bothers me that although this makes the non-renewal no less legitimate, it sure makes Powell look bad. I hope that doesn’t distract people from the fact that this was still the right decision for the future of the College.
It also seems important to stress that the resignation of Blair seems clearly tied to some sharp reactions from the BOV AFTER Nichol’s resignation, and not as a result of any impropriety during the non-renewal process itself. I think this critique that “they should have seen it coming” was a little unfair of Blair. While Nichol probably hurt the school in the process, I’ve always been able to understand why he would be furious and in that sense I can understand why he wrote his misleading email. I’d give the BOV the same latitude – I can certainly understand why they, in turn, were infuriated by Nichol’s email… but at least they had the decency to keep their fury behind closed doors (we know it was behind closed doors because we’re not even sure what Blair was refering to when he mentions the discord at the BOV).
— D Kuehn Feb 20, 06:35 AM #
I have a feeling that Rector Powell may soon learn one of the big lessons of the Watergate scandal; it’s not the initial infraction, it’s the lies and deceit of the coverup that ultimately bring a power structure down when those governed by it lose faith in the integrity of their leaders. Regardless of one’s views on former President Nichol, it’s clear that the BOV certainly had a right to decide not to renew Nichol. Intelligent people can disagree on whether or not they made the correct call. Nevertheless, the secretive way that Board has gone about making the decision, and the dishonest statements and half-truths of the Rector in the wake of Nichol’s resignation call the Rector’s leadership skills and his personal integrity into serious question. I expect Rector Powell’s going to get a grilling when he comes to campus this Friday. Perhaps he should consider sparing the College a sorry spectacle of more lies and half-truths by making a public apology for his misleading statements to the College community and submitting his resignation to Governor Kaine before Friday. W&M has the oldest Honor Code in the nation; shame on our Rector by not abiding by the basic principle of integrity central to the institution that he purports to lead.
— shame on Rector Powell Feb 20, 09:32 AM #
Wake me when this is over. Good life lesson from this bozo: If you don’t get your way, quit. What “incipient effort” is he alluding to? Sounds like an excuse he dreamed up so he could quit and then be free to sniff Nichol’s jock openly. Memo to everbody here: 75% of the student body could care less who their Predient is. There will be no revolution on campus.
— John Feb 20, 10:05 AM #
75% don’t care? How is it that almost 2000 came to the late-night, mid-week, cold-weather rally outside the President’s House last week to show their support for Nichol? Never underestimate the students of this College.
— William Finnie Feb 20, 10:26 AM #
to shame on Rector Powell:
That’s VERY interesting that you apply the Watergate lessons to the BOV. I would have thought they’d better apply to Nichol, who made some very benign “mistakes” in terms of their substance, but who managed the mistakes TERRIBLY. Granted, it looks like it also applies to the BOV now as well, perhaps. But I still think we need to give Powell some credit – if nobody spoke up to renew his contract, which it seems that they didn’t, that is “unanimous” in some sense… as I said, “consensus” may be a more accurate word. Unanimous doesn’t mean “unopposed” – it means that when it came time to make an actual decision, no one explicitly stood against the non-renewal. Still – he obviously could have been much more up front about it. But its not lying in the way that saying you never heard that you lost a $12 million donation is lying… its misleading.
— D Kuehn Feb 20, 10:43 AM #
“Granted, it looks like it also applies to the BOV now as well” – Kuehn
Sorry, but I don’t think you’ve made your case. Nichol ran off to send an email to his ideological allies in order to depart the way he governed: as a left-wing ideologue. One fellow-traveler, Blair, has succumbed to the temptation, abandoned the BOV and joined Nichol and his mob. Unable to withstand the false charge of being a member of a right-wing cabal, Blair has crumpled like a cheap camera. All that proves is that Nichol’s phony accusations have had an affect on the weak minded not only in the student body but also in the BOV. His divisiveness continues to be his halmark. Other BOV lefties may be equally wobbly. That only proves that Nichol’s ONLY legacy is to set us at each other’s throats.
— epa hombre! Feb 20, 11:17 AM #
At first I thought that Powell should have taken and up or down vote, but there may have been calculated reasons to NOT take a vote (to protect the rest of the BOV from scrutiny. Powell may have taken a strong hand to deflect heat from the BOV but it doesn’t appear to be working very well.
— Joe Towney Feb 20, 11:22 AM #
Rector Powell should resign immediately and let the College begin to heal from the damage his lies have inflicted.
— Anne Morgan '02 Feb 20, 11:39 AM #
“Rector Powell should resign immediately and let the College begin to heal from the damage his lies have inflicted.” Anne Morgan
Your stage name isn’t “Annie Oakley”, is it?
There’s absolutely no proof Powell “lied” about anything. Nichol’s veracity, on the other hand, is suspect: Remember the Sullivan email and the $12,000,000? As for Blair, one weak-minded ideologue has caved under the pressure of being thought illiberal. Boo hoo hoo. All that proves is that he may have been unsuited for the BOV in the first place.
Nichol tore the College apart and now he’s trying to do the same to the BOV. It’s still just all about HIM and his political agenda. The College will not begin to heal until Nichol’s rabid fans stop their hero-worship and start to act like adults. Blair should be ashamed of himself.
— rogers&clark Feb 20, 12:13 PM #
Like Father, Like Son.
Michael Powell has lied to the William and Mary community as his father lied to the United Nations.
The allegations put forward by Blair should be fully investigated. And, if found true, Powell should resign immediately. His actions are disgraceful.
http://bartoy.blogspot.com/2008/02/like-father-like-son.html
— Kevin Feb 20, 01:20 PM #
The Honor Code is one of the most central elements of student life at William & Mary. Regardless of what your view on the Nichol situation, it is clear that Powell deliberately mislead the College community about the process.
If Powell is allowed to mislead us as such, then the Honor Code that we have all upheld – in our time as students and alumni alike – is rendered meaningless.
Don’t let him take that away from all of us – students, alumni, faculty and staff alike should be proud of our Honor Code. Hold Powell to the same standards that we hold all members of our community.
— Chris '04 Feb 20, 01:39 PM #
Nothing more pathetic than a whiny, old liberal like Blair. What did Churchill say? If you’re not a liberal in your youth, you have no heart and if you’re not a conservative in your older years, you have no brains?
— MacSuile Feb 20, 02:16 PM #
To echo my friend and fellow alum, Dan, it sounds like we need more Bob Blairs on the BOV, not less. However, I understand his decision and am so glad he spoke out and shared his insider account of the decision not to renew Nichol’s contract. This is what we need and have been calling for: more transparency.
— Ashley '02 Feb 20, 02:17 PM #
More fallacies from Blair:
1) “William & Mary is a ‘public’ school” Huh?
a. Less than 20% operating funds from Richmond.
b. ~35% of students from out-of-state.
c. Wren Building restored with private funds (Rockefeller, etc.).
2) “William & Mary has a poor record on diversity” What?
a. First to educate Amer-indians in the early 1700s.
b. First VA state university to integrate women in the early 1900s.
c. Early Catholic integration in the 1950s.
d. More diverse (non-white) than 54% of top 67 state universities (about as diverse as UNC & UVA; more diverse than VA Tech).
3) “The Wren Chapel isn’t a chapel” Really?
a. Establishment clause doesn’t apply (no official school religion).
b. Bishop Madison & Botetourt buried below chapel in crypt (consecrated ground).
c. School founded and financed by Anglicans/Episcopalians including Archbishop of Canterbury (James Blair and other W&M presidents were Anglican ministers).
d. All other Colonial Colleges have crosses in their chapels (Rutgers is state-supported) and most have interdenominational chapels in their student centers.
— MacSuile Feb 20, 02:23 PM #
The following statement from the above story is patently false and only further shows how the Flat Hat has helped to shape opinion against Nichol throughout this ordeal:
“Blair also said he is confident that that BOV did not base the non-renewal decision on ideology.”
However, in his email announcing his resignation, Blair wrote that “I was confident at the time that most of those speaking for non-renewal based their positions on non-ideological grounds and without animus towards Mr. Nichol.” The Flat Hat, apparently deciding that it was not crucial to actually read the entire email before writing this story, either blatantly ignored or astoundingly overlooked a sentence from later in the email, in which Blair describes how his opinions on the reasons for Nichol’s dismissal have evolved. Blair clearly states that “Such communications (from the BOV) call into question the real motivation for the initial decision not to renew the President’s contract.” The real story here is that a member of the BOV is calling into question Powell’s assertion that the non-renewal decision was not based on ideological differences.
— Jason '05 Feb 20, 02:35 PM #
I salute Bob Blair for having the courage of his convictions and for speaking truth to power. We need more courageous members of the BOV like Blair
— Class of 1970 Feb 20, 04:31 PM #
I thought Powell said that all of the Board had agreed that Nichol would not be renewed. Since they did not EVER take a vote, as has been stated, the only thing that was unanimous was that ALL the Board members realized Nichol was not going to be renewed — he didn’t have enough supporters.
I find it most interesting that Powell’s statement is written off as a lie and people on this blog are calling for his head, but not long ago, when the Sullivan e-mail made it clear that Nichol was most likely lying (even Max Fischer thought so, and said so), the same people calling for Powell’s head now were excusing Nichol, and saying how “confused” he must have been.
Yeah, right. Either slam both of them or neither. It appears to me that Nichol’s behavior has been far worse than Powell’s, no matter what Powell has done. Nichol has acted like Nixon — dodging FOIA after FOIA until finally being forced to give up the Sullivan e-mail. If you want to see someone who acts like Nixon, look at Nichol.
Everyone does realize, of course, that since the review materials for the Nichol evaluation are sensitive personnel-related documents, the BOV cannot discuss them. Nichol knows this, and while the BOV is muzzled, Nichol lobs rocks as he pleases.
Blair is also wrong when he says Nichol went through the proper processes for funding Gateway. He did no such thing. He just announced it with no source of money.
ALL OF YOU OUT THERE WHO ARE DEMANDING OPENNESS: call Nichol and ask him to grant the BOV permission to release the independent evaluation and to provide the information about the decision that students and faculty are screaming for. Their hands are tied, as only Nichol can give that permission. And guess what, folks. NICHOL ISN’T GOING TO GIVE THAT PERMISSION. Because then it will become obvious why he was fired: administrative incompetence, lying (or being “confused” about matters of material importance to the College, poor relations with a significant component of the College community, alienating the General Assembly, refusing to discuss anything at all with the Board before jumping in with both feet, insulting donors and alumni in the press, and insisting that it was his way or no way. That’s just for starters.
So if you want openness, quit asking the Board. I’ll bet they’d love to give you the facts. SO TELL NICHOL TO LET THEM.
Funny, Blair was so offended at the nasty messages the Board sent to each other. I wonder what each of you would do, if you were on a Board, and the president resigned and wrote a nasty public letter accusing you of being driven by ideology and politics, not by love of the College, and accusing you of bribery. I can well understand why the Board may have responded in a nasty way to each other after Nichol spat in their faces as he did, throwing a tantrum and taking his toys and going home. The Board is only human, and perhaps for some that was the straw that broke the camel’s back. It would have broken mine.
— Ask Nichol Feb 20, 04:42 PM #
Seriously, this is starting to get old. President Nichol was in the process of running the school into the ground. The right decision was reached by the board, and the president was removed. The only thing being accomplished by these petty attacks from the losing side is to embarass our school. We should be known for our academic prestige and accomplishments, not for being a hotbed of activism and controversy.
— Chet Feb 20, 09:00 PM #
Blair will now be able to feel good about himself because he’s being attacked by the right rather than the left. He’s still a ridiculous clown and coward, but what counts for him is that his pals realize he’s still a leftie. Come to think of it, that’s pretty much how Nichol operated too.
— bullcorn recognizer Feb 20, 09:16 PM #
No matter what you think Michael Powell is an undisputed LIAR. He is not worthy to justify anyones continued trust. He owes an apology to the citizens of the Commonwealth as well as the William and Mary community. Students must abide by an honor code what about you and the BOV. Your resignation should certainly be forthcoming!
— BAllen Feb 20, 10:18 PM #
Dave J — don’t believe all you hear — and don’t presume to tell me what has changed. I went to a W&M that had curfew for women my freshman year — I applaud many of the changes; as for Mr. Blair, he was on the BOV and knew Nichol was in trouble — why didn’t he help him redeem his reputation and counsel him. By his email, Blair just adds to the controversy at the College. An egotist who had to let everyone know he likes Gene Ray
— Alice'73 Feb 20, 10:23 PM #
According to the BOV Q&A on the wm.edu website, “unanimity” concerned the fact that the BOV was unanimous in believing that Nichol would not be renewed. That is different from saying that the decision was unanimous. So for those of you who think Powell lied, I’d be careful. From afar, I agree with the BOV’s decision, and deplore the e-mails of Nichol and Blair. Falling on one’s sword, and moving on quietly, seems to be a forgotten virtue in W’burg these days.
— DLucas'80 Feb 21, 12:39 AM #
Falling on one’s sword and moving on quietly may have been a virtue in ancient Rome. I’m not convinced it’s any such thing in modern-day America, particularly at a university — a community whose core values are supposed to include the pursuit of truth.
I don’t know whether Nichol and Blair are telling the truth. At this point, I don’t know what the truth is, and I’d welcome any additional information that the Board of Visitors sees fit to provide. I don’t think, however, that calling for Blair to be silent serves any useful purpose. Even if it turns out that he’s lying his head off (and I don’t think he is), the College’s best interests are served by a sober examination of his claims and the evidence contradicting them.
— Nora, class of '98 Feb 21, 10:16 AM #
I would just weigh in here quickly:
I am SO happy that so many people are speaking out about this. I am ecstatic that the students, faculty, and staff feel the need to show that they care strongly about something at this College, for apathy has been the TRUE reason for our decline in the last decade. Don’t be lured into complacency, and keep fighting, whoever you are.
Furthermore, I find it very amusing and ironic that the comments by members who seem set on making this struggle about Nichol’s resignation wish to make the point that “75% of students don’t care”—look at the 40 comments on this (relatively obscure) forum itself! Wow! that’s involvement!
Now, for what really matters:
Perhaps its impossible in an anonymous, removed situation as this, but STOP THE FREAKING PERSONAL ATTACKS! I dont care WHO you are, but who the hell ARE you to judge the views of a fellow student? You all share the same interest: the positive future of the College. So shut up and pay attention:
This ISNT about Nichol. this IS about the future of the College. If you feel that the BoV is responsible for a negative future for the College, then that’s great. If you feel that Blair helps this or hurts this, thats fine. If you think its all a load of crock and we should stop talking about it, then perhaps turn your attention elsewhere and start an activity that will be a great diversion.
But here’s the kicker: this is a time for change. this is a time to come together as a community, regardless of your beliefs and actualize the future of the College that you feel is the best. Don’t fall into complacency, because that is the virus that has infected our campus and will bring us down. SPEAK OUT.
-SG
— Sam G '09 Feb 21, 01:37 PM #
Nora- Blair accused BOV members of having mean-spirited communications, and Nichol inferred that pre-Nichol W&M was racist, anti-poor people, and religiously intolerant. I find that to be deplorable, an attempt to harm, and shouldn’t have been said.
Modern day Romans use the terms – team players, taking one for the team, and sharing a foxhole, among other terms. As a sitting board of education member in my township, if another board member, or Superintendent, wrote the type of e-mail authored by Nichol and Blair, against the Board, I would consider it to be a breach of trust and confidentiality, unprofessional, and the placing of self-interest above the interests of the institution.
This was not, is not, and will not be about the pursuit of truth (especially given that the matter involves a personnel issue). This is about the abilities of Mr. Nichol as the CEO of a public university.
We’ll just have to disagree on this.
— DLucas'80 Feb 21, 02:06 PM #