President Nichol's e-mail, 9:43 AM on February 12th
Dear Members of the William & Mary Community:
I was informed by the Rector on Sunday, after our Charter Day celebrations, that my contract will not be renewed in July. Appropriately, serving the College in the wake of such a decision is beyond my imagining. Accordingly, I have advised the Rector, and announce today, effective immediately, my resignation as president of the College of William & Mary. I return to the faculty of the school of law to resume teaching and writing.
I have made four decisions, or sets of decisions, during my tenure that have stirred ample controversy.
First, as is widely known, I altered the way a Christian cross was displayed in a public facility, on a public university campus, in a chapel used regularly for secular College events -- both voluntary and mandatory -- in order to help Jewish, Muslim, Hindu, and other religious minorities feel more meaningfully included as members of our broad community. The decision was likely required by any effective notion of separation of church and state. And it was certainly motivated by the desire to extend the College’s welcome more generously to all. We are charged, as state actors, to respect and accommodate all religions, and to endorse none. The decision did no more.
Second, I have refused, now on two occasions, to ban from the campus a program funded by our student-fee-based, and student-governed, speaker series. To stop the production because I found it offensive, or unappealing, would have violated both the First Amendment and the traditions of openness and inquiry that sustain great universities. It would have been a knowing, intentional denial of the constitutional rights of our students. It is perhaps worth recalling that my very first act as president of the College was to swear on oath not to do so.
Third, in my early months here, recognizing that we likely had fewer poor, or Pell eligible, students than any public university in America, and that our record was getting worse, I introduced an aggressive Gateway scholarship program for Virginians demonstrating the strongest financial need. Under its terms, resident students from families earning $40,000 a year or less have 100% of their need met, without loans. Gateway has increased our Pell eligible students by 20% in the past two years.
Fourth, from the outset of my presidency, I have made it clear that if the College is to reach its aspirations of leadership, it is essential that it become a more diverse, less homogeneous institution. In the past two and half years we have proceeded, with surprising success, to assure that is so. Our last two entering classes have been, by good measure, the most diverse in the College’s history. We have, in the past two and a half years, more than doubled our number of faculty members of color. And we have more effectively integrated the administrative leadership of William & Mary. It is no longer the case, as it was when I arrived, that we could host a leadership retreat inviting the 35 senior administrators of the College and see, around the table, no persons of color.
As the result of these decisions, the last sixteen months have been challenging ones for me and my family. A committed, relentless, frequently untruthful and vicious campaign -- on the internet and in the press -- has been waged against me, my wife and my daughters. It has been joined, occasionally, by members of the Virginia House of Delegates -- including last week’s steps by the Privileges and Elections Committee to effectively threaten Board appointees if I were not fired over decisions concerning the Wren Cross and the Sex Workers’ Art Show. That campaign has now been rendered successful. And those same voices will no doubt claim victory today.
It is fair to say that, over the course of the past year, I have, more than once, considered either resigning my post or abandoning the positions I have taken on these matters -- which I believe crucial to the College’s future. But as I did so, I thought of other persons as well.
I thought of those students, staff, faculty, and alumni, not of the religious majority, who have told me of the power of even small steps, like the decision over display of the Wren Cross, to recognize that they, too, are full members of this inspiring community.
I have thought of those students, faculty, and staff who, in the past three years, have joined us with explicit hopes and assurances that the College could become more effectively opened to those of different races, backgrounds, and economic circumstances -- and I have thought of my own unwillingness to voluntarily abandon their efforts, and their prospects, in mid-stream.
I have thought of faculty and staff members here who have, for decades, believed that the College has, unlike many of its competitors, failed to place the challenge of becoming an effectively diverse institution center stage -- and who, as a result, have been strongly encouraged by the progress of the last two years.
I have thought of the students who define and personify the College’s belief in community, in service, in openness, in idealism -- those who make William & Mary a unique repository of the American promise. And I have believed it unworthy, regardless of burden, to break our bonds of partnership.
And I have thought, perhaps most acutely, of my wife and three remarkable daughters. I’ve believed it vital to understand, with them, that though defeat may at times come, it is crucial not to surrender to the loud and the vitriolic and the angry -- just because they are loud and vitriolic and angry. Recalling the old Methodist hymn that commands us “not to be afraid to defend the weak because of the anger of the strong,” nor “afraid to defend the poor because of the anger of the rich.” So I have sought not to yield. The Board’s decision, of course, changes that.
To my faculty colleagues, who have here created a distinctive culture of engaged, student-centered teaching and research, I will remember your strong and steadfast support until the end of my days.
To those staff members and alumni of this accomplished and heartening community, who have struggled to make the William & Mary of the future worthy of its distinctive past, I regret that I will no longer be part of that uplifting cause. But I have little doubt where the course of history lies.
And, finally, to the life-changing and soul-inspiring students of the College, the largest surprise of my professional life, those who have created in me a surpassing faith not only in an institution, but in a generation, I have not words to touch my affections. My belief in your promise has been the central and defining focus of my presidency. The too-quick ending of our work together is among the most profound and wrenching disappointments in my life. Your support, particularly of the past few weeks and days, will remain the strongest balm I’ve known. I am confident of the triumphs and contributions the future holds for women and men of such power and commitment.
I add only that, on Sunday, the Board of Visitors offered both my wife and me substantial economic incentives if we would agree “not to characterize [the non-renewal decision] as based on ideological grounds” or make any other statement about my departure without their approval. Some members may have intended this as a gesture of generosity to ease my transition. But the stipulation of censorship made it seem like something else entirely. We, of course, rejected the offer. It would have required that I make statements I believe to be untrue and that I believe most would find non-credible. I’ve said before that the values of the College are not for sale. Neither are ours.
Mine, to be sure, has not been a perfect presidency. I have sometimes moved too swiftly, and perhaps paid insufficient attention to the processes and practices of a strong and complex university. A wiser leader would likely have done otherwise. But I have believed, and attempted to explain, from even before my arrival on the campus, that an emboldened future for the College of William & Mary requires wider horizons, more fully opened doors, a broader membership, and a more engaging clash of perspectives than the sometimes narrowed gauges of the past have allowed. I step down today believing it still.
I have also hoped that this noble College might one day claim not only Thomas Jefferson’s pedigree, but his political philosophy as well. It was Jefferson who argued for a “wall of separation between church and state” -- putting all religious sects “on an equal footing.” He expressly rejected the claim that speech should be suppressed because “it might influence others to do evil,” insisting instead that “we have nothing to fear from the demoralizing reasonings of some if others are left free to demonstrate their errors.” And he averred powerfully that “worth and genius” should “be sought from every condition” of society.
The College of William & Mary is a singular place of invention, rigor, commitment, character, and heart. I have been proud that even in a short term we have engaged a marvelous new Chancellor, successfully concluded a hugely-promising capital campaign, secured surprising support for a cutting-edge school of education and other essential physical facilities, seen the most vibrant applicant pools in our history, fostered path-breaking achievements in undergraduate research, more potently internationalized our programs and opportunities, led the nation in an explosion of civic engagement, invigorated the fruitful marriage of athletics and academics, lifted the salaries of our lowest-paid employees, and even hosted a queen. None of this compares, though, to the magic and the inspiration of the people -- young and older -- who Glenn and I have come to know here. You will remain always and forever at the center of our hearts.
Go Tribe. And hark upon the gale.
Gene Nichol
Michael Powell's e-mail, 11:32 AM on February 12th
February 12, 2008
Dear Members of the College of William and Mary Community,
President Nichol has announced he will not serve the remainder of his term. We had hoped that he would and regret his decision. The Board of Visitors decision not to renew his contract after his current agreement expires on June 30th was extremely difficult. President Nichol achieved some outstanding things during his tenure. His energy and passion is legendary. He is a truly inspirational figure who has enjoyed the affection of many. After an exhaustive review, however, the Board believed there were a number of problems that were keeping the College from reaching its full potential and concluded that those issues could not be effectively remedied without a change of leadership.
It is critical to explain that this decision was not in any way based on ideology or any single public controversy. To suggest such a motivation for the Board is flatly wrong. Indeed, the Board has been repulsed by the personal attacks on the President and his family. The uncharitable personal assaults are unworthy of anyone who professes to care about the College and there should be no joy when things do not work out between good people.
Many policies championed by President Nichol are fully embraced by the Board. 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. We will continue the pursuit with vigor and will insist that all future presidents of the College do as well. We strongly support the Gateway program and will work to put it on sound financial footing by building an endowment that will allow it to blossom. Equally, we continue to see the enormous value that attends to the efforts of internationalization and civic engagement. And, so there is no doubt, the Board will not allow any change in the compromise reached on the placement of the Wren Cross.
The Board is cognizant that its decision will be deeply disappointing to many, especially members of our faculty and student body. Our sacred stewardship and full insight into the affairs of the College convinced us change was necessary to advance the best interests of the College. We understand the sense of loss and will work hard to heal all wounds.
But it is important to remember that William and Mary is stronger and more enduring than any one person or any one board. It will continue to rise and thrive through the ages. She is the Alma Matter of a Nation and the vibrancy of our students coupled with the wisdom and dedication of our masterful faculty will keep the College shining more brightly than any star in the constellation of higher education.
The College will begin a search for a new president immediately. In the interim, the Board will appoint Dean W. Taylor Reveley effective immediately to serve as President until a permanent leader is found.
Michael K. Powell ‘85
Rector, Board of Visitors
Zach Pilchen's and Valerie Hopkins' e-mail, 2:20 PM on February 12th
We learn this morning that President Nichol has resigned as President of the College. For many of us, he will always be our President, and the closed-door, unrecorded vote of the Board of Visitors has inspired everything from outrage to devastation to disillusionment. We will always be grateful to President Nichol for showing us what the College can be, and attempting to bring this "great and public" institution into the 21st century.
We are particularly ashamed of the way the BOV chose to handle this situation.
Michael Powell's statement on the BOV's decision rings empty. He lauds President Nichol and claims that the decision was, "not in any way based on ideology." If that was true, why would the BOV feel the necessity to bribe President Nichol and his wife into silence? Attempted bribery is about as un-William and Mary as you can get. President Nichol took the principled decision in rejecting their offer. We have come to expect nothing less from him.
The fact that he was informed of the decision by Michael Powell on Sunday, after President Nichol had spent the entirety of Charter Day performing for the BOV in blissful ignorance of their decision, comes across as equally slimy. This was a decision made in a closed room with no recorded vote. We have yet to hear anything but evasive, cheap rhetoric from the Rector. Who voted which way? Why was the decision made? The BOV has a responsibility to the College community to not hide behind closed doors, and to act with behavior befitting William and Mary. Sadly, they have failed in that duty.
Although we are not proud of the Board's decision, and are ashamed by their attempted bribery, the entire College community is proud of the students of the College who have been catalyzed in support of President Nichol. Students who understand that a love for the College is a love unmoved by one decision, or one year, in the life of our ancient institution. Students who gracefully rose above the epithets and personal attacks being hurled at their President to show the world, time and time again, how much they care for their College and their President. Students who now must come together to mourn our collective loss.
In appreciation and gratitude, we invite you to gather at President Nichol's home at 10PM TONIGHT. Those in attendance will sing the alma mater and present letters of support to the President--noting with Tribe Pride his incredible tenure and encouraging him in the wake of recent events. This is a show of support and unity among the student body, and we ask you to come with utmost respect to thank President Nichol for all he has done so selflessly for us.
Although the BOV has undercut our President, we must not allow them to undercut the inquisitive spirit to embrace diversity, and the unwavering love for the College and community that he has instilled in us during his short tenure.
As we said before: Gene Ray Nichol will always be our President.
Zach and Valerie
Email from Taylor Reveley, 9:37AM on February 14th.
Dear William and Mary Community:
In the hours since Tuesday's news reached us, our William and Mary community has known surprise, confusion and pain. In the words of a faculty member, this is a time when we must come together to heal wounds, revive ideals and restore hope.
This is a difficult time of transition not just for William and Mary but also for Gene Nichol and his family. Nick and Glenn are my good friends. They have my very best wishes.
Though not a mission I sought, I will serve this marvelous College as best I can. Listening and learning will be crucial for me in the weeks to come. I have begun meeting with our extraordinary faculty and students, deeply committed staff, and stalwart alumni. I look forward to many more conversations in the days and weeks to come.
Vitally important to the continued progress of the College is our commitment to William and Mary as a place for students, faculty and staff of great diversity. Important also are the College's welcome and support for students regardless of means. It matters too that the College is a place increasingly open to the world. And William and Mary's historic commitment to the civic involvement of its people is central to our identity. These are College values of great importance. They are also my values.
William and Mary is among the most ancient and important institutions in America. It is a national treasure. Those of us who love the College must keep it moving forward.
Taylor Reveley
Blair's Letter of Resignation, February 19th
Dear Members of the William & Mary Community:
After much soul searching, and input from my family and from alumni I respect, I will tender my resignation tomorrow from the Board of Visitors of the College of William and Mary to the Honorable Timothy M. Kaine, Governor of Virginia.
I was one of several members of the Board who argued forcefully for the renewal of Gene Nichol's contract as President of the College. Although no vote was taken, one was not required if the contract was not to be renewed. Those for renewal were given ample opportunity to argue their points. We ultimately found ourselves in the minority.
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.
I fought for renewal because I am proud of the progress that Gene Nichol boldly brought to the College. I would say before proceeding, in praising Mr. Nichol I in no way seek to diminish the critical work and achievements of our former President Tim Sullivan. They are many. Some would try to drive a wedge between Mr. Sullivan and Mr. Nichol, because Mr. Nichol takes credit (and is blamed) for progressive policies now in place, some of which I think built upon Mr. Sullivan's work.
I especially applaud President Nichol for making the College a more welcoming place for students, faculty and administrators of color, diverse ethnicities, and diverse religions. William and Mary is beginning to reflect more nearly the makeup of the citizenry of Virginia. President Nichol increased diversity without reducing the opportunities for others. 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. William and Mary is not a private, religious school. It is a public university that must be open to all who qualify for admissions based upon academic achievement and other accomplishments. Virginia families of color, various ethnicities, and various! ! reli gions properly expect as tax-paying citizens of Virginia that the doors of the College will be as open and welcoming to their children as to children of other backgrounds.
Gateway William and Mary has been particularly critical in moving the College forward. As is commonly known now, Gateway William and Mary is a program that furthers the goal of diversity by financially helping those worthy, successful applicants whose socio-economic status (regardless of color, ethnicity or religion) would preclude them from attending the College. 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. Now some detractors wish to belittle his achievement, and others claim wrongly that it is affirmative action in disguise. I have been assured that students benefiting from Gateway share one common denominator, socio-economic status.
I could go on with specifics of President Nichol's accomplishments, including playing a critical role in recruiting our wonderful Chancellor Sandra Day O'Connor. I will not.
Suffice it to say that dozens of our incredibly talented students (and others) called me both before and after the Board's decision, pouring out their hearts with love and admiration for President Nichol and the College. After President Nichol's resignation, I was initially reassured by public statements of Board Rector Michael Powell and other members of the Board of Visitors that the Board would not change the policies put in place by Mr. Nichol, including that dealing with the Wren Chapel Cross. Based in good measure on such statements, I tried to calm the fears of President Nichol's ardent supporters and assure them that while they mourn his loss, the important policies he put in place would remain. I strongly encouraged their continued commitment to the College.
Why then am I resigning from the Board at this juncture? Because there has been an incipient effort by some members of the Board of Visitors to pick apart President Nichol's accomplishments. To what end? They gained their stated objective. 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. Such communications call into question the real motivation for the initial decision not to renew the President's contract.
I know the reasoned reactions, as well as the emotional ones, of Board members are in response to the President's message of February 12th to the William and Mary Community. Would I have refrained from some of what Mr. Nichol said? 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.
My conscience now tells me it is time to move on. And I am. I hope my leaving will give Rector Powell and the Board pause, and cause them to follow Thomas Jefferson's advice contained his letter to John Tyler in 1804: to open the doors of truth and test their necessary deliberations by reason. I hope the Board will conduct those deliberations in a professional and civil manner worthy of our venerable institution and will defend their decision (as they are being asked to do by the faculty and students for whom the College and the Board exist) in a similar fashion.
I place my trust and hope for the future of the College in the hands of our incredible students and our esteemed faculty.
Robert Blair ('68)
