While I’m no fan of Gene Nichol’s policies at William & Mary — I totally share the concerns of certain members of the House of Delegates about the decisions the college president has made — I’m not sure that hauling members of the W&M Board of Trustees into the General Assembly for questioning is a good idea either.

As Olympia Meola reports for the Times-Dispatch, “Delegates spent 90 minutes yesterday grilling four members of The College of William and Mary’s board of visitors on their view of recent school events, including the Sex Workers’ Art Show, and their intentions for the future.”

I am very uncomfortable with the idea of the General Assembly micro-managing decisions made by Virginia’s college presidents — even when I happen to agree with the delegates on the issues concerned, and even though I have frequently argued in this blog that universities are largely unaccountable to anyone other than their own internal constituencies. As the same time, I worry that politicizing college decision-making could be a cure that’s worse than the disease.

The governor, if I am correct, has the power to appoint the trustees to the boards of Virginia’s public colleges and universities. If W&M trustees back up the president, what can you do? Elect a governor who will put trustees with a different philosophy onto board.

Otherwise, the impetus for accountability should come from college stakeholdersm not from politicians. Recent events at the University of Richmond, a private institution, were noteworthy: An unpopular president was recently unseated by alumni who rose up in revolt and threatened to stop contributing, thus jeopardizing fund raising. Why can’t W&M alumni hold the Nuckol administration accountable, as some already have, by voting with their pocketbooks?