The latest from Dartmouth College
The latest round in Dartmouth College’s attempt to eliminate its alumni from any meaningful role in the governance of the college will take place during the next two months. This time, I will be directly involved as a candidate for office.
Let's begin with a recap. Since 1891, alumni have elected half of Dartmouth’s trustees. This arrangement was the product of an agreement that helped save the college. At the time, Dartmouth was, in the words of historian and former Dartmouth professor Jere Daniel, a failing regional institution. By agreeing that alumni would elect half of the college’s 16 trustees, Dartmouth won back the support of its alums. With that support, the college began its ascent to top-tier status.
In modern times, at least until quite recently, the candidates served up by the Dartmouth power structure almost always ran unopposed. In the past five years, however, independent candidates have made it onto the ballot through a petition process. Moreover, the alumni have elected all four petition candidates who have run for the Board druing this period. All four – T.J. Rodgers, Peter Robinson, Todd Zywicki, and Stephen Smith – are independent. Sometimes they back the administration; sometimes they don’t. The other trustees seem almost invariably to march in lock step with the college administration.
Stung by the election of Rodgers, Robinson, and Zywicki, and unhappy with the independence they displayed, the college tried in 2006 to change the constitution in ways that would have made it much more difficult for petition candidates to run. The changes required a two-thirds majority, but failed to gain the support of even a simple majority.
The power structure received another blow in 2007 when Stephen Smith resoundingly defeated the popular Sandy Alderson to bring the total of independent trustees to four. Having by now had its fill of democracy, the college resorted to diktat. Specifically, the trustees decided to expand the Board to 24 members, with 16 chosen by the Board’s Governance Committee and only eight elected by alums. Under this scheme, no matter how many independent candidates the alums elect, the non-elected supporters of the power structure will have a commanding majority. The college’s rationale, as articulated by Chairman of the Board of Trustees, was that reducing the percentage of trustees elected by alumni would likely result in the election of more capable trustees. This of course, is an insult to alumni.
With no other recourse, the Executive Committee of the Association of Alumni (AoA), all of whose members had been elected by the alumni, voted to file a lawsuit to prevent the college’s abrogation of the 1891 agreement. The college’s lawyers moved to dismiss the suit, but the state court judge denied the motion. Moreover, although he did not rule on the merits, his opinion strongly suggested that he agreed with the AoA that the college’s decision to pack the Board was unlawful.
Dartmouth therefore agreed to postpone indefinitely the implementation of its Board-packing scheme. At this point, one might have hoped that the college would try to heal its increasingly bitter rift with large numbers of its sons and daughters. For example, Dartmouth likely could accomplish one of its stated goals, increasing the size of its Board in order to deal more effectively with an increasingly complex landscape, without reducing the proportion of elected Board members.
But Dartmouth has no interest in such a compromise because its overriding objective is precisely to exclude its alums from meaningful participation in college governance. Thus, the college has chosen to play one more card. It has put together a slate of candidates for the AoA Executive Committee that has agreed, if elected, to drop the lawsuit. Their platform, in other words, is capitulation to Dartmouth’s plan to deprive the alumni of any meaningful say.
In response, I have joined a slate that is committed to maintaining the lawsuit, since it is all that stands in the way of the virtually total marginalization of Dartmouth alumni. The slate is headed by Mike Murphy ’61 and also includes Marian Chambers ’76, the first female graduate of Dartmouth’s initial coeducational class, who is running for Secretary/Treasurer. I’m running for something called 2d Vice President. Our slate has established a website, Dartmouth Parity, which you can visit here.
Voting begins on April 28 and will continue until June 5. If you’re a Dartmouth alum, please consider supporting us. If you know Dartmouth alums, please spread the word.
