Association of Alumni Elections 2008

The Association of Alumni elections are April 28-June 5, 2008. This election is highly contested with both a nominations committee slate and a petition slate. Sample ballot.

Nine of the ten class presidents have recommended this marked slate. The missing class president's whereabouts are unknown. The class officers recognize that not all class members agree with this recommendation.

Some sample comments appear in the latest class newsletter and a letter from 20 classmates supporting Parity appears below.

Please vote!

Pro Unity

To our ’60 Classmates and Friends,

We are writing to you as the nine guys who have had the privilege of serving as your Class Presidents for the past 43 (!) years to urge each of you to vote in the Association of Alumni (AoA) election now underway. You can vote by mail or electronically through June 5th. We are also strongly recommending that you to vote for the nominated “Unity Slate”, headed by John Mathias ’69.

Frankly, in past years voting for the officers and executive committee members of the AoA has been something of a yawner. After all, for many years almost all Dartmouth alumni governance matters have been handled by the Alumni Council, the representative body charged with serving as “the principal spokesperson for alumni and the primary forum for the exchange of alumni sentiment”. The only real responsibility the AoA has is overseeing the mechanics of trustee elections and holding an annual meeting.

Unfortunately, all that changed last year when six “dissident” petition candidates were elected, giving them control of the 11-member AoA executive committee. Following the trustees’ decision in September ’07 to change the composition of the board, the six voted to file a lawsuit against the College - without seeking the approval of the 68,000 alumni they were sworn to represent! Not only has the lawsuit required the diversion of very substantial funds better devoted to educating students, it has resulted in unwarranted and harmful national publicity for Dartmouth, just as the College begins seeking the strongest possible successor to Jim Wright, who will step down as president next year. Despite repeated requests for transparency, those who filed the lawsuit still refuse to disclose where their funding is coming from.

We are absolutely in favor of strong alumni involvement in the life of the College and in open, spirited discussion and debate between alumni and the Board of Trustees and administration. But we believe Dartmouth issues should be addressed within the Dartmouth family, without resorting to the intervention of the courts, without seeking the involvement of the New Hampshire legislature (as one AoA executive committee member seeking re-election recently sought and failed to achieve), and without subjecting Dartmouth to on-going negative publicity in the national media.

The “Unity Slate”, headed by Jon Mathias ’69, represents a group of totally independent men and women, each with a long history of service to Dartmouth. They offer diverse backgrounds and perspectives and are committed to working together with the Board of Trustees and administration to build on Dartmouth’s strengths as the finest undergraduate liberal arts college anywhere. If elected, they will withdraw the lawsuit and restore reason and civility to the Association of Alumni. Please give them your vote! (To make it all a little simpler, we’ve enclosed a sample ballot with names of each “Unity Slate” person appropriately marked.)

This is a critical election - one that none of us can afford to sit out. PLEASE! Fulfill your right and obligation as a Dartmouth alum - CAST YOUR VOTE!!!

You can learn more about the election procedure at http://voxthevote.org/. For more information about the “Unity Slate’ please visit http://www.dartmouthundying.org. Thanks for listening.

Ken Johansen
Rick Roesch
Jim Adler
Marty Lower
Phil Kron
Gene Kohn
Seth Strickland
Spencer Morgan
Allen Stowe

Pro Parity

Dear Fellow '60s,

We have read with interest the thoughtful letter on the Association of Alumni election sent to the class by our current president, Ken Johansen, and eight previous class presidents. In the interest of fairness, we have asked that the following message, supporting the “Parity” slate of candidates headed by Michael Murphy ’61, be sent to the same list of classmates.

It is our strong belief that the decision by the Dartmouth Trustees to “pack” the Board with eight additional members, all to be selected by the Board and none by the alumni, was unwise, unfair, and in violation of an agreement dating back to 1891 to maintain parity between appointed and elected Trustees. The election of new officers and the Executive Committee of the Association of Alumni will determine whether a lawsuit contesting the Trustees’ decision will go forward or, as our class presidents desire, will be dropped and the “packing” of the Board of Trustees allowed to take place.

Our classmate Bob Brown replied in part to a letter from a group of Trustees as follows:

A fine letter, but as usual you have clouded or avoided the two issues central to this entire debate:

1. Can you unilaterally renege on a valid contract with the alumni? This appears not to be an issue with you, but it is at the heart of the lawsuit, and of those of us who support it. All alumni need to know if the College is bound by legal rules of society.

2. I have heard no quarrel with your increasing the size of the Board, which you portray as being a bone of contention. The Board size has been increased several times since 1891. What you don't acknowledge is that you don't allow parity of alumni selection of the new Board members. Your protests of innocence are disingenuous because you could easily have done so. The fact that you chose not to do so is telling of your true intentions, which is why so many alumni are opposing you.

Classmate Bob Bentel replied to the ’60 presidents’ email with these comments:

Gentlemen: I respect your views and readily admit to not having the full perspective that you apparently possess. My question is a rather simple one: Why should we vote for changing the parity agreement on the Board of Trustees that has existed for over 100 years?

I am not in favor of litigation but changing the parity agreement troubles me. Once done it will not be reversed. Having sat on Boards, I know how ineffective they can be when everyone follows the party line without true commitment and discussion. Trustees (Board Directors) nominated by the establishment do not necessarily bring open mindedness to the meetings. Oftentimes I have found directors (Trustees) who never read the material but just bask in their own perceived self-importance due to the position. A little controversy on the Board can be good. So far I haven't seen a good argument as to why parity should be dissolved with total power going to the establishment. If decisions on this issue are being made because of current problems, it is better to address these isolated problems in a way other than changing our constitution.

If you want my vote, help me to understand WHY parity should be dissolved forever. I do not take changing 100+ years of Dartmouth history lightly. I believe many others feel as I do. The dissident directors would never have been elected in the first place if Alums did not feel the need to balance the approach of the Administration. I have not yet seen a simple explanation that will sway those of us who believe the need for radical change has not been proven.

And finally, John Mitchell expressed his views on the Trustee Board-packing this way:

As a former commissioned officer in the US Army I took an oath not to cheat nor to tolerate those who do. The Trustees cheated. I don't tolerate that. Those who do can rationalize until hell won't have it but it doesn't change the reality.

If you have not already voted, we hope you will look at the other side of this matter and give careful consideration as to whether you should support the proposal to drop the lawsuit and allow the Trustees to end 117 years of parity between elected and appointed Trustees.

If you believe parity on the Board of Trustees should remain, we recommend that you vote for the slate of Murphy, Boles, Mirengoff, Chambers, Gado, Ross, Hafer, Roberts, Steel, Urstadt, and Mooney in the election of officers and the Executive Committee of the Association of Alumni.

Sincerely yours,