Yes, it's yet another guest editorial on "alumni governance" issues. Why care at all? Because College priorities are ultimately set by Dartmouth's trustees, and students are impacted in many ways, from rooming alternatives to course availability to resource allocations that impact your activities. You should care about how alumni are able to participate in electing those trustees.
In September, alumni will vote on a proposed new constitution. The biggest argument in its favor seems to be that it is better than what we have today. The Alumni Governance Task Force, the body proposing the changed constitution, has demonstrated an "all or nothing" mentality, presupposing that the only choices are to approve their plan or accept the status quo. Respect for the opinions of students and alumni, as well as for the well-meaning but ultimately flawed work of the AGTF, requires not merely an argument for the proposal's defeat, but a constructive third path.
Alumni should reject the AGTF proposal. The undemocratic tactics used to implement its passage, including a controversial cancellation of alumni officer elections this fall, are well documented. Instead, students and alumni should work together to improve the Alumni Council, with an appreciation of the need to distinguish this body -- designed to promote the engagement and organization of alumni volunteers in service to Dartmouth -- from the procedures of alumni trustee election, which directly affect the direction and governance of the College itself. Accountability is jeopardized when the former has preeminence over the latter.
For starters, representative student participation directly in the Council should be encouraged and expanded. After all, current students will be alumni before the "leadership arc" proposed by the AGTF completes its four-year cycle. Think of the power students could have by directly informing alumni of their concerns, and having the two bodies cooperating to address them.
Additionally, the Council can be improved by incorporating the work of the AGTF to increase openness and inclusivity. This could be accomplished by adding seats for more classes, for more "marginalized affinity group" representatives, and for more representatives chosen in alumni-wide elections. An arc of phased multi-year officer positions can provide year-to-year continuity, and a trustee liaison committee may improve communication between students, alumni, trustees and the Council's standing committees on various College affairs.
The Council bylaws should be amended to implement all these changes, and should also state that individual classes and clubs must elect their representatives in open elections and not be chosen by small committees or, in the case of newly-graduated classes, by administrative fiat. All of these changes can be made simply by a vote of the same 75-plus Council members who unanimously voted for reforming alumni governance this spring, without any need to impact how 66,000-plus alumni select Dartmouth trustees.
The existing Association of Alumni constitution can be improved with modest changes, keeping in mind that its purpose is primarily to serve all alumni as individuals in their stewardship role of electing trustees. The September ballot may include petition amendments to require the long-promised all-media voting of officers, the use of Robert's rules of order at meetings and the recognition of proxies to represent individuals who cannot be present. Further, the terms of officers and their election dates need to be clarified to avoid a recurrence of their controversial manipulation. The annual meeting should be opened through interactive webcast for alumni to participate and students to observe.
Finally, a new amendment should be considered that would have the Association reclaim direct responsibility for trustee nominations, which it previously delegated to the Council. This crucial amendment should require that all groups who put forward candidates, including a nominating committee of either Association or Council members, must follow exactly the same rules as all others. Let's ensure a level playing field and treat as equals each Dartmouth alumnus seeking a seat on the Board.
We must not confuse alumni and College governance in a rush to make changes. Although they are linked by selection of trustees, mechanisms that may be appropriate for the former are totally inappropriate for the latter. We must look more closely at ways to formalize the working bonds between current students and those who have already graduated.
Voting no in September will be a positive first step on a better path.
