The recent upsurge of web-based organizations aimed at maintaining alumni representation on the Board of Trustees has raised questions surrounding the significance of the anonymity of these organizations' leaders and the extent to which individual trustees should be allowed to voice their opinions publicly.
Dartmouth Board of Trustees Chairman Charles "Ed" Haldeman Jr. '70 criticized ongoing efforts to attack the trustee reform process, which he said were inappropriately anonymous, exposed private information and have the potential to damage the reputation of the College. Haldeman applauded the efforts, however, as indicative of the passion of Dartmouth alumni.
Haldeman also expressed irritation with the involvement of trustees in these campaigns, alluding to the four Board members elected by petition.
Haldeman's statements follow the launch of two websites and a national advertising campaign criticizing potential changes to the makeup of the Board. SaveDartmouth.org, the website for the newly-formed Committee to Save Dartmouth College, placed an ad on the front page of The New York Times website on Aug. 16 and Aug. 19. VoteDartmouth.org was launched with a similar purpose. Both websites ask alumni to sign a petition urging the Board not to change the extent to which or the process whereby alumni are represented on the Board.
The movement has arisen in response to the June announcement of the Board's governance committee that it is reexamining Board makeup, in part due to questions concerning alumni representation.
Haldeman took issue with the anonymity that surrounds the organizations.
"It is certainly not the way that I would do it," he said. "If I have a point of view, I think I have a responsibility to identify myself and I would hope were the funding coming from some outside organization or agency, I would feel an obligation to disclose that -- I would feel an obligation to put my name there."
Neither SaveDartmouth.org nor VoteDartmouth.org provides contact information for their founders or financiers.
An Aug. 16 press release for SaveDartmouth.org listed Sarah Lindler as the organization's media contact. Lindler, who is not an alumna of the College and says she is a volunteer for the organization, said that she is responsible for filtering calls for the CSDC and directed this reporter to contact whom she named as the organization's spokesmen, Trustees Todd Zywicki '88 and Stephen Smith '88, both of whom are alumni trustees who ran as petition candidates and have publicly opposed potential changes to Board structure.
When reached by The Dartmouth, Zywicki denied being the spokesperson for the CSDC. Further phone calls to Lindler and Smith on this matter were not returned as of press time.
The connection of the petition trustees to organizations and statements inherently critical of the work of the Board and the College represents the first time these trustees have publicly opposed Board actions without Board authorization. Zywicki, T.J. Rodgers '70 and Peter Robinson '79 had previously been given the opportunity to openly criticize the last iteration of the proposed alumni constitution as the only three Board members against it. The Board's "Statement on Governance and Trustee Responsibilities" states that trustees must "represent Dartmouth positively in words and deeds, particularly and proactively to Dartmouth constituents."
Smith, Zywicki, Rodgers and Robinson, the four board members elected by the petition process, co-signed a letter to alumni dated Aug. 6 that denounces any change to the Board's configuration and asserted that an 1891 Board resolution calling for a balance between the number of trustees selected by the Board and the number elected by alumni is binding.
That letter came about a month after Haldeman released a letter of his own that was displayed on the Dartmouth website and outlined an interpretation of what he called the "1891 'agreement.'"
Smith and Zywicki argue that any limit to their right to speak freely dissolved once Haldeman sent that letter, which they allege outlines his own personal beliefs on the ongoing controversy.
"Chairman Haldeman says that the alumni are in a state of 'confusion' about the 1891 'agreement,' a word that he puts in quotation marks to suggest that no agreement for permanent governance-sharing ever existed," the letter said. "We respectfully disagree."
Haldeman said that "for generations" the policy of the Board has been that individual trustees could not speak on Board matters without authorization, but that the Board chairman has the unique right to speak on behalf of the Board.
"If the Board chair was not allowed to do that, was precluded from speaking on behalf of the Board, then there would not be communication from the Board and that does not seems like as good idea," he said. "There is a strong argument that by voluntarily coming on the Board one does give up the right to completely say whatever is on your mind. Were the long tradition of Board behavior forced on Board members at this point, they would argue it was a violation of their free speech and it would result in yet another controversy at Dartmouth. I think we have to rely on Board members and trustees enforcing good behavior on themselves rather than the Board imposing it on them."
Smith agreed that the chairman should be permitted to speak on behalf of the Board, but argued that speaking on behalf of the Board would require that the communication be approved by the Board.
"If he [Haldeman] feels it is his right to express his views I think all trustees have that right," Smith said. "When it comes to something as fundamental as whether or not alumni should be disenfranchised, trustees should have a right to speak."
Regarding a section of the SaveDartmouth.org website titled "Meet the Trustees," Haldeman took issue with the extent to which the organization lists the personal contact information for trustees. The website supplies the fax numbers and e-mail addresses for each sitting member of the Board.
"One reaction is that I think it is great that we have so many alums at Dartmouth who care so much about their college and are willing to invest so much time and money in making sure that the College remains strong in the future," Haldeman said. "The unfortunate part was listing personal fax numbers and e-mail addresses and that was an uncomfortable thing for many people on the Board."
The governance committee -- a subcommittee of the Board responsible for exploring any changes to the Board's consistency or the methods of trustee election, will make its report at the Board's Sept. 7 meeting.
