With the Association of Alumni elections close on the horizon, thousands of alumni are now gearing up to cast the votes that will determine the composition of the next AoA executive committee. A contingent of the current executive committee's recent, more contentious actions -- most notably a costly mass mailing pushing the lawsuit in the name of the Association -- have raised the question of whether the committee has truly represented popular alumni interests.The committee's decision to file a lawsuit over the Board of Trustees' announced plan to add charter seats to the Board has ratcheted up the already noisy alumni governance debate to a fever pitch, pushing the College's troubles into the spotlight yet again. While the merits of the claims that precipitated the lawsuit are certainly open for debate, the decision to file the suit is of more dubious distinction.
In this grapple over alumni governance, both sides have hurled nasty accusations, each over the other's declared love for the College and just what that means. Just as those alumni bringing the suit believe they are acting in the best interest of alumni and the College, so too do Board Chairman Ed Haldeman '70 and the trustees in favor of expanding the Board.
To be fair, the lawsuit has successfully delayed the implementation of a hastily conceived, but permanent, plan to address inherent problems in the trustee election process. It has also reminded us all of the vigor, passion and care Dartmouth alumni are willing to devote to their alma mater. Close bonds between alumni and the College community are, after all, a key part of what makes Dartmouth, Dartmouth. But at what cost has this lawsuit come?
As the College undertakes the search for the next president and continues to deal with significant faculty retention problems, the lawsuit's implications have grown in consequence. Any top-notch presidential candidate or professor will have reservations about coming to an institution currently being sued by its alumni in the latest installment of a protracted tooth-and-nail debate that has grabbed national headlines and sullied the school's reputation.
Moreover, the lawsuit fritters away alumni funds, time and attention -- all of which could be better spent in other arenas. Instead of squandering it on litigation, the $2 million President Wright has said the College would likely end up spending to counter the suit could be used to address important issues that both sides purport to care about.
The grandiose claims made by the lawsuit's supporters and the ostentatious rhetoric of those who oppose it only distract from more pressing matters facing Dartmouth. Ultimately, the suit is harming the College. There's an old saying: If you love her, then set her free. Perhaps those who have chosen to sue the College should consider this adage when determining whether the ends justify their means.
