Several minutes ago, a letter from Ed Haldeman was sent out over blitz to (presumably) everybody at Dartmouth:
A LETTER FROM ED HALDEMAN, CHAIR OF THE BOARD OF TRUSTEES, TO THE DARTMOUTH COMMUNITYThe Dartmouth has also put an article about it up on their website. Yesterday, The Dartmouth's board wrote an editorial supporting changes to the Board of Trustees' structure.
Dear Members of the Dartmouth Community,
Earlier today, the Dartmouth Board of Trustees took several steps to strengthen the College's governance. Given the intense debate about this issue in recent months, I wanted to write to you as soon as possible to tell you what we've done and why.
Let me start by saying Dartmouth has never been stronger than it is today. It's one of the most selective institutions in the country. Our commitment to teaching has never been stronger and student satisfaction is at record highs. The student-to-faculty ratio now stands at 8:1. We have expanded the faculty by 15 percent since 2000 and maintained competitive faculty compensation, reflecting the College's sharp focus on its academic programs. Once current building plans are completed, we will have invested $1.1 billion in new and renovated state-of-the-art facilities since 1998.
Like its peers, however, the College confronts new challenges. We are facing increasing competition for the finest students and the best faculty as well as for the financial resources needed to support the College. And, we operate in an increasingly complex and highly regulated environment. Having the strongest possible governance is a critical factor to ensuring Dartmouth's continued success in the years ahead.
The changes we are making preserve alumni democracy at Dartmouth by keeping eight alumni-nominated trustees. They expand the Board with eight additional charter trustees, adding alumni to meet the needs of the College. And, they address the destructive politicization of trustee campaigns that have hurt Dartmouth. These changes represent a balancing of competing interests. They are true to Dartmouth's founding principles. And, they will ensure that, moving forward, the College has a strong, effective, and independent governing body.
Over the past three months, the Board's Governance Committee conducted a thorough review of this issue. We carefully considered input from many alumni, current and former trustees, faculty, parents, students, and other members of the Dartmouth community. We consulted with experts in college and non-profit governance and carefully evaluated practices among 30 leading colleges and universities. And, we developed a report to the full Board, which I encourage you to read for yourself at www.dartmouth.edu/governancereport.
After reviewing the Governance Committee's recommendations - and after much thought and deliberation - the Board of Trustees concluded that Dartmouth should strengthen its governance by taking steps to:
* Expand the Board by Adding More Alumni to Better Meet the Needs of the College: We are expanding the Board from 18 to 26 to ensure it has the broad range of backgrounds, skills, expertise, and fundraising capabilities needed to steward an institution of Dartmouth's scope and complexity. Dartmouth has been at a competitive disadvantage to its peers, with one of the smallest Boards of any comparable institution. We have had 18 members on our Board, versus an average of 42 trustees at peer schools and an average of 34 at other liberal arts colleges. We also are giving the Board more flexibility to select trustees who offer the specific talents and experiences that the College needs, which elections don't ensure. We will accomplish both of these goals by adding eight new charter trustee seats to the Board.
* Preserve Alumni Democracy by Retaining Alumni Trustee Elections: We are maintaining alumni trustee elections at their current level and preserving the ability of alumni to petition onto the ballot. Dartmouth currently has the highest proportion of alumni-nominated trustees of any peer institution and is one of the few schools that allows alumni to petition directly onto the ballot. The Board believes that this gives Dartmouth's alumni an important direct voice in our governance and fosters greater alumni involvement in the College. Dartmouth will continue to have one of the most democratic trustee election processes of any college in the country.
* Simplify the Alumni Nomination Process: Dartmouth's trustee elections have become increasingly politicized, costly, and divisive. It's not the results of these elections that are the problem, but the process itself. So we are charging the Alumni Council and the Association of Alumni to develop and implement a process for selecting alumni trustee nominees that preserves elections, maintains petition access to the ballot, and adopts a one-vote, majority-rule election process.
* Improve Direct Board Engagement with Alumni and Other Stakeholders: A larger group of trustees representing even more diverse backgrounds will help us enhance Board engagement with key areas of the College including academic affairs, student life, and alumni relations. We are therefore creating new Board committees focused on each of these three critical areas. This will facilitate greater interaction and communication with individuals in each of these three areas.
While we will continue to have eight trustees nominated directly by alumni, a significant number of seats on the Board, I know some will ask why we didn't simply expand the Board through an equal number of charter and alumni trustee seats. Given the divisiveness of recent elections we did not believe that having more elections would be good for Dartmouth. We also believe that the Board needs more trustees selected for the specific talents and experiences they can offer the College - which elections can't guarantee. We will still have more alumni-nominated trustees than most other schools and the opportunity for regular contested elections. But we think this is the best balancing of Dartmouth's interests.
I know there are strongly held views on all sides of this issue. And I respect that many of those views are driven above all by a desire to do what is best for Dartmouth and its students. But some of the recent rhetoric in this debate has become so harsh and divisive it is now doing harm to Dartmouth. I want to urge everyone who cares about Dartmouth to debate this issue in a reasonable and respectful way. As President Wright has said, there is far more that unites us - as friends, faculty, students, and loyal alumni of the College on the Hill - than divides us. Above all, we have a shared love of and dedication to Dartmouth.
One thing that has made Dartmouth an enduring and successful institution is that its history has always been one of adapting to meet new challenges and needs, while still preserving what is unique and special about Dartmouth. That is why a board originally composed of twelve New England men, half of them members of the clergy, today consists of eighteen men and women from many parts of the country and walks of life. That is why Trustees who once served for life now serve four-year terms. And, that is why elections once open only to "graduates... of at least five years standing" are now open to all alumni.
In these and many other respects, Dartmouth's Board has made fundamental changes to its governance structure and procedures throughout the College's history. The changes we're making today are no different. They are driven by what is best for Dartmouth and its students, and what is necessary to ensure the College continues to meet the new challenges it faces in the 21st century.
I love Dartmouth. I honestly believe there is nowhere else in the world quite like this great College. We need to protect Dartmouth and ensure it continues to prosper for future generations of students. I, and the entire Board, are intensely focused on helping Dartmouth to continue building its world-class academic program. That is what drives us forward. And, I look forward to continuing to work with all of you - alumni, faculty, students and parents - to build on Dartmouth's unique and pre-eminent place in American higher education.
Sincerely,
Ed Haldeman
Chair, Dartmouth College Board of Trustees
This morning, The New York Times published an article about the governance review on the front page of its National Report section.
11 comments:
So the Alumni Association, after buying "five" seats in 1891 with a promise to raise funds for the College, gets to keep three extras without being required to make any further promises. That sounds like a good deal, but one fears that it will not be enough for the radicals.
Now that we're all in a make-up and feel-good mood, why not make the last eight council-nominated losers the new charter trustees? Seems only fair.
Weren't they churned and burned, though? Don't they want nothing to do with Dartmouth because the campaigners made the election experience so crappy?
Right. So let's sell the slots on eBay.
Here's a wild idea: why not let the trustees pick 'em? I mean, they do own the corporation and have the duty to pick 'em, and it sounds like they want to... and they've been doing it since the 18th century, and Dartmouth is well run over the long term... I don't see the need to change now.
Two days ago, we were hearing that we shouldn't follow traditions blindly and that it's necessary to adapt for the future. That sold me.
The sitting Trustees don't pick new Charter members; only the five members of the Governance Committee do.
Jimmy W. picks his own supporters and most Trustees have no input at all.
WAKE UP! Wright now rules with an iron hand.
Can anyone spell Ermächtigungsgesetz?
Anonymous, get a clue: the entire Board elects every single elected trustee by majority vote. That means everyone other than the two ex officio seats.
Some of those elected Trustees are nominated by the alumni and some by the Board's own committee, but all nominees may be turned down by the Board.
Of the two ex officio seats, one is of course held by the President, who is himself appointed by the Board and retained at its pleasure.
I'm all for traditions. If you can find the word "alumni" in the damn charter, then I say give them the right to vote.
Hey Less Clueless.
What is your source? The latest Charter Trustee was presented to the Board in June by the Governance Committee as the new Charter Tustee. There was no debate. The GovCom considers this its right; and guess who is on the GovCom?
"What is your source?" For what? The majority election of trustees? Read the Charter.
"The latest Charter Trustee was presented to the Board in June by the Governance Committee as the new Charter Trustee. There was no debate." How do you know? What's your source? Board deliberations are secret; were you there? And why should there be any "debate" if there's only one nominee anyway? How long does it take for 17 people to cast a perfunctory vote?
Get a clue. Every trustee but two is elected by the full board.
Post a Comment