Original Article: http://dartreview.com/archives/2007/08/05/the_1891_agreement_a_history_in_brief.php
Sunday, August 5, 2007
History: In 1891, instigated by problems the College was facing and the growing dissonance between alumni and the College, five members of the then-ten-member appointed Board resigned; five elected alumni trustees took their place. The establishment of parity is recorded in the minutes of the Association of Alumni; each time the Board expanded, the parity was honored, establishing a 116 year precedent of parity on the Board.
Problem: The Governance Committee’s review and restructuring of the Board may threaten the parity of alumni trustees (elected by alumni) and charter trustees (appointed by the existing Board).
Question: Should the parity, established now for 116 years, be altered now? If so, should the weight shift to Alumni Trustees or Charter Trustees?
Our readers respond:
“My personal opinion is that absolutely nothing ought to be changed. The system is working exactly as it was intended to, and that’s a good thing. Alumni are unhappy with the College’s administration and with the Trustee candidates nominated by that administration, and have made that opinion known through a democratic process. Dartmouth’s Board is a uniquely resilient institution precisely because of its democratic nature. A string of elections producing “undesirable” results points to a need for the administration to change the candidates, not the system.”
–Michael Ellis ’06, Editor-in-chief emeritus of The Dartmouth Review
“I think it’s got to be the charter trustees. The environment in which a place like Dartmouth operates evolves constantly; it’s not clear to me that nostalgia should play an all important role in shaping the college’s future direction.”
–Alan Stam, Professor of Government
“I am surprised by the extent to which commentary has focused on the legality of changing the 1891 Agreement. Legality is not the issue here. For example, even if the trustees could legally vote to pave over the Green and make it a parking lot, would that decision be good for Dartmouth? Reducing alumni representation on the Board after the four recent trustee elections would tear the school apart.”
–Joseph Asch ‘79, guest columnist for The Dartmouth Review and The Dartmouth
“For 100-plus years our U.S. Congress was marked by similar parity: a more accountable House elected directly by the people and a more independent Senate chosen by state legislatures, often from within their own ranks. For our school, it seems to me that parity promotes a strong blend of stability and accountability. But we should note that when our country acted to reform, we opted for direct election of the Senate. Likewise, if Dartmouth does act to reform, we should certainly move to expand the democratic vote of alumni, not curtail it.”
–Zak Moore ’09, opinion columnist for The Dartmouth
“Trustees need to have balanced backgrounds, should be independent and not beholden to any particular group. If Dartmouth is to continue to build leaders and be a positive contributor to the full society, the current system must be altered.”
–William H. Mitchell ’79, Class Vice President and advisor to the Bones Gate fraternity