Plans for the Presidency: An Interview with David Millman

On May 16, Associate Editor James D. Eiler (TDR) sat down with newly elected President of the Dartmouth Student Assembly David Millman (DM) to talk about Millman’s vision and priorities for the coming year. This article is paired with another article, entitled Millman: A Further Consideration.

TDR: Why did you decide to run for Student Assembly President?

DM: I made the decision because I see the potential for it. Being in a unique situation with a relatively small student body and a really large standing in the country and within the Dartmouth community, there is the potential for improving the lives of Dartmouth students and the community. At its core, I see the student government as having so much power in terms of funding, advocacy, and media if it is used correctly. I have the background and the experience to effectively lead student government. 

TDR: Following up on that, could you go a bit into your background?

DM: I’ve been in the student government since freshman year. I lost freshman fall, but I came back and ran again. Since 2020, I’ve been in Assembly but have not had a leading role. In a lot of ways, Student Assembly is very top-down; the presidency has a lot of power and does most of the work. That is something that I campaigned on changing. 

TDR: What are your main goals as President?

DM: I would say that my goals are universal teletherapy, following up on the housing amendment, getting a student on the Board of Trustees, reinstituting safe rides, and bringing back late-night dining are the main priorities. The biggest thing, though, is reforming the structure so that when issues arise we can actually solve them. For instance, no one saw COVID coming. Having the structure to deal with such unexpected events is important. Student government needs to have more of a public advocacy role. 

TDR: How has the current administration reacted to your promises?

DM: Obviously it’s a mixed bag. Some of them are projects we’ve worked on before. Universal teletherapy has some support from the counseling department. Some things, though, have a lot of pushback, like late-night dining. Universal teletherapy might be the next big goal as it is the most feasible. The cost to have universal teletherapy would be less than a million. On a tangent, but if you take a more organized way of collecting student responses—we currently operate on very vague ideas—we can actually solve problems. 

A lot of our policies in my campaign were not general ideas such as “we need to make the Dartmouth experience better” but rather we need to solve specific issues like getting menstrual products in the bathrooms and sending out information-gathering surveys. I am very realistic about what we are. We have our budget and can use it for simple and direct measures unilaterally. As to advocacy, that is where I can use my experience with social media posts and community outreach to spread information about certain issues. I’m not afraid to directly confront the administration when it comes to issues that the student body believes in. When it comes to something you very much believe in, I think you shouldn’t try to take a both-sides approach. Student Assembly should be for students. And this is why I want to change our mission statement. Right now it says we are the liaison between students and the administration, and I want to change it to saying we represent students. The more things that we do and the more structured we are, the more support and interest we will receive. 

TDR: Moving onto more specific questions. During the East Wheelock campaign you did a lot of public outreach. What level of support did you get from the student body, the faculty, and the community?

DM: I would say I got near universal support from students. The amendment allows for more housing and renovations. The apartments are very run down. The reason is that there is no incentive to renovate the apartments because if the College renovated the apartments they would have to be made smaller as currently they are grandfathered in. Under the new amendment they can increase the capacity. From the town, reaction was mixed, and that is the same as it was in 2015. In 2015, it failed 453 to 719. The reason for that was lack of outreach. Normally in these votes roughly 5 students vote, so if you get a few hundred votes you will probably win if you have some town support. We did get the planning board to support it after a 3-2 vote with one abstention. We got a lot of opposition from the town because some people are against what I see as getting rid of red tape. Regulations get in the way of building new housing and some people are against getting rid of regulations. 

TDR: Why do you think you got opposition from the town?

DM: Some people simply don’t like that it was student-run. Some likely opposed the initiative because I ran it and they remembered my candidacy for the town council.

TDR: How quickly do you think Dartmouth will see increased housing capacity?

DM: The soonest is probably the class of 2025 that could see increased housing. It’s going to be up to the contractors, but they are eager to build more housing. Dartmouth is also interested in the project as they want to expand housing as well. The houses will be nice too, better than the current apartments. It’s going to be a staggered process. The whole idea with the Lyme Road construction is that they wanted to get swing space, but we want that swing space to be a block from campus rather than a mile. 

TDR: Right. I interviewed Hanlon a month or two ago, and we discussed the importance of being able to renovate and move people. 

DM: Yeah, now we’ll have a lot of it, as there really aren’t any excuses anymore. The whole Lyme Road thing is problematic. Would you want to live in a place that’s a bus or a car ride away? It’s also just frustrating because there are other places you can build, and it seems like they’re trying to pick Lyme Road because it’s a very flat area and the cheapest possible place to build. 

TDR: You talked about the issue with bad-quality dorms. Do you plan to campaign for improvements to Dartmouth’s existing dorms?

DM: This is a separate issue because, as you know, my campaign was dealing more with things like apartments and off-campus rentals than with on-campus dorms. Of course, if you have more off campus, that eases the burden on campus. But I think it’s totally a concern that we’re going to raise. I can’t give you any specifics about how in particular we’re going to campaign on it. In terms of structural amenities, definitely making sure that laundry machines, wifi, etc. is up to date is a priority. I do definitely think this goes back to the survey question; using social media, Google forms, incentivized focus groups, and things like that to collect student feedback. I think it is ridiculous. There is of course a very stark housing inequity between people in McGlaughlin and people in the Choates or the River. And that’s something we’ll try to collect data on and rectify as the year goes on. Another concern that might seem minor is that some buildings don’t have water machines like Topliff. That’s something that we could probably buy and just put in if they’re not going to do it. This is another example of something we can do unilaterally versus things we have to advocate for with administration.

TDR: On that topic, would you support expanding the 2% endowment renovations fund? 

DM: Yes, and I think a big reason is it would be really valuable to have a student or a young alum on the Board of Trustees. Someone that’s recently lived in dorms and understands the problems. It’s valuable on a wide variety of issues as well, because if the Board of Trustees has to approve everything and it’s made up of people who haven’t gone here for decades, it’s hard to get things passed. I want to try to make a focus of using Student Assembly’s connections to bring the administration in reach or at the very least bringing concerns of students to them. I want to prioritize being able to talk directly with administrators rather than safeguarding that within the Student Assembly. I think trying to make that more public-facing is important in the sense that, if someone has a concern, they can message me and then I can bring it up so people know where to go and what to do. That’s why I really want to reform the website and Instagram and make it easier to see what we’re doing, how you can get in touch over this, and how to join. I’m thinking about trying to expand into an at-large type of representative system so you have the Senate that votes, but then you have a non-voting representative. 

TDR: Speaking of administration: There’s been a lot of shakeup recently with Hanlon resigning next year, Scott Brown coming in, and Dean Kotz getting promoted. How has this shakeup affected your work so far?

DM: It’s tough for me to say because I don’t officially become President until after the current administration graduates. A lot of the time, those communications with administrators happen just between the President and Vice President and those administrators. The current President tries to loop us in, but a lot of times for issues of confidentiality those people usually meet alone. I haven’t been to those meetings. I don’t have a frame of reference to say, “oh, this is different than how it was with Dean Lively.” However, I’ve been pleasantly surprised by the communications from Rick Mills and Provost Kotz. The differences between that and the Dean Lively communications throughout COVID have been stark. I think there’s potential for a positive relationship. But again, I don’t want to assume it’s going to be easy to get things done. And then I don’t want to think that I am not under any impression that there’s not going to be a lack of conflict, because there’s a reason why these things don’t exist right now. And you’re not going to be able to get them by agreeing with the administration. I’m more open to more direct displays of what we want versus what’s current. I am being more openly critical, in that way.

TDR: Do you think that the reason why your goals haven’t already been met is a funding issue? Or are there other reasons for a lack of renovations or mental health care? 

DM: I think it’s a little frustrating. Again, I like to be realistic about what we can change. I don’t think that Student Assembly is going to be able to solve the national issue of administrative bloat. There are a lot of structural things that are outside our realm of influence. But I do think a lot of the times it is just a lack of will. They did dorm construction. It’s not like they couldn’t have done it 10 years ago; they’re building other buildings. It’s not like they couldn’t have done that in 1970. It’s a little frustrating sometimes when there are these grand projects. They’re renovating the Hood for $90 million, for example, but they aren’t building housing. I know they’re not directly connected. There are intricacies with the endowment. As I said, what I really want to push hard for is some representation on the Board of Trustees, because I feel that it’d be so worthwhile to have a voice in the room, being able to know what the priorities are and how these decisions are being made. But I think it’s very hard to get done.

TDR: On another issue of student voice, do you think students should have a more direct role in the choice of a replacement for Hanlon?

DM: Yeah, I think so. I am the incoming president, and I’ve heard nothing about the process. I hope that it’s something that is still in the works. I think there is an undergraduate student representative on the committee, but again I haven’t heard anything about that. And I think it’s really necessary. I think we need to make sure that the next president is one that’s going to be proactive rather than reactive. I think I’ll leave you with that. Further, I do a lot of work with campus sexual assault prevention, and even before we got here, there were issues. I’ve been disappointed with the program and how it’s been underfunded even though it’s something that is a supposed goal. I don’t want to think that it’s malignant. I just think it’s apathy. This is where student government is so important because our job is to represent students to the administration and let them know that this is what students want and fight for that inside of our own budget.

TDR: I have two more questions. Firstly, you propose information about a new executive council that takes representatives from all of the disparate bodies and authorities. My question is, do you think that adding yet another layer of student government could create more inefficiency because it’s just more bureaucracy?

DM: Well, two things. One, it wouldn’t be overseeing the different branches. The way I see it is like Paleolipitus, but for all classes. It could very well be another layer of bureaucracy if it’s managed poorly, but if managed well it could increase effectiveness. I would want to see monthly meetings where you would connect the branches and agree, say, that the Board of Trustees is something that we want to focus on and decide to utilize all of our connections in order to advocate for it. It’s more like pooling resources towards a common goal, rather than trying to oversee or manage the branches. It wouldn’t be an organization that would be running its own projects. I think it would be something that would try to amplify a common goal and brainstorm about how to do it. I would think it’d be very direct. I’m a big fan of tangible action and tangible results. For instance, if you have all these people from different organizations and you say we really think that we should reinstate safe rides before Green Key, then you would say, all right, let’s release a statement to the administration with a hundred organizations in support. We can very directly say that this is supported by people who represent all parts of the student body. So I would pursue it as more of an amplifying role. I do think your concern is very valid, though. If you add another layer of things it could very well be bad if you do it incorrectly; it could just end up being a place where you talk once a month and then nothing happens.

TDR: Finally, I have the obligatory COVID question. What is your position on the remaining COVID restrictions?

DM: There’s not a lot remaining, but yeah, there’s a vaccine mandate and arrival testing. I couldn’t really tell a difference honestly between now and pre-COVID. Since the restrictions have been lifted, it feels to me like Dartmouth. I don’t think that they interfere with community wellbeing at this point. That’s my biggest concern, and I think that right now we’re in a good place. 

TDR: One specific thing is that some professors can make requests that students wear masks. 

DM: I think a request in my eyes is fine because you still have the authority to choose.

TDR: One final follow-up question on this: You’ve talked about the town and dislike of the student body. And I know that some in the town have pushed for more Dartmouth restrictions. Do you think there’s any risk, if we get to another surge in cases, of town members pushing Dartmouth to increase restrictions?
DM: I would be against that. I don’t see them having a strong case because we’ve had several instances of a wave of COVID at Dartmouth, and it hasn’t impacted the broader community in any measurable way.