COUNCIL CHANGES PROPOSED
Member of Alumni Council from New England
AT THE October, 1932, meeting of the Alumni Council, a discussion took place as to the desirability of changes in the basis of representation on the Council and the methods of electing Councilors. A committee was appointed to study the situation in more detail. The subject was discussed by this committee with the Secretaries' Association at its last meeting in Hanover; the purpose of this article is to place the matter before the alumni. It is hoped that a number of suggestions may be received in order that the Council may act wisely in any recommendation it may make next June to the General Association of the Alumni.
The Council is composed of twenty-eight mem- bers, fifteen elected direct by the alumni (three each from five geographical groups), one from the faculty, three by the Secretaries' Association, three ex-officio and six "at large" by the Council. There has been no change in this arrangement since the Council was established in 1913, except that there were originally three members elected "at-large," which number was increased to six in 1930. Members are elected for a three-year term and may not serve for more than two consecutive terms.
The primary purpose of the Council is to act as a medium for well-considered expressions of alumni opinion in matters affecting the College, and for the dissemination, from time to time, of a correct understanding of the policies of the administration. It has developed certain specific functions of increasing importance, of which the most important are the nomination of Alumni Trustees and alumni members of the Athletic Council, the collection and application of the Alumni Fund and the collection of alumni reports under the Selective Process system of admissions.
It is clearly essential that the alumni, as a whole, should exercise careful thought in the selection of men for this body. They should be men who have a live interest in the affairs of the College, whose judgment is sound, and who are in a position to regularly attend the meetings of the Council.
Since the inception of the Council, a great change has taken place in the number and the national distribution of Dartmouth alumni. The Council has been and should continue to be nationally as well as numerically representative of the alumni. So large a percentage are grouped in a few of the major cities that representation on a numerical basis would not give proper weight to the points of view of different sections of the United States. It is a fair question, however, whether the original grouping, as shown on the accompanying map, is entirely consistent with the present distribution of the alumni body.
Map No. 1 shows the five present districts of the United States. It has been suggested, with sound reason, that the grouping of a part of the Southern States with New York and Pennsylvania is illogical, as there are now sufficient alumni in the Southern States to deserve definite regional representation, whereas the present group with so large a percentage resident in the two Northern States is not likely to accomplish this.
The same argument has been advanced regarding the State of Wisconsin, a considerable part of the alumni being connected with the Milwaukee organization. This group feels that not only do their interests lie more with the States to the West of them, than with Illinois, Indiana and Ohio, but that the greater number of Dartmouth men in Chicago and Cleveland overshadow their group representation.
The disadvantages of the present grouping have been recognized for some time, and it was with this in mind that the "members-at-large" were increased in number. In filling such vacancies the Council has taken into consideration situations such as these referred to and has, in the main, used this "at-large" membership as a means of properly balancing representation.
The argument is made, however, that this is not entirely adequate, and it is suggested that a new grouping, as shown in Map No. 2, be put into force. Broadly speaking, this would mean limiting Group II to New York, Pennsylvania, New Jersey and Delaware, and creating a new Group VI which would include the Southern States now in Group II, together with Texas, Oklahoma, Arkansas and Louisiana now in Group IV.
The other changes would consist of removing Wisconsin from Group III and adding it to the present Group IV, and the transfer of the Province of Ontario from Group II to Group III.
The following figures show the approximate alumni strength* in the present and proposed groups:
Group Present Proposed 1 3914 39J 4 II 2685 2319 III 956 912 IV 366 323 V 475 473 VI 453 8394 8394
The other question involved has to do with the method of electing members from the regional groups. The by-laws require the secretary, before January 15th, to notify each alumnus of vacancies occurring from his district and to furnish him with a nomination blank. Before March first the secretary is required to examine the nomination blanks so received and to designate as nominees the three persons receiving the largest number of nominating votes. The secretary must then send to all alumni an election ballot showing the three names and a brief sketch of the candidates' qualifications. The polls close on June 10th and the one in each group receiving the largest number of votes is declared elected.
In the table reproduced here one may see the results of this system for the past eight years. Nomination ballots to the number of 8499 were sent out in 1933 and but 10% were returned. It is a question
Nomination Ballots DARTMOUTH ALUMNI COUNCIL1926-1933 InclusiveNo. No. Per Cent ofBallots Ballots BallotsDistrict Sent Out Returned Returned New England 28,527 3,743 13.1 Middle and Southern 16,797 1,663 9.9 Central 6,196 818 13.2 Western a,799 361 12.9 Pacific 3.400 432 12.7
* "Number of alumni" here includes only those eligible to vote in Council elections; namely, graduates more than three years out of college. whether the expense of printing and mailing is justified for a 10% return. It should be noted, on the other hand, that election ballots averaged 30% return and have run as high as 49%. The reasons are apparent; the average voter can readily express a choice between three candidates whose records and qualifications are printed on the ballot. He has no means of knowing whom to nominate as he has no readily available information as to the suitability or eligibility of individuals.
In addition to the obvious inefficiency of the present system, there has been some complaint that as a rule the better organized groups in the large centers nominate and elect men of their choosing, as it is much more difficult in areas of the country where alumni representation is scattered to accomplish the same results.
As the importance of electing well-qualified men, thoroughly representative of alumni opinion, is apparent, it has been suggested that nominations be made by established alumni associations in the various districts, but that the final election be left to the alumni—as at present. Where there are more than three associations in a district, it might be arranged that each association, at its annual meeting, nominate a candidate, and that the Secretaries of the several associations in the district choose by ballot from such nominees, three candidates for submission to the alumni for election.
A questionnaire has been sent to all alumni associations asking for detailed information, as a basis for determining the desirability of such a plan.
The present set-up of the Council and methods of election have worked very satisfactorily on the whole. If the adoption of some of the suggested changes referred to in this article will result in further improvement, they are desirable. It is important, however, to avoid any ill-considered changes. The Council would like to make some definite report to the General Association of Alumni next June and would appreciate comments from the alumni on the points discussed in this article. Such communications should be addressed to Mr. Sidney C. Hayward, Secretary, Hanover, N. H.
This map shows the five districts of the Council as now set up. The number of alumni eligible to vote inCouncil elections is indicated for each state.
Note the new Southern District, No. VI, suggested by Mr. Wood's committee.
