Back to Association of Alumni meeting minutes archive
January 29, 2008, Special Conference Call

Attending: Bill Hutchinson, Frank Gado, David Spalding, Tim Dreisbach, Marji Ross

Proxies: Bert Boles to Frank Gado, Tim Dreisbach, Marji Ross, David Gale and Alex Mooney; Alex Mooney to Frank Gado if he's unavailable; Kate to Bill Hutchinson; Cheryl Bascomb to Bill Hutchinson, then to David Spalding

Special Proxy: David Gale to David Spalding on specific issues, at his request, this proxy would not count towards a quorum.

I give my proxy to David Spalding, in his role as secretary, to cast votes in my name as follows, and only as follows:

1) On Tim's letter to David Spalding: I wish to vote no, chiefly on the grounds that while acknowledging that the documents relevant to the Association may contain non-Association related items (quite possibly of a confidential nature), no provision is given for removing them, and no time (or option) is given for creating "clean" copies; I don't see how David could legally acquiesce to this demand. I also object to the aggressive, bridge-burning nature of the letter; this step will ensure that the College will decide to write the Association off entirely as a "lost cause" and deal with her alumni solely through the Council.

2) On the DAM ad: I wish to vote in favor.

3) On I wish to abstain. I have not had time to properly peruse the site, though on a quick glance, there isn't much to peruse; it seems to have the failing of not allowing for alumni interaction. I agree that the current blog is severely limited (not all of us have equal access, and my understanding is that it is still "administered" by Anton Anderson), and the anonymous commentator(s) on it have been an issue, but I believe that it is good to have some sort of forum available for alumni discussion. I would much prefer our adopting a motion that all future posts to the blog require logged-in posters, which would go a long way towards improving the quality of interaction on the blog.

4) On Frank's overhaul of the guidelines: I wish to vote no. Frank has not produced a list of his changes, requiring us to do a manual, line-by-line comparison with the current guidelines; I simply have not had (and do not have) the time to do this, and suspect that neither have most of the rest of us. There are some changes I've been able to identify which I agree with and support, but there are others I disagree with; much like the AGTF proposal, and the previous attempted constitution, I must vote no on the entire package, since I cannot vote for simply those components I agree with. I'm surprised that Frank would take this approach, given his experience with those two constitution votes. I would much prefer it if Frank were to withdraw his motion and replace it with a set of individual motions, which we could vote on during our next meeting.

These are all of the issues I'm aware of which are on the table for tonight's meeting. On any other issue which may come up, I abstain. Also, I desire that this proxy be counted solely for determination of votes, and not for determination of a quorum.

If there is a quorum for tonight's meeting, I would ask that this e-mail with my voting instructions and my reasons be added to the minutes.

The special meeting convened at 7:06 p.m.

1. The proposed constitutional amendment was turned to first:

Amendment to Article IV (Officers):

The first of Article IV of the Constitution of the Association of Alumni of Dartmouth College shall be amended to read:

"The officers of the Association shall be a president, two vice-presidents, secretary-treasurer, and an executive committee of seven additional members, all to be chosen by a[n] election open to the entire membership in which ballots may be cast by postal mail, by courier mail, by written electronic means such as email and facsimile, or in person at the annual meeting."

It was suggested that the language about voting in person be deleted.Frank agreed.Bill suggested that the Balloting Committee be able to decide on how people would vote from a distance.Tim believes that we shouldn't leave it completely open, because, for example, fax should be in the language since it's not really electronically based.[Marji joined the call].Bill suggested we take time to work on the language and vote on it at next week's meeting.Bill asked what courier mail meant.Frank said that would be services like Federal Express.Bill suggested taking out "written."Frank's amendment was based on a prior effort, and the wording is not his.Tim believes it's based on the petition amendment of last year, and he suggested Bill look at the AGTF language.Tim said there does seem to be a consensus to propose it.Bill said he is worried about offering any constitutional amendment this year given voter fatigue, but since most of us ran on a platform of having this we should go ahead.Tim said this is why Bill believed we shouldn't offer any other amendments.Frank said more than 50% voted for this last year, and with all of us for it, this should pass.It was agreed that Bill would look at the AGTF language and propose changes to us all.

Next, Frank's motion for the website was discussed:

1. I move that "* shall henceforth be the one and only official website of the Association of Alumni of Dartmouth College and the only website permitted by the Association to display its name and logo on its masthead. I further move that any association or approval of is henceforth discontinued. I further move that notice of this decision be sent to the Dartmouth College Office of Alumni Relations and that that office be instructed that all web pages under its control linking or appearing to link to the website of the Association of Alumni be updated to link to

Frank said that this language should not be assumed to shut down the blog.There may need to be changes there such as requiring people to give their names or use better language.Frank said that David Spalding says we can't post what we want on the current AoA website.This new site is not to supplement blogspot or Vox the Vote.Tim said it's where we would make our official announcements.Tim seconded the motion, but wanted to clarify that this doesn't mean shutting down the blog.Tim said that the College is referring people to the blog instead of the Association website maintained by the College.David Spalding disagreed with that.Tim said we've had to use the blog for announcements and that has led to more use of it than appropriate.Bill stated that the motion called for the blog to be shut down, even though it's completely in our control.

Frank believes the character of the blog has changed, so he doesn't get there anymore.He and Tim tried to respond to people, but it became clear that people weren't asking questions, they were just trying to make political points.He stated that Scott Meacham, for example, just makes the same point over and over again.It's just chaff.

Bill said this motion just disassociates us from it.Tim said that perhaps we should make it clear that the blog is not our official site.Tim said minority opinion could be up on the new site as well, but no comments by outsiders.Tim believes it's legitimate for the College not to put up items that harm the College on the site it maintains for the Association.

David Gale did not work on this proposed site.Frank doesn't know how much it will cost.Tim said this site would allow all of us to post.Bill asked who set it up and how much this will cost.Tim doesn't know how much it will cost, but he believes this was set up by Joe Malchow.Frank said Joe wants nothing to do with this, and he doesn't think Joe should be involved.Tim said Joe did it at his own initiative, but it has been abandoned.Frank has not talked to Joe, but he understands Joe walked away from it.Bill said someone paid for the domain name and hosting.Tim and Marji said those expenses are minimal.

Frank has believed that we've needed a separate site ever since he learned the College controlled the other site.He said that we need a way to communicate with alumni.David Gale was tasked months ago with this.Tim said the questions are cost and how we and only we control access.Bill is uncomfortable with the motion in part because it represents walking away from the blog.Frank believes this site is different from the blog.Tim wants us to make clear what the official website is.Tim thinks the blog should continue as well.Frank said we should provide the means for a discussion on the blog, but not control content.Tim said we should make it clear that while this new site is the official site, the blog remains as a discussion site.Bill believes the motion doesn't cover what Tim said.Tim will be out of pocket for a week, so he can't rewrite it.

Bill also mentioned that while he isn't concerned about having another website, he doesn't think we should tell Alumni Relations what to do in linking to it.Frank said he doesn't want to twist arms, but he wants the administration to pass on the links.It's up to them as to whether to do that; then it's up to us to point that out if they don't.Tim said it was contrary to the wishes of 10 of the committee to not put up the mission.David Spalding made his usual objection to that characterization.Tim said the request was for a replacement to the mission already up there. David Spalding stated you got half a loaf by having your version up there.Tim said this is a burr under his saddle.David Spalding said there is an issue with the look of the name and logo on the top of the site because it is copyrighted by the designer.Marji asked what the current use charge was.David Spalding said he didn't know.Bill asked where the phone number came from.David said he assumed it was Bonnie's.Tim said he thinks Joe Malchow set up a phone number at the same time he prepared the site.Tim asked who would own this project since the look needs to be changed and the phone number investigated.Bill asked how the copyright on here works.Marji said anyone who writes anything can own what is there by putting the copyright symbol at the bottom.Bill feels there is more work to be done here.Tim suggested the following language for the motion:The creation of a new website is done with the intent that it be the official location for communications from the Executive Committee to Association members and the general public.While the Association may still maintain the AoA blogspot as a forum for discussion among alumni, we wish to make it clear to all that discussion forum is not the official site for announcements and communications.We ask that the College refer alumni wanting official information to the new official site.

Bill asked if information would be there as well as announcements.Tim and Frank said yes.Frank said we're not saying the College can't speak about the Association.Tim said someone should run in May to serve as a webmaster.Perhaps we need to add to this motion that we should look for a webmaster, but rather than delaying, perhaps we should all just get access.Bill believes we need to get the questions answered including what information will be on there.Tim asked that maybe we table it.Frank agreed, but said that we need to do it.Tim asked if we should vote to make it happen.Bill said we already did.Tim said we should do it again, because last time it was doing it with David Gale.Bill said without a person tasked to work on the site, nothing will happen.Bill believes we need to figure out what it is before it becomes an official site.Frank said we can't foresee all eventualities with this.Bill agreed, but questions like how we pay and who maintains the site are big questions.Frank doesn't believe someone needs to be named.Frank believes it is a small cost per month.He would consider rewriting the motion, but he would need some guidance.He will give it a try and circulate it before people need to provide suggestions next time.Frank agreed to withdraw the motion.

Bill said part of the frustration here is a shift from relying on the College and instead trying to do it on our own.Until we can duplicate Alumni Relations efforts, we will have these frustrations.Frank said this began with the survey.He continued saying that there's a difference between Bill and himself on this.The College believes we are a part of them.We believe we are apart from it.This is what the lawsuit is about.The 1891 agreement made us partners.

Tim said we all want a partnership, but there are times when opinion of a majority of alumni are not in line with the administration and when that happens it is in the best interests of the College that we represent that.He said that he wished that we had enough resources to operate independently with sufficient funds to do things we need to do and by being independent, it would reduce tensions.We should raise sufficient revenue to accomplish that, and the sooner the better.Tim asked if the College would support that independence.Bill opposes that, and he is sure David Spalding does as well.

Frank agreed to table the motion.

We next moved to the guidelines.Frank's motion was offered:

This is a revised version of what I sent out prior to our previous meeting. I have removed some of the previous changes for the sake of simplicity and general accord. Changes from the present set of guidelines are indicated by brackets [for addition of changed wording] or <> for deletions.

I move that the *Guidelines for Voting for Election of Officers and Executive Committee Members, Constitutional Amendments, and Conduct of Meetings of the Association of Alumni* as adopted on December 5, 2006 be amended as follows:

Delete the current text of the existing guidelines approved on December 5, 2006 and insert in its place the following:



Guidelines for Election of Officers and Committee Members and for

Constitutional Amendments

1. All Media Voting. Subject to the procedures set forth in the Association's constitution and these Guidelines, balloting materials relating to the election of officers and the Executive Committee of the Association as well as proposed amendments to the Constitution shall be

distributed to all alumni and voted on using a process and procedures determined by the Executive Committee that include mail-in ballot, voting via secure web site (electronically) or other medium.

2. *Nomination of Candidates for Officer and Executive Committee Positions*.

The Constitution provides that the officers of the Association shall be a President, two Vice Presidents and a Secretary-Treasurer, and also calls for an Executive Committee of seven members, all to be elected at each annual meeting based on all-media voting as well as in-person voting at the meeting. Candidates will be nominated by a Nominations Committee appointed by the President In addition to this nominating process, any 50 members qualified to vote may file with the Secretary of the Association a nomination of one or more qualified persons for election as an officer or member of the Executive Committee. The notice of nomination shall indicate for which office each person is nominated, and must be received at least 60

days prior to the balloting period designated in advance by the [Executive] Committee. The Executive Committee may, in its discretion, waive or extend the filing deadline. Candidates so nominated shall be identified on the Association's website. If no candidates are nominated in this manner for a particular office or Executive Committee seat, then the Nominating

Committee's candidates shall be the sole candidates. Only persons nominated in accordance with these provisions may be elected to any Association office or Executive Committee position.

3. *Voting for Multiple Candidates*. If more than one candidate is nominated

for the office of President, First Vice President, Second Vice President or Secretary-Treasurer, then the candidate receiving the greatest number of votes for such office shall be elected. If more than seven candidates are nominated for the non-officer seats on the Executive Committee, then each member may vote for up to seven candidates, and the seven candidates receiving the greatest number of votes shall be elected.

4. *Proposed Amendments to Constitution*. Any 1% of members qualified to vote may file with the Secretary of the Association a proposed amendment to the Association's Constitution (a "Petition Amendment"). If the Petition Amendment is received 90 days prior to the balloting period designated in advance by the Executive Committee, the Petition Amendment shall be included on the ballot. Each amendment shall have a designated individual [or group]

as Sponsor, and all communications regarding such Petition Amendments delivered to the sponsor shall be deemed delivered to all the signatories. Petition Amendments shall be posted on the Association's website no later than 75 days in advance of the opening of the voting period. The Executive Committee may, in its sole discretion, waive or extend the filing deadline.

The Sponsor for each Petition

Amendment may provide an article of no more than 300 words explaining the benefits of that amendment. Such articles will be posted on the Association's website within seven days of submission of the article to the Secretary in care of the Office of Alumni Relations, subject to review, but no sooner than 75 days in advance of the opening of the balloting period.

Each article will be reviewed by the Executive Committee to confirm that the facts presented are correct. Any and all issues will be brought to the attention of the Sponsor by the Executive Committee, which may request a revised article.

Proposed amendments to the Association's Constitution may also be made by the Executive Committee, which shall be considered and voted upon during the balloting period, provided that such proposed amendments are identified and described on the Association's website no later than 75 days prior to the balloting period.

Proposed amendments will be listed in this order: (1) amendments proposed by the Executive Committee, (2) Petition Amendments. Within the preceding categories, amendments will be listed in the order in which they are received. The Executive Committee may, at its discretion, provide such other information on proposed amendments as it deems appropriate. The

Association's Constitution may only be amended in conformity with this section. Amendments shall be adopted if they receive a two-thirds or greater majority of votes cast.

5. *Signatures Required*. Where these Guidelines set forth signature requirements, in addition to original hard copy signatures, fax or electronic signatures will be accepted.

6. *Balloting Period*. The voting period shall be an annual six- week period each spring, intended to mirror the election period for Alumni Trustees. In a year during which an Alumni Trustee election takes place, the voting period shall coincide with the Trustee election, and officer/Executive Committee and constitutional amendment balloting materials will be included

in the Trustee election ballot mailing. The dates of the voting period will be determined and notice placed on the Association website 120 days prior to the opening of the period. In addition, the Executive Committee may in its discretion call for a special voting period (particularly for constitutional amendments) outside of the annual period. When the Executive Committee

elects to call for a special voting period, notice must be announced on the Association web site no later than 120 days in advance of that special voting period. <Deletion of paragraphing EC cancellation of election.>

7. *Notice of Voting*. Information regarding election of officers and Executive Committee members, as well as proposed amendments to the Constitution, will be provided to alumni in the following manner: (a) posting of a notice on the Association's website no less than [65] days in

advance of the opening of the voting period and (b) sending a notice to all alumni by mail or electronic means no less than 45 days in advance of the voting period. Such notices shall serve to inform alumni that there will be an election of officers and an Executive Committee and/or a vote on proposed amendments to the Constitution, and shall contain such other information as

shall be required by the Executive Committee. The notice also shall refer alumni to the Association's web page for further information, including the names of the candidates, text of any proposed amendments, these Guidelines, and information on how to access forums where alumni may debate, lobby and learn more about the election and/or the amendments. The notice shall include contact information for the Alumni Relations Office for those alumni who are not able to access a website for the information described above.

8. *Balloting Material*. The form of the ballot and related materials shall be at the discretion of the Balloting Committee. The ballot may include such other information as may be deemed appropriate by the Executive Committee in its sole discretion. The mailing to alumni shall also specify the last date on which votes may be cast.

9. *Results of Voting*. The election of officers and the Executive Committee will be announced at the Annual Meeting. The results of any vote on constitutional amendments shall be published on the Association's website no later than 10 days after the end of the balloting period and through appropriate College channels (as determined by the Executive Committee) as quickly as possible.

Guidelines for Meetings of the Association

10. *Date of Annual Meeting*. In accordance with the Association's Constitution, the Annual Meeting will be held on the Tuesday following Commencement Day unless otherwise scheduled by the Executive Committee, who will have the right to reschedule meeting dates in the event it is deemed necessary or appropriate to do so.

11. *Notice of Annual Meeting*. Notice of the date, time and place of the Annual Meeting shall be given by publishing the same in such medium as the Executive Committee shall deem appropriate at least 90 days before the Annual Meeting. This notice shall specify that the subject matter of the meeting be made available on the Association's website or will be provided by calling the Alumni Relations Office. The Executive Committee or its designee shall maintain the Association's website to ensure that it includes such information.

12. *Conduct of Business at Meetings.* The Agenda and Order of Business for any Annual Meeting or Special Meeting shall be established by the Executive Committee. The Executive Committee [shall] adopt a recognized [and fair] procedure for the conduct of any such Meeting.

13. *Amendment to Guidelines*. These Guidelines may be amended by a majority vote of the Executive Committee.

Marji seconded the motion.Frank said this has been through two different versions.He thought the first one codified what we agreed to awhile ago.David Gale disagreed and Frank asked him to call him.He didn't and Frank felt we needed to get on with this since we are within the election period.

Frank thought it would be acceptable, but now we have gotten David's email, he is surprised by David Gale's disagreement.If David told him he objected to something, he might have changed it.Frank is concerned that time is fleeting.Frank stated that he doesn't know what to do at this point, so he asked what we should do.Bill believes that since we are in the election period, it's too late to change the guidelines.Frank said there's no constitutional bar against changing them now.

Bill said he just thought this was a bad idea.Bill mentioned the signature requirements for example.He just disagreed with the premise of changing it.Frank asked we go beyond feelings.Bill said you asked for my opinion and you got it.Bill also could give other concerns but fundamentally he believes it is wrong procedurally to change the rules midstream.Frank believes it's right, not feel.Bill said it directly is unconstitutional for the guidelines to say the Executive Committee sets the order of business at the annual meeting, the constitution sets the order.Frank said that order has never been followed.David Spalding said it was followed last year.Frank disagreed because there was cherry picking done then as well because there was no prayer and oration, and Bill's objection is specious.Bill said constitutional objections are not specious.Frank believes these are housekeeping changes not wholesale changes.Frank said he will vote his conscience.Tim will vote in favor, but he shares the concerns about changing midstream.He believes there is a record we wanted to change them in December so while late, we're not doing anything to hurt anyone, so it's okay.It's a small change.

Voting yes: Frank Gado, Tim Dreisbach, Bert Boles, Alex Mooney, Marji Ross.

Voting no: Bill Hutchinson, David Spalding, Kate Aiken, Cheryl Bascomb, David Gale.

On a five to five vote, the motion does not carry.Tim suggested Frank try to follow up with David on smaller changes.Marji asked if is there merit in proposing changes for next time since it is too late for this time.Bill said the next committee should do that. Marji said that the next committee might get caught in the same places we did.Tim said let's pass Frank's motion right now to take effect in the future.David said under Roberts Rules you can't propose the same or a similar motion in the same meeting once the original motion has been defeated.Bill said we could take a look in the future.Tim agreed we should take time to think about it.

Frank moved that the Alumni Magazine ad be approved.Frank is doing this for someone else.He doesn't think the committee needs to approve it.Tim said the question is whether this is a motion by the Association or a letter for the six.Marji seconded the motion.

*College officers have loosed a tidal wave of misleading information and innuendo about those of us on the Association of Alumni's Executive Committee who have fought to save the 1891 Agreement between the trustees and the alumni. Further, the Administration has also sought to block us from all direct communications with our own constituency by denying us previously-provided funding and even access to our own membership lists. We have therefore purchased this space with the help of alumni contributions to communicate with our membership.

Dear Dartmouth graduates,

We are writing to report on our efforts over the last several months to secure continuance of equality on the Dartmouth Board of Trustees between members elected by you and those appointed by the Board. As you probably already know, since an historic agreement in 1891, all graduates of the College democratically elect half of the non- *ex officio *trustees, and the

Board has honored its promise to seat whomever the alumni elected. Last September, however, this compact, written over a century ago, was suddenly overturned by the Board after a fourth consecutive 'petition Trustee' was elected, and after a proposed new constitution, which would have accomplished much the same purpose as the Board's unilateral action, was rejected by the alumni in a referendum.

We conducted a survey of the alumni on this question of parity, and 92% of those who responded favored its preservation.

We notified the Trustees, advising them to heed overwhelming alumni sentiment, and when they revoked parity, we pleaded with them to forbear from making new appointments while we jointly entered into mediation. The board rejected each of our efforts to resolve our differences.

In response, we asked the local court to enjoin this 'Board-packing' maneuver. Our request does not seek any damages or money of any kind; it asks only for a restoration of equality between elected and unelected Trustees.

Simply put, we are arguing that the Board made a binding promise with its alumni stakeholders over a century ago. Regular, open, and fair elections have become a tradition -- an essential bond between each of us and our alma mater.

*We believe the Board must not abrogate the democratic nature of College governance simply because it does not especially like the results of the four or five most recent elections. *To unilaterally make the move from 1:1 equality to a lopsided 2:1 board made up mostly of appointees is to sacrifice the health of our alma mater to the will of a few. Whether in

recent years you voted for the 'petition Trustees' whose campaigns have criticized the policies of the College's Administration, or you voted for the other distinguished alumni running for Trusteeships, we hope you will agree that the democratic process itself, which has ushered Dartmouth through two world wars and into the fore of American higher education, must be protected.

Preserving alumni voting rights is important for the future strength of Dartmouth. The Trustees' September decision is premised on the contention that alumni elections harm the College. We believe the opposite is true. Each of the last four petition trustee candidates conducted respectful

campaigns which raised concerns that then received increased attention and in some cases corrective action from the College. These included a liberalized speech code (part of the campaign platform of Trustee T.J. Rodgers), renewed support for athletics (part of the platform of Trustee Peter Robinson), increased focus on teaching and smaller classes (part of

the platform of Trustee Todd Zywicki) and, most recently, reform of the once-draconian student disciplinary system (part of the platform of Trustee Stephen Smith).

We invite you to be in touch with us. Our collective email address is We plan to update you on an ongoing basis on the website of the Association of Alumni, which is<>.

Please help us, in whatever way you can, preserve equality on Dartmouth's Board. Our goal is emphatically apolitical: we are looking only to insulate a good, decent, and fair governance structure from the temporary whims of a few individuals.


Frank Gado, '58 Second Vice President

Bert Boles '80

Tim Dreisbach '71

David Gale '00

Alex Mooney '93

Marji Grant Ross '81


David Spalding asked if it was on letterhead, and if so, the letterhead is copyrighted. Marji said that needs to be changed.

David Spalding objected to the characterization in the opening sentence.Tim said the DAM covered the six who voted for the lawsuit and wondered if the College approved that.David said, "no, the magazine is editorially independent."Tim said that while it is hard to account for all 6,000 College employees, he wondered where the pictures for the article came from.David said the magazine has its own archives.Bill said he couldn't start with his objections to this, he had so many.Frank said there has been a propaganda campaign against them.Bill asked who paid for the ad.Frank said it was the Hanover Institute.Tim said it acted as the vehicle for paying for the ad.Frank said the College is not allowing us to communicate, so we needed to do this.

Voting yes: Frank Gado, Tim Dreisbach, Marji Ross, Alex Mooney, David Gale, Bert Boles.

Voting no: Bill Hutchinson, David Spalding, Kate Aiken, Cheryl Bascomb.

The motion passes six to four.

Tim's resolution was next.He moved it and believes this is another aspect of independence.He made it clear that he is not seeking to inconvenience the College.Frank seconded the motion.

I request that the committee consider and adopt a resolution relating to Association record-keeping, am willing to help participate (temporarily) in this regard, and therefore move that we adopt a resolution authorizing me to send the following letter and act as it accords:

January 30, 2008
David Spalding, Vice President
Alumni Relations
6068 Blunt Alumni Center
Dartmouth College
Hanover, NH 03755

Dear David:

It is altogether appropriate that the Association of Alumni Executive Committee have custody and control of Association books and records such as meeting minutes, audio recordings, voting records for both alumni trustee and Association executive elections, membership lists, bank statements and other financial reports if any, Association-related contracts with other parties, historical journals, and any other documents related to Association business.

On behalf of the Association, I request that you provide immediate access to all such books and records to any member of the Executive Committee who requests it, and deliver all such Association books and records to the Association by February 15, 2008. Understanding that there may be some overlap with College records, you may make copies of such materials for retention and use by your staff before such transfer.

I will appreciate your notification to me by February 10 of a delivery date that will be convenient for your office and staff, along with a ballpark estimate as to the physical quantity of materials.We can accept delivery either at your offices, or with advance notification, by your delivery to 119 Morgan Road, South Royalton, Vermont.At the time of transfer, we will also appreciate your confirmation that all such records have been provided in their entirety.

As the authorized representative of the Executive Committee in this matter, I will retain these records until such time as the Association has its own offices or its Executive Committee designates an alternate representative.

Please also confirm that there are no current Association monies in the possession of the College or in financial accounts controlled by the College.If there are, we request that they be transferred to Ledyard National Bank (#011701987) for deposit with the Association of Alumni

(Account #582387).

Yours truly,

Timothy Dreisbach '71
Executive Committee Member
Association of Alumni of Dartmouth College

Voting yes: Frank Gado, Tim Dreisbach, Marji Ross, Alex Mooney, Bert Boles.

Voting no: Bill Hutchinson, David Gale, David Spalding, Kate Aiken, Cheryl Bascomb.

The vote being five to five, the motion does not pass.

[Frank signed off].

Tim said he wouldn't reintroduce it tonight, but he asked Bill if a narrower resolution would be acceptable.He asked if he could see the TrueBallot results of the last four elections.David Spalding said that request would not be granted.Tim wanted to understand whose records they are.David said, in part, that last year's trustee candidates ran with an understanding that the results would not be disclosed.

The meeting adjourned at 8:55 p.m.

Respectfully submitted,

David Spalding
Association of Alumni