GAP is reentering the fragrance and toiletries foray.

Christian Louboutin

I had no idea what they were talking about, so they showed me. After a couple of centuries of paintings, take the long walk to the Uffizi bar for an espresso on the rooftop terrace, with its stunning panorama of the city. Giuseppe Zanotti Kängor Frightened at the thought of flying, Irish tourists Glenda Kavanagh and Stephen McCabe had stayed away from the United States since the Sept. Herbs like lavender or lemon verbena can be used as air fresheners, added to soaps or infused in oils. Giuseppe Zanotti Flats Advice for the Spammers of Open Salon As individuals we all go through change at our own rate youll see some people who accept it and get on with it very quickly, whereas others may remain in denial for a long period.

Giuseppe Zanotti Sneakers

Also convicted were Reggiani Martinellis longtime psychic adviser, Giuseppina Auriemma, a hotel doorman, a debtridden pizzeria owner accused of shooting Gucci and an unemployed auto worker who prosecutors said drove the getaway car.


The Hanover Institute
  Non-Profit Organization of Dartmouth Alumni, by Dartmouth Alumni and for Dartmouth Alumni  







General News

Update: September 2009

- Lawsuit Update September 2009


Update: March 2009

- MacGovern responds to Alumni Council president John Daukas

- Lawsuit Update March 2009


New Dartmouth College president is chosen

Congratulations to Jim Yong Kim, MD, PhD, as he assumes the presidency of Dartmouth College. Dr Kim is unquestionably a man of high intellectual caliber and a leader in his field. Whether he is the right choice for the presidency of Dartmouth College at this point in the school's history the future will tell, but neither his CV nor the statement accompanying the announcement of his appointment will encourage those of us who see the cause of the undergraduate college as THE major challenge.

Despite the boilerplate pronouncements, Dartmouth's investment during the Freedman and Wright presidencies has strongly favored the university model, with heavy emphasis on the life sciences. Dr. Kim's appointment is patently a reaffirmation of that strategy.

Dr. Kim's selection clearly indicates a future reliance on grants from the federal treasury and major foundations, and that will tend to diminish the importance of alumni in charting the school's course. This direction is in keeping with the board's radical abandonment of alumni parity on the board.

We wish Dr. Kim the very best.


Update: May 2008 - Critical Election

To learn more about this election, the pro-parity candidates, the real facts on the lawsuit, and other related matters, please click here.


Judge Denies College's Motion


Administration seeks to block Dartmouth Association of Alumni leaders from communicating with their members.

Hanover, July 6 --

The Wright administration has sought to block the newly elected leaders of the Association of Alumni, from speaking to Dartmouth alumni, their constituents, about a pending proposal to take away the right of alumni to vote for trustee.

Specifically, the administration has denied the AssociationŸecutive Committee access to the Association mailing lists and has refused to release to them the funding allocated for their communications with alumni. In light of the urgency of the matter at hand, they were forced to obtain a mailing list and funding for their critical message from other sources.

We urge the new leaders of the Association to take whatever action is necessary and proper to obtain their mailing lists. In addition we urge them to open a bank account for the Association and to start raising funds necessary to fulfill its responsibilities to Dartmouth alumni and to the College.

Please see the letter from David Spalding, Vice President of Alumni Affairs.


Update: May 31st. 2007

On May 19, Dartmouth Trustee Chairman William Neukom made some very troubling statements to the meeting of Dartmouthlumni Council.

I reported on that event in more detail in a May 28 communication to alumni (below).

On May 30, The Dartmouth ran a front page story on Neukom೴atements.

Now, the Association of Alumni of Dartmouth College has acted.

In response to the refusal of Dartmouth Trustee Chairman William Neukom to commit to respecting the 1891 agreement between the board and alumni, the newly elected Association of Alumni leaders, in 10 to 1 vote, have approved and sent to the Board of Trustees this statement.

In addition, I have included an introduction to that statement written by six of the eleven members of the committee.

This action in defense of Dartmouth and her alumni ൮ique partnership has occurred only because of the election, almost two weeks ago, of independent alumni leaders.


MacGovern Report on Neukom Statement
May 28, 2007
Important and troubling news

Reports are just now leaking about troubling statements made by the Chairman of the Dartmouth College Board of Trustees, William Neukom, pertaining to vital and cherished alumni rights.

In a public statement to the Alumni Council on Saturday, May 19, hours after the election victory of petition candidate Stephen Smith, Chairman Neukom reported that the Governance Committee of the Board is considering changes in the historic right of alumni to select half the Board of Trustees.  Neukom revealed that the committee had been meeting all year to determine the appropriate composition of the Board and the right means to reach that composition.  Furthermore, he stated that the results of these deliberations will be presented to the Board at their meeting in June.

Immediately following these remarks, Dartmouth alumnus Joseph Asch 頡sked Neukom if he would give assurance to the Alumni Council that the numerical parity between alumni and charter trustees would not be affected.  Neukom answered evasively, and Asch repeated his question, emphasizing again the critical significance of numerical balance between the two classes of trustees.  Again Neukom prevaricated, impatiently replying: ೡid the Board is keeping all options open.Ⲿ
In 1891 the Association of Alumni of Dartmouth College, after decades of negotiation with the Board of Trustees, won the right, by agreement with the Board, to select half of the trustees. For 116 years this close governance partnership has provided great benefit to Dartmouth and has contributed significantly to the legendary loyalty of alumni to the College.

It would appear that a small cabal of Dartmouth trustees, as a result of four consecutive defeats of their preferred candidates, is seeking to change the rules, resulting in a significant dilution in the traditional right of our alumni to select half the Board of Trustees. 

Loyal Dartmouth alumni urge our newly elected Association of Alumni leaders to make it resoundingly clear to DartmouthԲustees that Dartmouth alumni are vehemently opposed to any action that would dilute or undermine this important right of all alumni to select one half of the Board of Trustees, and, will take all actions necessary to protect that traditional right.

We urge the Board of Trustees to bring all sub rosa discussions, deliberations and votes on this matter into the light of day. Such a disclosure enables Dartmouth, it৲aduates and undergraduates, to share in the important deliberations about the institution঵ture governance.  Any failure in this task is degrading to the institution, to students and alumni, and most of all to those trustees who may be engaged in secret discussions to preserve their entrenched and self-interested control over one of the great and free educational institutions in America.


Dartmouth College alumni who support reform and democracy won decisively in the two elections held between April 1 and May 15, 2007.

As I reported to you, Stephen Smith蠷on the election for a seat on Dartmouth¯ard of Trustees. In each of the last 4 elections, independent petition candidates have been chosen by alumni, while the establishment candidates, with the full support of the administration, have been defeated.

In the historic election for new leadership for the Association of Alumni of Dartmouth College, seven of the eleven seats on the Executive Committee were won by alumni not endorsed by the establishment leaders but who, rather, earned their place on the ballot by petition and were committed to specific reforms leading to more transparency, democracy and fair play.


Another win; 7 of 11
Report on the Association of Alumni election/meeting of May 19, 2007.

For most of us the election for Association leadership ended at midnight on Tuesday, May 15; but any alum who did not vote was allowed to vote in person at the Association meeting held today(Saturday) in Alumni Hall at Dartmouth College.

The results have now been tabulated; seven of the eleven seats went to petition candidates; four went to officially nominated candidates.

This is a big win for reform and for the preservation of alumni rights. It was the first election where all alumni could vote whether they were in Hanover or not. Nearly 17,000 voted as opposed to 200, or at most 350, in the past.

Truly, this  executive committee are the duly elected representatives of the 65,000 Dartmouth alumni, an important fact to remember as they conduct the election of one half of Dartmouthࢯard of trustees.

The following alumni were elected to the eleven seats on the Executive Committee of the Association of Alumni of Dartmouth College.

President: Bill Hutchinson '76
First Vice President: Kate Aiken '92
Second Vice President: Frank Gado 謠Petition candidate
Secretary/Treasurer: David Spalding '76

Executive Committee Members:
Marjory Grant Ross ᬠPetition candidate
Cheryl Bascomb '82
Martin R. Boles ଠPetition candidate
Timothy A. Dreisbach ᬠPetition candidate
David S. Gale ଠPetition candidate
Alexander X. Mooney 㬠Petition candidate
Kathryn Flitner Wallop ଠPetition candidate

Here is a breakdown of the votes.

We should all be proud of this day and this election. Thanks to your persistent, unwavering and wise efforts,  all Dartmouth alumni had the very first opportunity ever to vote, without being required to come to Hanover, for their representatives who may have an influence on the future directions of the College.




MAY 16, 2007

I have great news to report.

Stephen Smith謠stellar independent petition candidate, was elected to Dartmouth͊ Board of Trustees with 55 percent of alumni voting for him, decisively defeating the three nominees of the Alumni Council: Richard ᮤy튉Alderson, Carol Oberg and John Wolf.

18,603 alumni voted in the election, roughly three thousand more than in the 2005 trustee election. Of that number, nearly 10,000 voted for Professor Smith.

The three official candidates were outstanding candidates. They are to be commended for offering to run for trustee. They are all accomplished individuals and a credit to Dartmouth, as was the vote of alumni for Stephen Smith.

Smith ran a race on issues, not personalities. And Dartmouth alumni made their selection based on those issues.

Professor Smith෩n is a great victory for the Dartmouth College and for reform.

Many thanks to all of you for your efforts, your energy and your devotion to Dartmouth.


Report on February 12, 2006 Special Meeting

At the special meeting of the Association in Hanover on February 12, 2006, the Constitution of the Association was successfully amended to make it easier for the small group currently in control, backed by the administration, to pass their proposed new constitution and ultimately to better control future Dartmouth trustee elections.

The vote in the room on the executive committee amendment broke down as follows: 198 votes were cast for the administration-backed amendment, and 32 votes against it. More than 450 proxy votes against the amendment and for alternative amendments were not counted.

Once again, as with all the recent Association meetings, whether of December 2002, December 2003, September 18, 2004, or October 2005, we had to play against a stacked deck. This time the leaders of the so-called Affiliated Groups (societies organized on the basis of sexual practices or minority racial identification) were staying in Hanover as guests of the College administration--some even had their transportation paid for by the administration. The Affiliated Groups were awarded seats on the Alumni Council in the 1990's. Not incidentally, the AGTF constitution for which the amendment paves the way doubles the number of representatives from these Affiliated Groups in the new, merged alumni governing body. The Executive Committee has openly admitted that the February 12 date of the meeting was chosen to coincide with the Affiliated Group gathering.

As had happened at the meeting on October 23, 2005, the president of the Association, Allen Collins, ruled that only alumni who had physically entered the room could vote--though they could leave their ballots and were not required to stay through the discussion. He excluded hundreds of proxy votes submitted by loyal Dartmouth alumni from all across the country. The meeting had been set for a date in the depth of winter, and the weather did not disappoint: a major storm pounded the East Coast, and heavy snow made for treacherous travel throughout New England. Many alumni who might otherwise have come understandably stayed home. As a result, a mere 230 alumni (a large portion of whom consisted of Affiliated Group guests and local alumni employed by the College) made a fundamental decision for over 60,000. Should unwarranted restrictions imposed by a self-selecting, self-serving 11-member Executive Committee allow four-tenths of one percent of the alumni represent the will and interests of all?

There was NO voting on rank and file members᬴ernate proposals because "Guidelines" issued by this same executive committee imposed a four-month notice requirement three months before the meeting. Lewis Carroll could not have invented a more outrageous device in his Alice in Wonderland! When we asked the committee to waive that filing deadline, as its own guideline specifically allows, [it not only refused but claimed it was required to follow the rules!

But even that was not enough for this Executive Committee. In violation of logic and all parliamentary rules of order, NO amendments were allowed from the floor. None! The Chair said there were no rules, only his rules. And so, the only choice was to vote Yes or No--no matter how strongly one may have objected to any of the three provisions in the amendment. The behavior of the Executive Committee, and of their supporters packed into Spalding Auditorium who tried to drown out speakers with handclapping, was reminiscent of a Bayonne, New Jersey, Teamsters Union Local on one of its less democratic days. Tony Pro had nothing on Al Collins.


Update Report on the Lawsuit (March, 2006)

Since 2001, all our repeated efforts to have Association leaders allow absentee voting for the election of officers have been rejected.

At the Association of Alumni annual meeting in October 2005, two slates of candidates sought election to the Executive Committee of the Association: one slate hand-picked and backed by the incumbent Executive Committee and the second slate backed by rank-and-file alumni and placed on the agenda by petition.

I collected more than 420 proxies and attempted to vote them at the October meeting. These 420 proxies from Dartmouth College alumni from diverse parts of the US and foreign countries were not counted. Consequently, the election had the same result as the one that had put Walters's slate in office: the slate created by the Executive Committee was "elected."

I decided to protest this year's round of being forced to play against a stacked deck.
One important reason: this year a new constitution is being proposed by the Alumni Governance Task Force (AGTF), and its ally, the Executive Committee that will curtail our rights dramatically. A key feature of the new AGTF constitution is its change of the rules for the election of Alumni Trustee--the very rules that resulted in the successful bids of petition candidates T.J. Rodgers last year and Peter Robinson and Todd Zywicki this year.

Unwilling to acquiesce to an illegally-installed Executive Committee and watch while it finesses a new constitution that will further skew alumni governance and impede the expression of alumni in their selection of Dartmouth's trustees, I have, with great reluctance, begun the process of obtaining legal remedy through the courts.

To that end, in November 2005, I filed suit against the Association in New Hampshire Superior Court, seeking to have the proxies counted. As yet, contrary to what you may have been led to believe, that case has not been heard.

Within days of their sham election, the new Executive Committee called the February 12, 2006 special meeting specifically to amend the present constitution so as to make it much easier to ratify its replacement.

I again went to court, this time seeking a Temporary Restraining Order to direct that proxies be counted. On February 10, the judge denied this request. He denied my request, solely "by focusing on whether the petitioner has demonstrated a likelihood of success on the underlying merits of his claim." In other words, he was saying that it was not an open and shut case.

When Allen Collins announced from the podium on February 12 that the judge had ruled against counting proxy votes, that statement was false. The court has NOT ordered that proxy votes should not be accepted, as Collins implied. (We await the audio recording of the meeting so that we might quote Collins's exact words.)

No decision has been reached, indeed no hearing has been held, on the underlying case on the 420 proxies that were rejected in the election of Association officers at the October 23, 2005 meeting.


Union Leader - Editorial
October 24, 2005

Sham election in Hanover

Less than two weeks ago, a Superior Court judge upheld the New Hampshire law that allows the victorious party in the previous election to have its candidates listed atop the next ballot. If you think that law creates an unfair advantage for incumbents, get a load of the rules governing the election of Dartmouth College࡬umni association executive committee.

Dartmouth alumni are eligible to vote for executive committee candidates 튉with one caveat. To vote, you have to come to Hanover and do it in person.

The restriction ensures that alumni who stick around Hanover 粡d students, professors and others who settle within easy driving distance 祴 to vote, while those who move out of New England will find it much harder to cast a ballot. It also ensures that a tiny percentage of alumni ಥdominantly, those physically tied to the campus (and likely, to the administration) ᣴually get to vote for alumni association officers.

A slate of petition candidates ran for election to the executive committee this year, pledging to change the rule so that all alumni could vote. Not surprisingly, the Hanover area alumni yesterday voted down the candidates who pledged to dilute their power.

The issue of the alumni associationವles was the latest in a string of controversies involving alumni upset at the Dartmouth administration. This spring, in what was called the ﮥ Pine Revolution,튉two conservative academics ran as petition candidates to the board of trustees and were elected. In response, the administration proposed changing election rules to make it harder for petition candidates to win.

Funny thing. Where are the campus activists who are always running around advocating ॡking truth to powerٯu donਥar a lot of left-wingers crying about the powerful oppressing the weak, or the well-connected rigging the system to keep out the outsiders, when the powerful and well-connected are left-wing academics and university administrators.

What can the powers-that-be at Dartmouth find so frightening about a few independent-minded alumni who would like to have a say in running of the college that they feel compelled to rig the system to keep them out? Couldnനey just campaign against them and let the voters decide?


Last Updated:  Monday September 07, 2009

This area will be updated frequently with important information
and current events that we believe will affect Dartmouth alumni.
If you have information that you feel would be important
for other alumni to know about, please let us know.

Contact Us


Please Check Back Soon!


ⰰ4-2005 - All Rights Reserved - The Hanover Institute, Inc.