My
objection to the proposed Alumni Association (AA) constitutional changes is
informed by my highly active volunteer participation, including service on the Alumni
Board of Directors (ABD). I helped write
the group statement in opposition, and here add further objections.
The
self-perpetuation of the ABD solely through the closely-selected Nominating
Committee is anti-democratic; instead, the AA as a whole should choose its
representatives in as transparent and democratic a manner as possible. A way to accomplish this is to use modern
communications technology to hold an annual ranked-choice election for:
·
One alumni trustee to serve a four-year term,
·
One member of the ABD Executive Committee to serve a
four-year term, and
·
Five at-large members of the ABD, each to serve a
three-year term.
Alumni
wishing to serve would submit a short statement of why they wish to do so; they
might possibly also be asked to name up to ten people who endorse their
candidacy.
“Alignment
of interests”—used to justify the proposed changes—should be accomplished by
coordination of bottom-up ideas instead of top-down diktats. Indeed, to be faithful to the AA’s mission, such coordination
should be the primary function of the ABD.
James
Kahan, ‘64
