Archived post

This is an archived post. Please click here to see the latest entries.

« Tuck Dean Matt Slaughter: Philosophy, Politics & Economics and the AAAS | Home | Some People Still Rage »

College Admits to Misleading AD

On Monday we’ll reproduce the AD Board’s description of the College’s duplicity in offering the fraternity a near-term path to re-recognition — and then withdrawing that offer. But first, let’s review together the Hanlon administration’s own view of events. In that way, your perception of what unfolded will not be clouded by doubt about self-interest.

Needless to say, Phil Hanlon and Bill Helman indict themselves without anyone’s help. Talk about bait and switch. This paragraph should go down as a model of bureaucratic language that fails to obscure what is really happening:

Senior members of the College administration clearly sent mixed signals to representatives of the [AD] corporation. We regret that we now have to choose between harming the College’s relationship with a group of alumni who have contributed a great deal to Dartmouth and worked hard on behalf of their fraternity, and taking a step that would undermine the Moving Dartmouth Forward (MDF) initiative, a high-priority effort aimed at eliminating high-risk behavior and increasing inclusivity while strengthening Dartmouth’s longstanding commitment to leadership in teaching and learning.

Admire the administration for its brazenness. In essence, the paragraph says, ‘Sure we told you a number of things, but because we have other priorities now, we cannot respect the things that we told you.’ In the business world, someone who does this kind of thing goes right to the top of my “Never Deal With That SOB Again” list. Read on:

AD Letter March 13 Page1.jpg

AD Letter March 13 Page 2.jpg

AD Letter March 13 Page 3.jpg

The administration’s war on the fraternities is now in high gear.

Addendum: A Dartmouth parent writes in:

The double-dealing apparent in the Helman letter highlights some of the most disturbing aspects of the AD case, which are that:

(1) Dartmouth has effectively been given the power to deprive private property owners of the right to occupy their property or earn a fair return on it;

(2) the “judicial” procedure employed by Dartmouth to de-recognize or otherwise discipline Greek houses is a travesty of justice, in which an accused’s ability to present a defense is sharply curtailed; and

(3) Dartmouth has both institutional and economic conflicts of interest when exercising its judicial/zoning powers. The College can use de-recognition to further its policy of promoting MDF at the expense of the Greek system, while simultaneously devaluing property it wishes to acquire.

Under these circumstances, the ZBA’s claim that it was not incorporating Dartmouth’s recognition standards into the ordinance is incomprehensible. By making Greek houses’ zoning compliance contingent on recognition, the ordinance inarguably gives the College the power to alter the zoning status of a Greek house. The College’s power to use its own system of “adjudication” to pursue its economic and institutional objectives to the detriment of private property owners cries out for some solution. It must be fun to operate your own court system, answerable to no one.

Other areas of the law, like contracts and corporate law, have equitable principles to prevent the powerful from steamrolling the weak. At the very least, a judicial or quasi-judicial, body that is impartial and provides proper procedural safeguards should be required in cases where de-recognition is possible. The absence of such a body should render de-recognition invalid and unenforceable for zoning purposes.


Featured posts

  • August 14, 2013
    Breaking: Of Crips and Bloods and Memories of Ghetto Parties
    History repeats itself, first as tragedy and then as farce, or sometimes it just repeats itself. From the New York Times on November 30, 1998: At Dartmouth College, white students at a ”ghetto party” dressed…
  • June 25, 2013
    Dean of the College Charlotte Johnson’s War on Students Part (2/2)
    Part 1, Part 2 Today’s post again recounts the events that befell the Freshman. However, the content of the Hanover Police department report reproduced in this space yesterday is supplemented by information from my own…
  • October 18, 2009
    When Love Beckoned in 52nd Street
    We were at San Francisco’s BIX last evening, enjoying prosecco, cheese, and a bit of music. A full year of inhabitation in Northern California has unraveled to me no decent venue for proper lounging, but…
  • October 9, 2009
    D Afraid of a Little Competish
    So our colleague and Dartblog writer Joe Asch informed me that the D has rejected our cunning advertising campaign. Uh-oh. The Dartmouth is widely known as a breeding ground for instant New York Times successes,…
  • September 4, 2009
    How Regents Should Reign
    As Dartmouth alumni proceed through the legal hoops necessary to defuse a Board-packing plan—which put in unhappy desuetude an historic 1891 Agreement between alumni and the College guaranteeing a half-democratically-elected Board of Trustees—it strikes one…
  • August 29, 2009
    Election Reform Study Committee
    If you are an alum of the College on the Hill, you may have received a number of e-mails of late beseeching your input for a new arm of the College’s Alumni Control Apparatus called…

Dartblog Specials

Subscribe by Email

Enter your email address:

Help, Pecuniarily

Please note

This website reflects the personal opinions of its authors. Any e-mails received may be published along with the full name of the sender. If you wish otherwise, please say so.

All content appearing at should be presumed copyright 2004-2018 its respective bylined author unless otherwise noted or unless linked to original source.




May 2018
Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
1 2 3 4 5
6 7 8 9 10 11 12
13 14 15 16 17 18 19
20 21 22 23 24 25 26
27 28 29 30 31