Dear Members of the Dartmouth Community,
Earlier today, the Dartmouth Board of Trustees took several steps to strengthen the College's governance. Given the intense debate about this issue in recent months, I wanted to write to you as soon as possible to tell you what we've done and why.
Let me start by saying Dartmouth has never been stronger than it is today. It's one of the most selective institutions in the country. Our commitment to teaching has never been stronger and student satisfaction is at record highs. The student-to-faculty ratio now stands at 8:1. We have expanded the faculty by 15 percent since 2000 and maintained competitive faculty compensation, reflecting the College's sharp focus on its academic programs. Once current building plans are completed, we will have invested $1.1 billion in new and renovated state-of-the-art facilities since 1998.
Like its peers, however, the College confronts new challenges. We are facing increasing competition for the finest students and the best faculty as well as for the financial resources needed to support the College. And, we operate in an increasingly complex and highly regulated environment. Having the strongest possible governance is a critical factor to ensuring Dartmouth's continued success in the years ahead.
The changes we are making preserve alumni democracy at Dartmouth by keeping eight alumni-nominated trustees. They expand the Board with eight additional charter trustees, adding alumni to meet the needs of the College. And, they address the destructive politicization of trustee campaigns that have hurt Dartmouth. These changes represent a balancing of competing interests. They are true to Dartmouth's founding principles. And, they will ensure that, moving forward, the College has a strong, effective, and independent governing body.
Over the past three months, the Board's Governance Committee conducted a thorough review of this issue. We carefully considered input from many alumni, current and former trustees, faculty, parents, students, and other members of the Dartmouth community. We consulted with experts in college and non-profit governance and carefully evaluated practices among 30 leading colleges and universities. And, we developed a report to the full Board, which I encourage you to read for yourself at www.dartmouth.edu/governancereport.
After reviewing the Governance Committee's recommendations - and after much thought and deliberation - the Board of Trustees concluded that Dartmouth should strengthen its governance by taking steps to:
* Expand the Board by Adding More Alumni to Better Meet the Needs of the College: We are expanding the Board from 18 to 26 to ensure it has the broad range of backgrounds, skills, expertise, and fundraising capabilities needed to steward an institution of Dartmouth's scope and complexity. Dartmouth has been at a competitive disadvantage to its peers, with one of the smallest Boards of any comparable institution. We have had 18 members on our Board, versus an average of 42 trustees at peer schools and an average of 34 at other liberal arts colleges. We also are giving the Board more flexibility to select trustees who offer the specific talents and experiences that the College needs, which elections don't ensure. We will accomplish both of these goals by adding eight new charter trustee seats to the Board.
* Preserve Alumni Democracy by Retaining Alumni Trustee Elections: We are maintaining alumni trustee elections at their current level and preserving the ability of alumni to petition onto the ballot. Dartmouth currently has the highest proportion of alumni-nominated trustees of any peer institution and is one of the few schools that allows alumni to petition directly onto the ballot. The Board believes that this gives Dartmouth's alumni an important direct voice in our governance and fosters greater alumni involvement in the College. Dartmouth will continue to have one of the most democratic trustee election processes of any college in the country.
* Simplify the Alumni Nomination Process: Dartmouth's trustee elections have become increasingly politicized, costly, and divisive. It's not the results of these elections that are the problem, but the process itself. So we are charging the Alumni Council and the Association of Alumni to develop and implement a process for selecting alumni trustee nominees that preserves elections, maintains petition access to the ballot, and adopts a one-vote, majority-rule election process.
* Improve Direct Board Engagement with Alumni and Other Stakeholders: A larger group of trustees representing even more diverse backgrounds will help us enhance Board engagement with key areas of the College including academic affairs, student life, and alumni relations. We are therefore creating new Board committees focused on each of these three critical areas. This will facilitate greater interaction and communication with individuals in each of these three areas.
While we will continue to have eight trustees nominated directly by alumni, a significant number of seats on the Board, I know some will ask why we didn't simply expand the Board through an equal number of charter and alumni trustee seats. Given the divisiveness of recent elections we did not believe that having more elections would be good for Dartmouth. We also believe that the Board needs more trustees selected for the specific talents and experiences they can offer the College - which elections can't guarantee. We will still have more alumni-nominated trustees than most other schools and the opportunity for regular contested elections. But we think this is the best balancing of Dartmouth's interests.
I know there are strongly held views on all sides of this issue. And I respect that many of those views are driven above all by a desire to do what is best for Dartmouth and its students. But some of the recent rhetoric in this debate has become so harsh and divisive it is now doing harm to Dartmouth. I want to urge everyone who cares about Dartmouth to debate this issue in a reasonable and respectful way. As President Wright has said, there is far more that unites us - as friends, faculty, students, and loyal alumni of the College on the Hill - than divides us. Above all, we have a shared love of and dedication to Dartmouth.
One thing that has made Dartmouth an enduring and successful institution is that its history has always been one of adapting to meet new challenges and needs, while still preserving what is unique and special about Dartmouth. That is why a board originally composed of twelve New England men, half of them members of the clergy, today consists of eighteen men and women from many parts of the country and walks of life. That is why Trustees who once served for life now serve four-year terms. And, that is why elections once open only to "graduates... of at least five years standing" are now open to all alumni.
In these and many other respects, Dartmouth's Board has made fundamental changes to its governance structure and procedures throughout the College's history. The changes we're making today are no different. They are driven by what is best for Dartmouth and its students, and what is necessary to ensure the College continues to meet the new challenges it faces in the 21st century.
I love Dartmouth. I honestly believe there is nowhere else in the world quite like this great College. We need to protect Dartmouth and ensure it continues to prosper for future generations of students. I, and the entire Board, are intensely focused on helping Dartmouth to continue building its world-class academic program. That is what drives us forward. And, I look forward to continuing to work with all of you - alumni, faculty, students and parents - to build on Dartmouth's unique and pre-eminent place in American higher education.
Sincerely,
Ed Haldeman
Chair, Dartmouth College Board of Trustees
____________________________________________________
LINKS:
Governance Committee Report web page:
http://www.dartmouth.edu/~news/features/
governance/
Governance Committee Full Report:http://www.dartmouth.edu/~news/features/ governance/report-083007.pdf
Saturday, September 08, 2007
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
23 comments:
I would simply like to point out the illogicality and idiocy of this sentence, which I think deserves special attention, “Given the divisiveness of recent elections we did not believe that having more elections would be good for Dartmouth.” The last bit, in particular, is the height of condescension.
Your comment is fairly condescending, Emily. Haldeman explained that he means there will be no elections for new seats, not "no more" elections for the existing alumni seats, since they will continue to be elected. You can see this by reading the rest of the paragraph.
Why bother with elections? Let's give the eight seats to the craziest people willing to serve.
The BOT promised five seats in 1891 and -- without any additional consideration, to use Professor Zywicki's term -- has given and continues to give eight seats. That's three freebies in my book.
Now if the College could just go back to the Alumni and ask them to cough up some cash or promises for the three "free" seats we alums got in 1961 and 2003... But it is probably too late for that.
Let's not forget that before you can talk about how the contract term "five" means "parity," you will have to prove there's a binding contract at all, implied in law from the various BOT resolutions (as Professor Zywicki has explained). That alone will be tough if not impossible...
And then you would have to double back and say "yes, we rely on the words of these various unsigned documents to imply a contract, but now that we've done so, let's all agree to ignore their literal meanings, since, to get what we want, we have to reinterpret 'five' to mean 'parity'..." It just won't fly.
If there are 8 alumni chosen trustees, there will typically be an election every year. Having more alumni chosen seats does not result in more elections, only in more candidates in the existing elections.
Some fancy wordsmithing here.
Another big change besdies breaking the parity... making it easier for multiple petitioners in a given election while reducing the nominated candidates to one. The goal is clearly to split votes across the petitioners, as they also change the rules to one person one vote. More petitioners would be OK, even combined with a single nominating committee candidate, if they kept approval voting or used an instant runoff. But what they have set up is clearly designed to hurt petitioners. It may backfire on them as the only way to beat this new game is a very strong SINGLE outside political party, even moreso than today's presumed cabal.
Before we get riled up on the report's "bullet voting" point, I think what the GC is trying to say is that the current preference voting system requires strategic voting. In reality, I'd bet that alumni tend to vote for the one candidate they like rather than against the one they dislike.
The more that voters resist the urge to vote "against" the least-worthy candidate, the more they split their votes among the inoffensive three and give strength to the possibly-rabid minority.
Although such voting isn't necessarily rational, I wonder whether it is appropriate for any alumni vote to require such cynical gamesmanship. This process was not meant to involve "electioneering," and there were rules against excessive campaigning for a reason. Maybe that traditional amateur spirit should be brought to bear on the ballot itself.
The recommendations to the Council regarding elections are not within the power of the board to carry out, which is why they phrased them as a "charge" to the Council. The Council would shoot itself in the foot if it didn't do as it was asked, but it doesn't have to accept every single point that people might disagree with.
The story in the D uses the word "portion" when it means proportion.
The "portion" of the board that is Alumni Trustees will stay the same, at 8. The "proportion" or ratio of Alumni Trustees to Charter Trustees will go down because the number of Charter seats is going up.
The Council (and the Association) do not have to agree with the Trustees? The Board does not have the power to carry these things out in the absence of agreement?
This writer agrees. But then why did the decision also include a provision that as of right now, the College itself runs the elections, not the alumni. The alumni groups are only allowed to reengage after their processes are deemed worthy.
Talk about your non-partnering non-negotiating power play!!!!
The council will do whatever the trustees tell it to do, but it is the Association that has to modify its constitution to change the election process. Good luck.
Contribution Choices:
Send your money to the Association of Alumni, or send it to the College to be spent by the Administration in part on "Sex is Hot" T shirts.
From the "D":
"Amidst a sea of brown t-shirts sporting the perennial catchphrase “Consensual Sex is Hot” in bold face and green letters, Dartmouth’s Sexual Abuse Peer Advisors hosted the fifth annual Consent Day this past Friday afternoon on Massachusetts Row...
"Booths set up from a variety of campus groups from the Native Americans at Dartmouth, to the AIDS Workcrew, to representatives from Hillary Clinton’s campaign. The vendors provided students with information, games, free food, and give aways including condoms..."
.
.
.
.
The threat must be made clear:
.
.
Either parity or diversion.
.
.
Withholding funds is a threat, but not a realistic one as Dartmouth can survive off large endowment funds and donations from almost half these levels.
The donor participation might drop, but it already is lower than it should be.
What is really scary is if the current Association of Alumni executive committee established a new 501(c)3 trust, named 10 new 10 year trustees to it (one to be elected each year successively) and started to request funds to benefit the association of alumni, the College, or Dartmouth related activities as the new trustees saw fit. Call it the Association of Alumni of Dartmouth College Endowment Trust.
All donations should not be withheld, but diverted to the new Endowment.
1% of every donation should be yearly forwarded to the College to maintain our donor participation. The College has wrecked participation rates, and challengers have recently improved these rates across the board and shouldn't threaten to lower them.
The impact of the alumni's endowment would be real. Alumni could officially donate to the new official fund, which would build up and at some point, the new endowment could have the bargaining power to force a full and lasting charter revision that even the dead-enders in the administration would be grudgingly accept: perpetual parity.
Every alumni officer to every class, council position, or association position must be asked:
Will you or won't you support alumni parity on the Board of Trustees?
Every donor must be asked:
Will you willingly divert your donation to the alumni's fund to be held in trust until the board permanently recognizes alumni parity on the board?
Withdrawal or lawsuits?
Perhaps a structured threat of diversion is more powerful.
.
.
.
.
.
Strange that The D claims the end of a "century-old parity." I thought parity only dated to 1961, when the board could have stuck to its promise of just five seats but instead kept the ratio of half of elected seats.
What makes you think Dartmouth spent donor money on those booths or the shirts that frighten you so, Old One? I'll bet they were bought with student activity fees, collected alongside tuition from all students.
"[W]hy did the decision also include a provision that as of right now, the College itself runs the elections, not the alumni"?
The Board explained in detail the problems with recent elections. The Council's changes to meet the new requirements will probably take some time, and Board said that it would hand the job from the College to the Council when the Council got its act together. This is all very clear in the Board's report.
my wallet (as well as those of many of my fellow alums) is closed until further notice.
I like the idea of an alumni endowment. I would be willing to contribute my money their instead when it comes available.
i hate this wright character (not even an ivy leaguer --- former ohio state guy) as much as i hated his "intellectual loner" loving predecessor James O.
We as alums have to put a stop to such tomfoolery. i don't care what side of the political spectrum you are on. this is about preserving democracy! if you're a liberal, you can vote for a liberal candidate. if you are a conservative, you can vote for a conservative one. But at least you can vote! the new ruling makes voting useless as the majority will always rubber stamp whatever halderman and wright say.
Also, wtf is up with the coverage in the NYT and the Post? they make the dissent candidates and the 8 elective seats sound like a bad thing and seem to be supporting the non-democracy that the appointed trustees are trying to create!
Paul '96
Paul, you seem to have confused "voting" with "democracy"!
This debate is not "about preserving democracy," and just because the Trustees (then and now) let you cast a ballot for a nominee whom they reserve the right to decline does not make the Dartmouth corporation in any way democratic.
Are you confusing Dartmouth with the University of New Hampshire or some other arm of the state government that in-state voters might have a democratic right to affect?
It sounds like you've bought into the ignorant fundamentalist rhetoric of SaveDartmouth.org. You should try reading the Trustees' report (on the Dartmouth website) to get the view from the people who actually know what they are talking about.
I suggest that all disenfranchised alumni tear up their annual pledge cards and mail the pieces back to Hanover. Even small contributors will make a difference if Dartmouth's published "alumni giving rate" takes a hit.
Oh Brave Anonymous,
I have undertaken to annotate Ed Haldeman's letter, so that you might better understand it:
A LETTER FROM ED HALDEMAN, CHAIR OF THE BOARD OF TRUSTEES, TO THE DARTMOUTH COMMUNITY
Dear Members of the Dartmouth Community,
Earlier today [while you were sleeping], the Dartmouth Board of Trustees [or, at least, the relevant portion of it]took several steps to strengthen the College's governance [we tired of dealing with the supplication of you peons]. Given the intense debate about this issue in recent months [shut up, now], I wanted to write to you as soon as possible to tell you what we've done and why [please lubricate your asses].
Let me start by saying Dartmouth has never been stronger than it is today [by which I mean, it has more money]. It's one of the most selective institutions in the country. Our commitment to teaching has never been stronger [missing comma] and student satisfaction is at record highs [since the time we started gauging student satisfaction in ???]. The student-to-faculty ratio now stands at 8:1 [especially in PC
cutting-edge disciplines]. We have expanded the faculty by 15 percent since 2000 and maintained competitive faculty compensation, reflecting the College's sharp focus on its academic programs [by, for instance, getting rid of the writing clinicians provided to students free of charge by meddling alumni]. Once current building plans are completed, we will have invested $1.1 billion in new and renovated state-of-the-art facilities since 1998 [and similar expansion in various kinds of administrators].
Like its peers, however [whom we wish to follow down the primrose path], the College confronts new challenges [e.g., contrary alumni]. We are facing increasing competition for the finest students and the best faculty [in Gay, Bisexual and Lesbian studies, as well as other identitarian disciplines]as well as for the financial resources needed to support the College [which is why we are determined to insult the alumni]. And, we operate in an increasingly complex and highly regulated environment [i.e., we need more and more niggling administrative positions filled, which also increases our support within College staff]. Having the strongest possible governance [by which we mean the one that best appreciates the self-evident wisdom of our prescriptions]is a critical factor to ensuring Dartmouth's continued success in the years ahead [which is a prospect that mere alumni couldn’t possibly understand].
The changes we are making preserve alumni democracy at Dartmouth by keeping eight alumni-nominated trustees [whilst at the same time diluting it to the point where it will be a mere nuisance rather than a threat]. They expand the Board with eight additional charter trustees, adding alumni to meet the needs of the College [and all of whom will be carefully vetted to ensure that they agree with us regarding the nature of those needs]. And, they address the destructive politicization of trustee campaigns [which is what happens when you let alumni have too much say in these matters, none of which have ever been political in nature in the entire history of such institutions on the face of the earth until just recently] that have hurt Dartmouth [by exposing us for the arrogant authoritarian putzes that wee are]. These changes represent a balancing of competing interests [balanced, as it were, quite heavily in the direction we favor]. They are true to Dartmouth's founding principles [which are oligarchic, naturally]. And, they will ensure that, moving forward, the College has a strong, effective, and independent governing body [strongly and effectively independent of unwanted alumni interference].
Over the past three months, the Board's Governance Committee conducted a thorough review of this issue [at which we came to precisely the same conclusions we had prior to enacting by fiat what we had attempted to do in a less absurdly insulting manner through the ballot]. We carefully considered input from many alumni, current and former trustees, faculty, parents, students, and other members of the Dartmouth community [ardently separating the wheat from the chaff]. We consulted with experts in college and non-profit governance [whom we paid a pretty penny to agree with us]and carefully evaluated practices among 30 leading colleges and universities [hereinafter referred to as the Joneses]. And, we developed a report to the full Board, which I encourage you to read for yourself at www.dartmouth.edu/governancereport [assuming you can read for yourself].
After reviewing the Governance Committee's recommendations - and after much thought and deliberation [hemming and hawing]- the Board of Trustees concluded [rationalized its preexisting desires]that Dartmouth should strengthen its governance by taking steps to:
* Expand the Board by Adding More Alumni to Better Meet the Needs of the College: We are expanding the Board from 18 to 26 to ensure it has the broad range of backgrounds, skills, expertise, and fundraising capabilities needed to steward an institution of Dartmouth's scope and complexity [all of which necessary skills, expertise and capabilities will happily coincide with agreement with our beliefs regarding the College]. Dartmouth has been at a competitive disadvantage to its peers, with one of the smallest Boards of any comparable institution [and so full of contrarian voices, which is why it’s necessary to expand the board, but not to submit those expansions to any unwieldy democratic process]. We have had 18 members on our Board, versus an average of 42 trustees at peer schools and an average of 34 at other liberal arts colleges [and everyone has heard the old aphorism, “Many cooks make clarified broth”]. We also are giving the Board more flexibility to select trustees who offer the specific talents and experiences [read, predispositions]that the College needs, which elections don't ensure [as is clearly demonstrated by the fact that so many trustees with differing visions of the College have been foisted upon us recently]. We will accomplish both of these goals by adding eight new charter trustee seats to the Board [but most of all, we will ensure suppliance].
* Preserve Alumni Democracy by Retaining Alumni Trustee Elections: We are maintaining alumni trustee elections at their current level [whilst simultaneously making them mean less, which is a clever way of attempting to put the best face on this usurpation, even as it, unfortunately, demonstrates our deep contempt for you] and preserving the ability of alumni to petition onto the ballot [not that it will mean very much anymore, but, you know, let them eat cake]. Dartmouth currently has [is shackled with]the highest proportion of alumni-nominated trustees of any peer institution and is one of the few schools that allows alumni to petition directly onto the ballot [which, to be honest, is a terrible idea]. The Board believes that this gives Dartmouth's alumni an important direct voice in our governance and fosters greater alumni involvement in the College [so, we hope that you don’t mind our diminishing the volume of that voice by fiat, and that in abject gratitude you’ll keep giving]. Dartmouth will continue to have one of the most democratic trustee election processes of any college in the country [; it will merely be significantly less democratic].
* Simplify the Alumni Nomination Process: Dartmouth's trustee elections have become increasingly politicized, costly, and divisive [none of which has anything to do with US, and everything to do with the unreasonable people the alumni insist on electing]. It's not the results of these elections that are the problem [and you’ve won the Internet Eurolottery again], but the process itself [which continues to produce unacceptable results]. So we are charging [imperiously demanding]the Alumni Council and the Association of Alumni to develop and implement a process for selecting alumni trustee nominees that preserves elections, maintains petition access to the ballot, and adopts a one-vote, majority-rule election process [but most importantly, gives us the results that we want].
* Improve Direct Board Engagement with Alumni and Other Stakeholders: A larger group of trustees representing even more diverse backgrounds [all of whom happen to agree with us in all important respects] will help us enhance Board engagement with key areas of the College including academic affairs, student life, and alumni relations [and as we are demonstrating by reducing your voice, there’s nothing we’d rather hear than that Vox]. We are therefore creating new Board committees focused on each of these three critical areas [because, you know, you can never pack too many committees full of toadies]. This will facilitate greater interaction and communication with individuals in each of these three areas [and although we’ve stated that we’ve done a poor job of communicating our positions, this will render that troublesome business moot].
While we will continue to have eight trustees nominated directly by alumni, a significant number of seats on the Board [just, you know, much less significant], I know some will ask why we didn't simply expand the Board through an equal number of charter and alumni trustee seats [see how anticipatory I am]. Given the divisiveness of recent elections [by which we mean that we didn’t get our way]we did not believe that having more elections would be good for Dartmouth [because they haven’t really been going well for us, and we really do know what’s best for Dartmouth]. We also believe that the Board needs more trustees selected for the specific talents and experiences [just so that they are agreeable with us]they can offer the College - which elections can't guarantee [we knowing what diversity consists of best]. We will still have more alumni-nominated trustees than most other schools [be grateful, you mewling pricks]and the opportunity for regular contested elections [which simply won’t mean very much]. But we think this is the best balancing of Dartmouth's interests [in our favor].
I know there are strongly held views on all sides of this issue [none of which really matter, if they’re not ours]. And I respect that many of those views are driven above all by a desire to do what is best for Dartmouth and its students [which is not so much a matter, at least in some instances, of bad faith as utter stupidity]. But some of the recent rhetoric in this debate has become so harsh and divisive it is now doing harm to Dartmouth [which wresting the rights of alumni away from them will certainly do much to ameliorate]. I want to urge everyone who cares about Dartmouth to debate this issue in a reasonable and respectful way [even though I’m being unbelievably insulting to you]. As President Wright has said, there is far more that unites us - as friends, faculty, students, and loyal alumni of the College on the Hill - than divides us [just so long as you shut up and send money]. Above all, we have a shared love of and dedication to Dartmouth [which is why we need to terminate your prerogatives].
One thing that has made Dartmouth an enduring and successful institution is that its history has always been one of adapting to meet new challenges and needs [even if it means declaring martial law], while still preserving what is unique and special about Dartmouth [so long as that has nothing to do with fraternities or any other eyebrow-raising freedom of association, or any freedom of expression that might possibly insult someone or injure their feelings or self-esteem]. That is why a board originally composed of twelve New England men, half of them members of the clergy, today consists of eighteen men and women from many parts of the country and walks of life. That is why Trustees who once served for life now serve four-year terms. And, that is why elections once open only to "graduates... of at least five years standing" are now open to all alumni [especially the ones we determine are worthy].
In these and many other respects, Dartmouth's Board has made fundamental changes to its governance structure and procedures throughout the College's history [none of which has tended in the direction of depriving alumni of their voices before, however]. The changes we're making today are no different [well, except for that part about diminishing direct alumni involvement]. They are driven by what is best for Dartmouth and its students [which is, after all, whatever we say it is], and what is necessary to ensure the College continues to meet the new challenges it faces in the 21st century [which will undoubtedly be more mentally hygienic].
I love Dartmouth [how dare you question my patriotism!]. I honestly believe there is nowhere else in the world quite like this great College [which is why our studies relied so much on their conception of best practices at less democratic institutions]. We need to protect Dartmouth and ensure it continues to prosper for future generations of students [as the smoothly functioning oligarchy that we know it can be]. I, and the entire Board, are intensely focused on helping Dartmouth to continue building its world-class academic program. That is what drives us forward. And, I look forward to continuing to work with all of you - alumni, faculty, students and parents - to build on Dartmouth's unique and pre-eminent place in American higher education [and with all this intense forward focus, can’t be please just forget that you’ve been screwed up the ass and let me off the hook?].
Sincerely [Honest Injun!],
Ed Haldeman
Chair, Dartmouth College Board of Trustees
(translated by Dan Collins '82)
Whenever any collegiate administration and/or faculty fear alum who may not bow to their policies & beliefs, they decide to "limit" through various governance policies, the value of the vote of the alum. Most college administrations & faculty fear alumni participation in the decision making process because it could permit those outside the insulated collegiate atmosphere to provide opinions that reflect real world circumstances. Actual or real transparency is not real important to those with agenda. In fact, it is seen as a threat to the autonomy of those who want to decide the right & wrong of all around them. Ego driven people resent transparency.
An insular collegiate atmosphere generated by some administrations & especially by many agenda driven faculty, always spell an end to speech, participation, individual thought & expression, & especially when that expression does not
"conform" to some faculty agenda position. Grades, grants, teaching positions, etc., can become great hammers to impose conformance to the accepted position of those who wield the power.
Dartmouth would not the first to risk having its mission co-opted by ideologues. Independent boards keep college's in the real world. If a board becomes the mouthpiece of those who control the voting power of its members, its members abandon their obligation to govern the institution & become mere puppets espousing whatever policy position they are told to conform to.
warhammer gold warhammer money warhammer accounts tibia money tibia gold tibia item runescape accounts buy runescape accounts runescape money runescape gold runescape gp runescape power leveling runescape powerleveling cheap rs2 powerleveling runescape equipment buy rs equipment runescape runes cheap rs2 runes runescape logs cheap rs2 logs runescape items buy runescape items runescape quest point rs2 quest point cheap runescape questpoint runescape gold runescape items runescape power leveling runescape money runescape gold buy runescape gold buy runescape money runescape items runescape accounts runescape gp runescape accounts runescape money runescape power leveling runescape powerleveling tibia gold dofus kamas buy dofus kamas wow power leveling wow powerleveling runescape questpoint rs2 questpoint Warcraft PowerLeveling Warcraft Power Leveling World of Warcraft PowerLeveling World of Warcraft Power Leveling Hellgate money Hellgate gold buy runescape logs buy rs2 items cheap runescape items Hellgate London gold Guild Wars Gold buy Guild Wars Gold runescape items rs2 accounts cheap rs2 equipments lotro gold buy lotro gold buy runescape money buy runescape gold buy runescape runes lotro gold buy lotro gold runescape money runescape gold cheap rs2 powerleveling eve isk eve online isk buy runescape power leveling rs2 power leveling tibia gold tibia item runescape accounts Fiesta Silver Fiesta Gold Scions of Fate Gold Hellgate Palladium Hellgate London Palladium SOF Gold Age Of Conan Gold AOC Gold ArchLord gold tibia money tibia gold runescape accounts runescape gold cheap rs2 powerleveling buy ArchLord gold DDO Plat Dungeons and Dragons Online Plat
A片,aio,av女優,av,av片,aio交友愛情館,ut聊天室,聊天室,豆豆聊天室,色情聊天室,尋夢園聊天室,080聊天室,視訊聊天室,080苗栗人聊天室,上班族聊天室,成人聊天室,中部人聊天室,一夜情聊天室,情色聊天室,情色視訊,美女視訊,辣妹視訊,視訊交友網,免費視訊聊天,視訊,免費視訊,美女交友,成人交友,聊天室交友,微風論壇,微風成人,sex,成人,情色,情色貼圖,色情,微風,聊天室尋夢園,交友,視訊交友,視訊聊天,視訊辣妹,一夜情
情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣,按摩棒,跳蛋,充氣娃娃,情境坊歡愉用品,情趣用品,情人節禮物,情惑用品性易購,A片,視訊聊天室
免費A片,AV女優,美女視訊,情色交友,免費AV,色情網站,辣妹視訊,美女交友,色情影片,成人影片,成人網站,A片,H漫,18成人,成人圖片,成人漫畫,情色網,日本A片,免費A片下載,性愛
A片,色情,成人,做愛,情色文學,A片下載,色情遊戲,色情影片,色情聊天室,情色電影,免費視訊,免費視訊聊天,免費視訊聊天室,一葉情貼圖片區,情色,情色視訊,免費成人影片,視訊交友,視訊聊天,視訊聊天室,言情小說,愛情小說,AIO,AV片,A漫,av dvd,聊天室,自拍,情色論壇,視訊美女,AV成人網,色情A片,SEX
情趣用品,A片,免費A片,AV女優,美女視訊,情趣用品,A片,免費A片,日本A片,A片下載,線上A片,成人電影,嘟嘟成人網,成人,成人貼圖,成人交友,成人圖片,18成人,成人小說,成人圖片區,微風成人區,成人文章,成人影城,情色,情色貼圖,色情聊天室,情色視訊色情網站,一葉情貼圖片區,做愛,性愛,美女視訊,辣妹視訊,視訊聊天室,視訊交友網,免費視訊聊天,美女交友,做愛影片
av,情趣用品,a片,成人電影,微風成人,嘟嘟成人網,成人,成人貼圖,成人交友,成人圖片,18成人,成人小說,成人圖片區,,情色,情色貼圖,色情聊天室,情色視訊,情色文學,色情小說,情色小說,色情,情色電影,aio,av女優,AV,免費A片,日本a片,美女視訊,辣妹視訊,聊天室
情趣用品.A片,情色,情色貼圖,色情聊天室,情色視訊,情色文學,色情小說,情色小說,色情,寄情築園小遊戲,情色電影,色情遊戲,色情網站,聊天室,ut聊天室,豆豆聊天室,美女視訊,辣妹視訊,視訊聊天室,視訊交友網,免費視訊聊天,免費A片,av女優,av,成人電影,成人,成人貼圖,成人交友,成人網站,自拍,尋夢園聊天室
runescape money runescape gold runescape money buy runescape gold buy runescape money runescape money runescape gold wow power leveling wow powerleveling Warcraft Power Leveling Warcraft PowerLeveling buy runescape gold buy runescape money runescape itemsrunescape accounts runescape gp dofus kamas buy dofus kamas Guild Wars Gold buy Guild Wars Gold lotro gold buy lotro gold lotro gold buy lotro gold lotro gold buy lotro gold runescape money runescape power leveling runescape money runescape gold dofus kamas cheap runescape money cheap runescape gold Hellgate Palladium Hellgate London Palladium Hellgate money Tabula Rasa gold tabula rasa money Tabula Rasa Credit Tabula Rasa Credits Hellgate gold Hellgate London gold wow power leveling wow powerleveling Warcraft PowerLeveling Warcraft Power Leveling World of Warcraft PowerLeveling World of Warcraft Power Leveling runescape power leveling runescape powerleveling eve isk eve online isk eve isk eve online isk tibia gold Fiesta Silver Fiesta Gold
Age of Conan Gold
buy Age of Conan Gold
aoc gold
呼吸机
无创呼吸机
家用呼吸机
呼吸机
家用呼吸机
美国呼吸机
篮球培训
篮球培训班
篮球夏令营
china tour
beijing tour
beijing travel
china tour
tibet tour
tibet travel
computer monitoring software
employee monitoring
Post a Comment