During her Oct. 11, 2024, “State of Community” address to faculty, Beilock remarked, “As much as we care what alumni think and will continue to listen on critical issues affecting our community, it is the faculty and staff and leadership in this room and on our campus that shape our direction.” This comment reveals a dangerous disconnect between how Beilock views alumni — arguably the College’s backbone — and other community members. We are concerned about how College President Sian Leah Beilock reorganizes the College at an institutional level.
Exemplifying a history of collaboration, Dartmouth’s Alumni Council maintains a dialogue between those who have attended Dartmouth and the College itself. Alumni nominate members to the Board of Trustees, which comprises 24 alums and two non-alum ex-officio members. This is but one example. To pretend that admissions, fundraising, graduate networking and student internships could operate seamlessly without alumni ignores reality. When Beilock says those “in this room” shape Dartmouth’s direction, it invalidates the importance of alumni who have helped define the College since its inception.
Alumni have shaped the College in countless ways throughout Dartmouth’s history. During the legal battles of 1817, when the state of New Hampshire tried to change Dartmouth into a public university by amending its charter, alumni played a pivotal role in defending the College’s independence. Daniel Webster (Class of 1801) rallied alumni support and resources in the Supreme Court case Trustees of Dartmouth College v. Woodward. More recently, alumni were involved in a variety of College actions on social justice, including divestment from South African apartheid. Alumni served on the Council on Investor Responsibility, and former College President David McLaughlin consulted Gary Love ’76, then-President of the Black Alumni of Dartmouth Association, for support with de-escalation. Moreover, alumni were involved in the more recent divestment from fossil fuels by writing an open letter expressing support for such an action. When students rose to demand action after the Bored@Baker “r*p* guide” became public, alumni and current students pushed the administration for accountability by mobilizing Dartmouth’s class years of alumni, regional clubs and affiliated groups to demand tangible solutions to address rape culture at Dartmouth. Leadership did not come only from those “in this room.” It came from all of us. And today, in a divided country, Beilock’s words are a slap in the face to the generations of alumni who fought for Dartmouth to become more inclusive, challenge an unjust status quo and remain true to its mission.
Beilock’s leadership style forces a square peg into a round hole. It appears out of place. Dartmouth is beloved because collaboration, including between alumni and those on campus, is the essence of who we are. The deep bonds between students, faculty and alumni make Dartmouth, Dartmouth. Beilock’s words and actions have acted as a sword, cutting our deep bonds. Her inability or unwillingness to champion our values and traditions is why we believe student protests escalated into violence on May 1, when 89 individuals were arrested at a pro-Palestinian protest on the Green.
We believe Beilock chose violence over dialogue because of her involvement in the arrests that took place on May 1, which included the well-documented, violent arrest of Professor Annelise Orleck. The summary of the arrests that took place on May 1 and corresponding bond hearings — also known as Blue Papers 1 and 2 — of Judge Michael C. Mace, the New Hampshire state judge who oversaw these bond hearings, suggest the College “possibly influenced [a] bail commissioner and misled alumni.” Bail conditions barred those arrested from key campus areas. According to the court orders, the College was not completely transparent about how, during a May 30, 2024 proceeding, the Court gave the College the option to indicate that students did not represent a threat to the institution.
Hanover native Andrew Tefft’s arrest caused a fractured arm bone, among other injuries. In the court orders, Mace questioned the College’s claim that the 65 students arrested were a threat, claims made by the College in an attempt to allow the graduating seniors to attend the commencement because they, specifically, were deemed not a threat to the College. He admonished the College for attempting to bypass court procedures to modify the bail orders it initially sought. Then, on July 17, 2024, Henry Klementowicz, the deputy legal director for the American Civil Liberties Union of New Hampshire, wrote in an email to Beilock and University of New Hampshire president James Dean Jr. to “express concerns” about Dartmouth and UNH’s response. In the letter, the ACLU states that the College’s reaction “has profound implications for free expression on college campuses in New Hampshire.” Furthermore, to quote the Joint Dartmouth Affinity Groups letter, “the consequences of the arrests were experienced inequitably.”
Beilock offers neither transparency nor empathy. Her promotion of “institutional restraint” silences students and alumni, threatening progress earned through generations of collaboration between alumni, faculty, past administrators and students by not taking stances on issues that affect the most minoritized students, such as genocide. We have navigated conflict before when the South African shanties were destroyed, or when the Dimensions and Freedom Budget protests were met with questioning. In both cases, we worked through the lack of transparency and apathy as a community by protesting on united fronts.
Beilock, while circumnavigating the globe and asking alumni for money on a “Presidential Welcome Tour,” will not likely repeat her remarks to alums’ faces. But we have heard her loud and clear: alumni do not have an essential role in shaping the College’s future. She wants us to keep our wallets open and our mouths shut.
When alumni call for action, as in previous divestment movements, we draw on a legacy of leadership and the values we inherited at matriculation. Dartmouth community members feel a lifelong commitment to integrity, diversity and social responsibility. These values moved the College forward through the egregious opponents of coeducation and built the country’s premiere Native American studies program in the face of entrenched resistance. It seems that Beilock runs to alumni when she needs a check balanced’ while distancing herself from a leadership model that has served the College for decades. Including alumni allows generations of past Dartmouth students to express interest in the concerns and perspectives of concerned community members. Whose voices is she trying to silence, and to what end?
To be clear: we are not saying you must be an alum to lead Dartmouth. Look at College Presidents John Kemeny and James Freedman. Neither were alumni, yet they pushed the College forward. Kemeny stood firm on coeducation, and Freedman answered the calls to divest from South African apartheid. Yet, despite stating that she cares what alumni think, we believe that Beilock chooses to dismiss the interests of alumni based on her recent actions. Women leaders from every affinity group and decades of alumnae since coeducation have called on Beilock to change course with regard to her approach to protests expressing solidarity with Palestine. They have stated that her approach to May 1 threatened Dartmouth’s status as an enduring institution, and to us it seems that she has not accepted accountability in practice.
Despite her apologies for “community harm” and public relations appearances in the Atlantic, NPR and at the Aspen Institute, her specific actions—green-lighting the mass arrest of nonviolent protesters, injuring community members and, we believe, clamping down on down free speech—speak louder than words.
Alumni, the ACLU, state judges and others have raised legitimate concerns about the events of May 1. Alumni are not driven by nostalgia. We champion values that strengthen Dartmouth and must guide the College in the future: free speech, a community that includes all of us and the ideal that this institution is part of this world, not apart from it. As Keli’i Opulauoho ’96, a parent of a member of a member of the Class of 2026, recently wrote in the Valley News, “I have been a Dartmouth College alum longer than I have been or done anything else.” Those who retain the still North in our soul and the hill winds in our breath know that Dartmouth’s true strength lies not in the power of the few in a room but in the collective voice of our community—a voice that refuses to be sidelined.
At Dartmouth, leadership is more than about who the College president invites into the room. It is about those who round the girdled earth, those in Hanover today and those who will dare a deed tomorrow. Collectively, we are the architects upholding Dartmouth’s mission and values, shaping its direction and cementing its place as an institution that leads responsibly.
Dartmouth’s true strength lies in those who dare to demolish the walls of regressive and exclusive rooms — the same rooms and values that we suspect Beilock is protecting.
Jackelinne Claros Benitez ’24 and Yomalis Rosario ’15 are members of Dartmouth Alumni for Palestine. Unai Montes-Irueste ’98 is an alumni councilor for the Dartmouth Association of Latino Alumni. Guest columns represent the views of their author(s), which are not necessarily those of The Dartmouth.
