Former SU Alumni Association president cites reasoning for premature resignation

University chancellors come and go. Staff members and professors come and go. Even students come and go. Alumni are the only constant — they are forever.

These include both those who make the largest gifts and those with fewer financial resources who passionately give their time and talent to promote Syracuse University and create an environment in which the university’s graduates, former students, current students and friends become and stay connected to the university and each other. This is, in essence, the mission statement of the SU National Alumni Association.

As Chancellor-Elect Cantor wrote in a message to alumni, published in Syracuse Magazine:

“As alumni, you are one of the University’s most valuable links to the world. You represent a great pool of talent from which we can draw ideas and advice, as well as an intergenerational connection for students now on campus.”

In January, I reluctantly resigned as president of the alumni association and as a trustee — a position held based on being alumni president — five months before the end of my two-year term. I am sure it came as a shock to many because of my unlimited and unconditional love and devotion to SU. I did so because of my deep disappointment and frustration with what I viewed as low regard that the Board of Trustees and university administration had for the Alumni Board.

Under Larry Bashe’s leadership, and while I was president, the Alumni Board followed the explicit direction of the administration by becoming smaller and, last year, developing and implementing an Alumni Philanthropy Plan. The motivation for the plan was to leverage the resources available for and cost of fundraising by organizing and training groups of alumni volunteers to assist the development staff and reach new potential donors. The goal was to increase the “participation rate,” the percentage of alumni who donate and to serve as a foundation for future capital campaigns, instead of focusing solely on larger gifts, which the Alumni Board wholeheartedly supported.

During this process, representations were made regarding the role and importance of the Alumni Board, among others. The board was told it was “second in importance at SU only to the Board of Trustees,” and was lauded for the significant progress it had made in many areas, including most notably the philanthropy plan.

However, when it came to the new chancellor search committee, the true value of the Alumni Board became apparent. Notwithstanding its efforts and representations made to it, a member of the board was not offered a seat at the table for the most important decision to be made in the last 10 years regarding the future of the university. Various reasons were provided for the snub, but they all rang hollow:

• There were already alumni on the committee, but none who are not either large donors, trustees or professional or other staff members.
• The committee is already too large, a justification usually given to exclude otherwise deserving representation.
• Not all organizations or constituencies are represented on the committee. The board is not just a “constituency,” but rather represents the one and only Alumni Association of the university.

I was also told that no Alumni Board member served on the prior two search committees, which was not true. I learned that the then-board president served on the Chancellor Shaw search committee. I viewed the decision as a vote of “no confidence” and a repudiation of what the board accomplished the last few years. I also learned that the board was not included in the development of the new plan for Regional Councils. Is this part of a master plan to replace the Alumni Association and alumni clubs with the Regional Councils?

The questionable commitment to alumni can also be gleaned from the lack of attention to the significant staffing issues at the Office of Alumni Relations, including the failure to permanently fill the Director of Clubs position, now staffed by an interim director, and the extended delay in filling the executive director position, also currently staffed on an interim basis.

Most troubling is the decision of senior administration staff to denigrate the board by challenging its own giving and saying it will never have the prominent role it was told and believed it had unless and until it gives more, the first time total board giving had ever been raised. One must wonder if this is pure coincidence or instead part of the new master plan.

There is desperate need for a re-evaluation of the role and function of the Alumni Board, the Alumni Association, as well as the alumni clubs to ensure the voices of all alumni — not just of the largest donors or those who have “connections” — are heard loud and clear and that their efforts, and not just dollars, are encouraged and valued. It is also not too late to reaffirm the value and efforts of SU’s alumni by giving an Alumni Board member a seat on the search committee.

SU belongs to its alumni and not just to a select few who are “in power.” I still love and will support the university. I just don’t want to see the hard work, devotion and enthusiasm of its alumni volunteers the last several years to be in vain.

Brian Spector
Former president of SU Alumni Association and former member of SU’s Board of Trustees
Class of 1978