The following description was offered to inform Hamline Oracle readers about the college's Board of Trustees:
“There is sometimes a misunderstanding about the role of the Board. Often students believe that the Board of Trustees manages or leads the university, but in reality, they empower President Miller to do that,” Radtke said. “[The board has] fiduciary responsibility for the overall mission, policy and direction of the University’s academic and educational purposes.”
The responsibility of managing Hamline is delegated to President Miller, the university’s chief executive officer, who then reports to the board.
“Like any nonprofit or 501(c)(3), number one: The organization’s are mission driven. And so a trustee has to be very wedded, and I would say, be passionate about the mission because you don’t get paid as trustees… People accept a lot of responsibility governing a nonprofit,” Schiebel said. “The trustees are there to not only review but support and ensure that President Miller has what she needs to be an effective and impactful president.”
Hamline’s Board of Trustees is composed of Hamline alum, St. Paul and Minnesota community members and others. They meet three times per year.
Most members serve on a committee within the board. These committees meet the week before the full Board and bring forth any recommendations that need discussion or approval.
The committees cover the topics of academic and student affairs, finance, facilities, investment and trusteeship. There is also an executive Committee which includes the Board officers and committee chairs.
In the past two years the role of the board has not changed, with the frequency and mode of their meetings being an evolving factor. Board meetings have moved to virtual platforms due to the COVID-19 pandemic with their last meeting this fall operating in a hybrid form.
This description, clearly posed for a quick read and digestion by the general public begs the question as to what board members and/or staff tell prospective members about the board job. Foe one, I would certainly hope there is a lot more substance. I would likely quibble over the number and "rightness" of the number of committees. And most important, I would actively debate the idea that the board "empowers" the exec to lead the organization.
What's your thought?