Voting Yes

Preserves Our Neighborhoods

  • Promotes Substantial Property Investments

    Promotes Substantial Property Investments

  • Keeps Students Close to Campus

    Keeps Students Close to Campus

  • Protects Our Quiet Neighborhoods

    Protects Our Quiet Neighborhoods

  • Preserves the Property Tax Base

    Preserves the Property Tax Base

  • Improves Safety For Our Children and Seniors

    Improves Safety For Our Children and Seniors

  • Reduces Traffic and Helps the Environment

    Reduces Traffic and Helps the Environment

“It is, in some sense, the case of every person among us who has property of which he may be stripped, for the question is simply this, 'Shall our State Legislatures be allowed to take that which is not their own, to turn it from its original use, and apply it to such ends and purposes as they in their discretion shall see fit!’”
Daniel Webster’s, March 1818 Preoration in Dartmouth vs. Woodward SCOTUS

Testimonial - Peter Frederick

“Article 9 proposes allowing everyone in the I zone, which is the neighborhoods essentially intertwined with campus, to build and manage student housing if they can meet the standard facility safety regulations set by the town.  This is commonplace in many other college towns.  By giving Dartmouth special veto rights, the current ordinance is achieving the opposite of the town’s stated goal of improving the life safety of its citizens.  Dartmouth is effectively restricting the supply of “on campus” student housing that they do not own, but the demand from students who wish to live together remains –  they are already moving out into the residential neighborhoods where Dartmouth has no oversight at all.  As a result, the health and safety hazards have increased, not decreased, because when students live, socialize and drive off campus it is both a greater nuisance and health and safety risk to the community. 

Zoning is not the appropriate avenue for Dartmouth to oversee student housing.   Dartmouth does not and should not have the right through zoning to oversee apartments that its students rent which are owned by private individuals.  From the towns perspective:

  • Facility safety for student housing should be set by the planning, zoning and code enforcement office of the town and regulated through regular inspections (as is already happening).
  • Student behavior, on the other hand, is more effectively managed through the enforcement of law by HPD. 
  • The proponents believe that the town has a legal and moral obligation to provide these services to all citizens, regardless of their status as students or I zone land owners.
  • If Dartmouth needs to have more oversight, they should enforce the student handbook through the Dean’s office.
  • The owners of these private houses in the I zone pay substantial town taxes, a portion of which should be used to cover safety and security services.



– Peter Frederick

Hanover Resident

Dartmouth Alumni Award Winner

Former Mayor of Fenwick Island, Delaware

Testimonial - Hanover Resident

“Why does the College want special rights and privileges to effectively control the economic value of Greek owned private property?  

  1. Dartmouth wants to own these houses to build the College system and do away with the Greeks.
  2. If the current members of the Greek system that own their houses cannot live up to a threat to go independent or rent to another Greek organization on their own terms, the entire system will suffer because the College will be dictating, not negotiating or working together in good faith.

This is also a matter of equal protection under the law.  For many of its supporters, it is out of a sense of fairness and justice in how we choose to treat each other equally, even when we disagree or even dislike the people whose rights we are protecting.  

30 or more adult men and women of Hanover have gone out of their way to petition this amendment in order to support the rights of the Greek system as a whole to exist because they see the writing on the wall is that the system will go away if you don’t all go out and vote.  They include professors, large private employers, alums who were affiliated men and women.  Only one was associated with either SAE and AD – this is not a referendum on AD or SAE.  We are all in this together.

Please take a moment to consider the true nature of this vote, for it is more. We have no greater love for an institution than for Dartmouth College, but neither the Greek houses nor Hanover property owners need kneel to the local liege lord to maintain the same basic rights and privileges as our neighbors.  Vote your conscience.”
– Long-Time Hanover Resident and Dartmouth Alumnus