This is a placeholder text
Group text
by Diatbda on 02 October 2009 - 23:10
Nia,
I'm not completely inaccurate. Although the 1993 EB Motion described mail ballots. I believe because of the financial impact with possible implications to our IRS tax status Johannes' proposal should be presented with the following guidelines:
May 17, 1993 Executive Board Meeting.
Executive Mail Ballots. Steve Robinson moved, Kay Koerner seconded that all Executive Board mail ballots contain, at a minimum, the following information;
1) The reason for the ballot, including a brief description of the issue.
2) If a change from the status quo, the reason for the requested change
3) Support, including documentation, if necessary
4) Any impact on the organization or its personnel
5) Any impact on USA's budget or financial projections
It is further proposed that responsibility for the above be place on the person, persons, or committee requesting the ballot.
After discussion. Roll Call #10 MOTION PASSED, 21 yes, 0 no
Diane Madigan
Lifetime Member
National Secretary 1999-2004
GSD Lover Thirty Years
Working on becoming a Mali Lover
I'm not completely inaccurate. Although the 1993 EB Motion described mail ballots. I believe because of the financial impact with possible implications to our IRS tax status Johannes' proposal should be presented with the following guidelines:
May 17, 1993 Executive Board Meeting.
Executive Mail Ballots. Steve Robinson moved, Kay Koerner seconded that all Executive Board mail ballots contain, at a minimum, the following information;
1) The reason for the ballot, including a brief description of the issue.
2) If a change from the status quo, the reason for the requested change
3) Support, including documentation, if necessary
4) Any impact on the organization or its personnel
5) Any impact on USA's budget or financial projections
It is further proposed that responsibility for the above be place on the person, persons, or committee requesting the ballot.
After discussion. Roll Call #10 MOTION PASSED, 21 yes, 0 no
Diane Madigan
Lifetime Member
National Secretary 1999-2004
GSD Lover Thirty Years
Working on becoming a Mali Lover
by Mystere on 03 October 2009 - 00:10
Diane,
Yes, you ARE still inaccurate. You noted it yourself--this involved MAIL BALLOTS among the EB members. Further, it is NOT a bylaw; it is an EB resolution.
I am really not going to waste my time responding further.
Yes, you ARE still inaccurate. You noted it yourself--this involved MAIL BALLOTS among the EB members. Further, it is NOT a bylaw; it is an EB resolution.
I am really not going to waste my time responding further.
by Diatbda on 03 October 2009 - 11:10
Okay Nia, don't respond,
What would the BENEFITS be to Board members and delegates by NOT GIVING reason for change, impact on organization, and impact on USA's budget or financial projections?
This information is not readily available on the floor at the General Board Meeting. As I stated before, John Koerner was the Bylaw Chair up until this current administration, changes with such an impact on our IRS status, disenfranchising a good percentage of our members, and changes that might not be in the best interest of the German Shepherd Dog always came with enough information for everyone to make an informed decision.
Now please don't waste anytime going back through old Agendas and get with Johannes for information on this proposal.
Before this current administration clubs also got proposed Bylaw Amendments by the second week in September. It was helpful to discuss the changes at regional meetings and with the clubs. Why is there such pressure to get delegate letters in to the Secretary 30 days before the meeting when the Agenda and Bylaw Changes come after that deadline?
What is the member benifit by not providing information for an informed vote?
Oh never mind, don't respond to that either,
Out to track,
Diane Madigan
What would the BENEFITS be to Board members and delegates by NOT GIVING reason for change, impact on organization, and impact on USA's budget or financial projections?
This information is not readily available on the floor at the General Board Meeting. As I stated before, John Koerner was the Bylaw Chair up until this current administration, changes with such an impact on our IRS status, disenfranchising a good percentage of our members, and changes that might not be in the best interest of the German Shepherd Dog always came with enough information for everyone to make an informed decision.
Now please don't waste anytime going back through old Agendas and get with Johannes for information on this proposal.
Before this current administration clubs also got proposed Bylaw Amendments by the second week in September. It was helpful to discuss the changes at regional meetings and with the clubs. Why is there such pressure to get delegate letters in to the Secretary 30 days before the meeting when the Agenda and Bylaw Changes come after that deadline?
What is the member benifit by not providing information for an informed vote?
Oh never mind, don't respond to that either,
Out to track,
Diane Madigan
by Christopher Smith on 03 October 2009 - 19:10
Is it their plan to go back 30+ years and severe all ties with folks that have worked hard to make this organization what it is today?
Why not? That’s what they did to the longtime members that had “alternative” breeds.
Is this for the good of the GSD or for the good of some USA Board member and their private interests?
Of course not! This is a clumsy attempt to get rid of the WDA. And once the WDA is gone USCA will have the power to do want they want.
USCA is has been doing these types of maneuvers to for the last few years. But, because it didn’t affect most GSD folks no one paid attention. But now it seems as if the snake has begun to eat its own tail.
Check out this message from the president of the AWMA about USCA’s latest stunt that attempts every other to screw every other breed club in the AWDF.
At the general board meeting of the AWDF in May, there was a motion made as follows: All AWDF score books must be acquired from their specific AWDF member sport/breed club with the exception of the sporting clubs (Mondioring, LV/DVG, etc) in order to retain the breed identification in the AWDF score book, otherwise the breed ID will be listed in the AWDF score book as MIX BREED. This motion passed unanimously. Subsequent to the vote, all of the AWDF clubs were sent wording on implementation and suggestions on materials to add to their scorebook applications to minimize any confusion about the decision. The AWMA has added this material to their scorebook application and a post was made to the discussion board about the motion. Subsequent to this vote, USCA has decided to offer a second non-AWDF scorebook to their members, and this scorebook lists the dog’s breed. To the best of my knowledge there has not been a posting of a vote or mechanism for the decision by USCA, but there is a change to their scorebook application that can be found here: http://germanshepherddog.com/members/forms/Scorebook%20application.pdf.
There are a couple of things that everyone should be aware of about these new USCA-only scorebooks. They cannot be used at any events other than those sponsored by USCA. If you have one of these books and want to enter any other club’s trials, including AWMA trials, the USCA-only book will not be recognized and you would need to get an AWDF or DVG book. This process negates the overall initial attempt by AWDF to have one scorebook (if at all possible) per dog.
Other things of importance to consider are:
1. AWMA has always issued AWDF scorebooks.
2. If you wish to have your dog’s breed listed in an AWDF book, and you have a Malinois, that book must be issued by AWMA, USMRA or DVG. NARA is currently a guest member of AWDF, and if they are voted in as full members and choose to use AWDF scorebooks, that would be another option. It is also required that you have an AWDF scorebook to enter the AWDF Championship.
3. If you wish to enter USCA trials with a scorebook issued by any club other than USCA, you must send your scorebook to them to be stamped. This cost was recently doubled and the fee is $10 for USCA members and $40 for non-members. USCA is the only organization within AWDF that requires stamping.
Anne Camper
Why not? That’s what they did to the longtime members that had “alternative” breeds.
Is this for the good of the GSD or for the good of some USA Board member and their private interests?
Of course not! This is a clumsy attempt to get rid of the WDA. And once the WDA is gone USCA will have the power to do want they want.
USCA is has been doing these types of maneuvers to for the last few years. But, because it didn’t affect most GSD folks no one paid attention. But now it seems as if the snake has begun to eat its own tail.
Check out this message from the president of the AWMA about USCA’s latest stunt that attempts every other to screw every other breed club in the AWDF.
At the general board meeting of the AWDF in May, there was a motion made as follows: All AWDF score books must be acquired from their specific AWDF member sport/breed club with the exception of the sporting clubs (Mondioring, LV/DVG, etc) in order to retain the breed identification in the AWDF score book, otherwise the breed ID will be listed in the AWDF score book as MIX BREED. This motion passed unanimously. Subsequent to the vote, all of the AWDF clubs were sent wording on implementation and suggestions on materials to add to their scorebook applications to minimize any confusion about the decision. The AWMA has added this material to their scorebook application and a post was made to the discussion board about the motion. Subsequent to this vote, USCA has decided to offer a second non-AWDF scorebook to their members, and this scorebook lists the dog’s breed. To the best of my knowledge there has not been a posting of a vote or mechanism for the decision by USCA, but there is a change to their scorebook application that can be found here: http://germanshepherddog.com/members/forms/Scorebook%20application.pdf.
There are a couple of things that everyone should be aware of about these new USCA-only scorebooks. They cannot be used at any events other than those sponsored by USCA. If you have one of these books and want to enter any other club’s trials, including AWMA trials, the USCA-only book will not be recognized and you would need to get an AWDF or DVG book. This process negates the overall initial attempt by AWDF to have one scorebook (if at all possible) per dog.
Other things of importance to consider are:
1. AWMA has always issued AWDF scorebooks.
2. If you wish to have your dog’s breed listed in an AWDF book, and you have a Malinois, that book must be issued by AWMA, USMRA or DVG. NARA is currently a guest member of AWDF, and if they are voted in as full members and choose to use AWDF scorebooks, that would be another option. It is also required that you have an AWDF scorebook to enter the AWDF Championship.
3. If you wish to enter USCA trials with a scorebook issued by any club other than USCA, you must send your scorebook to them to be stamped. This cost was recently doubled and the fee is $10 for USCA members and $40 for non-members. USCA is the only organization within AWDF that requires stamping.
Anne Camper
by TessJ10 on 05 October 2009 - 15:10
Bumping for the new week.
Delegate designation deadline (alliteration's artful aid, eh?) is today.
Delegate designation deadline (alliteration's artful aid, eh?) is today.
by Diatbda on 07 October 2009 - 12:10
Yesterday, our club received the financial statements.
Twenty-Nine (29) days and counting down.
Has anyone received the Agenda and Bylaw Changes that are to be available to all club contacts 30 days prior to the meeting?
The notice for delegate letters is removed from the website....wonder if they have enough delegate letters in favor of Johannes' proposal to refuse future Delegate Letters once the information is delivered and processed by our clubs.
Where is the member benefit in not providing information for an informed vote?
Diane Madigan
Twenty-Nine (29) days and counting down.
Has anyone received the Agenda and Bylaw Changes that are to be available to all club contacts 30 days prior to the meeting?
The notice for delegate letters is removed from the website....wonder if they have enough delegate letters in favor of Johannes' proposal to refuse future Delegate Letters once the information is delivered and processed by our clubs.
Where is the member benefit in not providing information for an informed vote?
Diane Madigan
by Unknown on 07 October 2009 - 12:10
Contact your Regional Director. Our club contact got them from the regional Director last night.
30 days in advance.
by Diatbda on 07 October 2009 - 13:10
The Bylaws state that it is the Secretary's responsibility to mail to all clubs and EB Members.
Our club has not received the Agenda or Proposed Bylaw Changes and mailing is not the RDs responsibility.
Unknown, what region do you live in?
Diane Madigan
Our club has not received the Agenda or Proposed Bylaw Changes and mailing is not the RDs responsibility.
Unknown, what region do you live in?
Diane Madigan
by eichenluft on 07 October 2009 - 13:10
I am the contact person for my club (Northeast Region) and I received the above, sent from USA - last week.
molly
molly
by Unknown on 07 October 2009 - 13:10
New England... It was sent to the RD to forward to all club contacts.
Contact information Disclaimer Privacy Statement Copyright Information Terms of Service Cookie policy ↑ Back to top