GSDCA-WDA BYLAW Change Proposal - Page 9

Judy K, what did you say that made you censored and what happened when you were censored?

I do not belong to FB or other groups like that.  I do not think it is fair to make the people go to FB to get info when one does not want to join it.

Basically I said that raising the quorum was an attempt to silence the voice of the people and that the strength of the WDA has always been with the members and this move tells me that the Board does not want membership involvement.  I said that because no one to date had given me a reasonable explanation as to why the quorum should be raised. We have only had a quorum once in the past 4-5 years and the quorum is now at 50+ so how on earth would we be able to muster 200?  My post was deleted as abusive.   I did not use offensive language or slam any individual.  It was my opinion and that's all.  Apparently they don't want to hear our opinions. 

Judy

If I did belong to WDA, I could not afford to fly and stay at a hotel just to go to the meeting.  I would have to board my dogs and they do not do well when boarded and costs a lot of money in addition.  Then have to rent a car and eat out?  Think it would be one day to fly, two days of meetings, one day to fly back.  At Least!  Geeez, what could one do there?  They would not listen to one person anyway.  Too little time to get anything done anyway.

Just work our dogs and trial locally.  Then if things get too bad, leave and go somewhere else.  Or do something else with your dogs.  Sad.

The board wants to raise the quorum to 200 members from 50.  They state that 26 members should not speak for the membership. If they raise the quorum to 200 members, 200 members have never attended any event coinciding with the annual membership meeting.  If you don't have 200 members, you have no meeting.  You have no meeting, the membership has NO say.   The membership has no say, where are the checks and balances of the board?  26 is better than 0.  The board will state that 200 members have attended NASS, but have no facts to prove this, only a statement by them saying it happens.  If the board could determine a way for the membership to vote via proxy or electronically, then 200 members would be realistic.  At 50 members the GSDCA-WDA quorum is at around 4.5% of the membership, the GSDCA uses 75 members as their quorum number which is aroud 3% of their membership.  Vote NO !

I did not vote on any of the Bylaw changes simply because of a few reasons,  One: The board makes a lot of the decisions at the 3 meeting they attend before the NASS.  Two: What they can't take care of at those meeting they take care of on conference calls.  Three:  The executive committee take care of the day to day and last but not least if they really need something important changed like a bylaw or a election they mail a ballot to you just as they did with this vote.  So by the time the Nass roll around there is not much to vote on.


What is more important is why we have appox 61 clubs and we only had 35 trials nation wide in 2011?  Out of those 35 trials 9 clubs did two trials and one did 3.  In Region 3 (S.E. Region) where we have 16 clubs, 9 of them did not host a trial and some of them have not hosted a trial in years.  Maybe the membership meeting should be held at GSDCA-WDA National Championship?   Hmm, to small a venue for you guys Shit it's lucky if it get 50 people total spectators and competitors combined.   My point is lets vote on something to make IPO and breed surveys and even show important in this organization and not worry about what constitute a quorum because the way the system is set up all the admin crap is taken care of before the NASS take place anyway.


Wallace 

That great conference call and how you were going to be kept informed?  Looked at the site and the conference call number is for last month.  What about this month?  Even if you know the number, what is the date or has it passed by? Just wondering about keeping you informed.

The board of directors SERVES the membership.  WDA Officers serve at the pleasure of the Directors, and the Directors serve at the pleasure of the Membership.  (At least that is my current understanding of Colorado law.)

WDA's great strength lies in the power of the individual member/voter.  Members who choose not to vote, one way or another, willfully surrender (like Wallace) their democratic rights to shape their nonprofit organization's future.  

Wallace's potty mouth represents bad behavior that simply needs to be corrected within the dog sport.  He would certainly not tolerate similar behavior from any of his dogs.  Why should the WDA membership?

There is still a window of opportunity for WDA members to caste their votes.  Please don't just belly roll.  Think.  And speak your mind.

Keep the membership power to shape the WDA.    

Vote NO to all bylaw amendments.

I'm not concern whether or not we have a quorum at the Nass, I'm not concern if the secretary position is voted or appointed, I'm also not concern about how long anyone stays in office.  What I am concern about is why this organization was started in the first place and that is "WORKING" Dog Association!  The GSDCA-"WORKING" Dog Association is always bringing up the rear when it comes to "WORKING" and all we can spend our time with is who's running what.  In your case Mrs. Kirkwood it's your mouth.

No matter what happens it's doesn't interfere with what I do and that is Schutzhund, VPG, IPO or whatever else you want to call it.  What does interfer with what I do and others like me is the lack of trials GSDCA-"WORKING" Dog Association offer it's members to the point that we had to change our score book to accommodate UScA so that our member can trial in their organization.  UScA members is not trying to trial at GSDCA-"WORKING" Dog Association trials.  I wonder why? 


As far as the sport running me out I don't think so! I'm good at what I do  and that's schutzhund,  I also do a lot of work for the sport. So Mrs. Kirkwood what are you good at other than running your mouth?  Last I checked it was you not me that was ran out of office,  It was you not me that the members didn't want.

Where did you find out about about the conference call?  Did you receive an email and when did you receive it?  It was not on the web page.  If I go to the site one way there is info about a meeting in PA, I think and another way it shows the March call.  So odd!