A letter from Mark Wilson concerning IAMHA

[Ronnie]

Let me state that I am not affiliated with IAMHA but I do believe they have some good ideas and I think they deserve equal time here. Below is a response from Mark Wilson to AMHA's Message.

Mark wondered if anyone had the nerve to post this so here ya go! He probably knew I would be dumb enough.

Ronnie

__________________________________________________________________

Mike,

You stated in your President's response to the IAMHA launch that 6 months

ago two of the IAMHA directors served as Pres and VP and AMHA. You implied

without directly saying, we were serving two masters, nothing could be

further from the truth. We were not involved with the IAMHA until after

resigning from the Executive Committee. You also wanted to know why as BOD

members, suggestions and ideas were not offered to the BOD and the AMHA.

Suzy and I both served on the Computer Committee, and I made it clear to you

personally, at the June BOD meeting, that We had not resigned from that

committee and with 18 years experience in the Information Systems field had

much expertise to bring to the table. I also told Sheryl P the same thing.

You indicated that we were welcome to continue to serve on the Computer

Committee. From that point forward I did not receive a single call or email

from the new Co-Chairs. The next thing you know, at the World Show a formal

presentation is made by Mark H. The obvious point here is input and

suggestions are not wanted and control is maintained by a select group. Is

that how a committee that is challenged with one of the most critical issues

the AMHA faced is supposed to operate.. Not one single email or phone call,

just a recommendation and a vote. Now because of the decision made by the

BOD, of which I did not support, 2007 is looking at solving a budget deficit

in the $75,000 area. Is there any wonder when I was approached by the IAMHA

and given a feel for their focus, that I wouldn't jump at the chance to be

part of a progressive group, interested in the promotion and proliferation

of The American Miniature Horse!

I would appreciate more truth regarding actual facts when you address the

masses in the future. I have given my time, dollars and expertise to the

AMHA and will continue to do so, but someone is going to have to wake up and

smell the coffee while there is still time.

This response is being sent to the BOD, I wonder if anyone will have the

nerve to post it on LB.

Regards,

Mark

 

[kaykay]

thanks for letting us see the other side ronnie. and im glad someone is finally fessing up about the financial situation at amha. if you dont admit there is a problem you cant fix it!

ronnie one more question. i was an amha for half of 2006 so i received the amha email about the egroup set up to let members know what is going on etc. to date nothing has ever been posted on it. do you know why??

thanks so much!

Kay

 

[HGFarm]

I still do not agree that running off to a FOR PROFIT organization, in which 'members' or 'part owners' or whatever people will be called should they decide to invest in it via 'membership dues' is the answer. The folks that have put together IAMHA, did so as a Limited Liability Corporation (LLC) which means if they do not want the 'membership' to vote on ANYTHING, they dont have to. It is their business, that they OWN and are responsible for financially- to make a profit for themselves as the owners, and to make ALL the decisions if they so desire to do so. There are no means to govern this business except by the owners of it. They can do whatever they want, whether you have paid dues or not, based on a 'business decision' for what they like.

I still feel that, since it was setup as an LLC, there is a hidden agenda somewhere, since I dont really know of any other horse organizations that are setup that way..... The officers/directors of this organization have TOTAL control. YOU may not have a say in their 'business' whatsoever. They do not ever have to allow anyone else to serve as an officer, or president, as they OWN it.

I do not see where Mike's letter was incorrect. Mark was serving on a committee with AMHA while he was involved in IAMHA- (computer committee). The original letter from Mark C stated they had been working on IAMHA for a year. And when did Mark W resign from the Executive Committee?

As to Mike Wilsons suggestions not being implemented? Perhaps they were not feasable? Having served on the local state board here for two years, I learn that not everyone's ideas are going to be used for particular projects. It is apparent, that the 'suggestion' that was passed, was passed by a majority vote. Why was it not turned down and another proposal presented then if the one that passed was so bad?

Ronnie, thank you for posting this letter. It is good to see others viewpoints and opinions on such matters. You were NOT stupid in doing so!!!! THANK YOU

 

[Lisa-Ruff N Tuff Minis]

I keep hearing about this being a LLC and am not saying it isnt a valid point. I am confused though as to why when some prominent members of AMHA some higher ups formed there own LLC for the GLM (and no this was NOT DONE by just one person I did see the paperwork filed with TX and saw the signatures on there) there were many in support of that LLC and actually using AMHA fund for it.

I realize these are 2 different issues but my point here is that some of those from the GLM fiasco are still active respected members of AMHA so why then does this IAMHA have to be different. Why is it so hard to believe that this group of people who formed a LLC could not still be active respected members of AMHA just like those that were involved in the GLM?(and came out unscathed) I guess it is the double standard thing that I am confused with.

Bottom line is in any business there is the insider info and the public info I do believe those on the "inside" know of financial issues that we as members are being told arent that abd of course they dont want to cause a panic that makes sense in any buisness.

However does that mean those that bring it up to the forfront are bad with bad intent or maybe just maybe that they are bringing it others so that finally issues can be dealt with?

I guess in this case time will tell but really if these people want to form a club to promote minis which is what this IAMHA seems to be at this time.. it really isnt a huge deal to me any club can open at any time and do the exact same thing this one just happens to have long time AMHA supporters backing it

 

[Tony]

Lisa, GLM was chartered as a for profit entity, 100% OWNED by AMHA. It has since been totally disbanded, so it is history, but would have been the way to go if a "B" separate division were ever decided on. Then all the costs of lawyers setting it up wouldn't have been redone. However, historically, we seem to like to pay for things over and over.

 

[Ronnie]

Lisa, GLM was chartered as a for profit entity, 100% OWNED by AMHA. It has since been totally disbanded, so it is history, but would have been the way to go if a "B" separate division were ever decided on. Then all the costs of lawyers setting it up wouldn't have been redone. However, historically, we seem to like to pay for things over and over.

AMEN!

 

[Lonesome Dove]

Thank you Ronnie for posting Mark's letter.

Mark, well said. My husband, Daniel Crider, was/is also on the computer committee. His experience is a carbon copy of Mark's. No calls, emails, letters ... nothing. Then boom ... a recomendation on an incredibly expensive software program from some unknown South African company. This recommendation did not go through the committee, did not come from the committee but guess what ... if it goes to heck in a handbasket the "committee" will get the blame.

Carla Crider