Tony
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Dec 1, 2002
- Messages
- 1,953
- Reaction score
- 57
I have purposely stayed out of the discussion of the various groups recently proposed and started, but choose to respond to Rabbitsfizz numerous posts about mail in voting. For your remembrance, here is one of them:
Very succinct BUT I have to take task with the statement that certain things have been voted on "by the membership" this patently is NOT true you only have to look at the reactions to these problems here on this board.
They have been voted on by the very small, non representational numbers of members present at the meetings IF you gave out postal voting, or even better on line, as has been requested over and over and over ad nauseum you would at least get a fair representation.
I would not necessarily get my way on measuring/hardship/ shows etc but at least I would have had my say, and I would know that the judgement was truly one of the membership instead of a few individuals lucky or determined enough to get to the meetings.
Your voting system is outdated and non-representational, it is time you upgraded it, and quickly, too.
I do truly believe that this one action alone would go a long long way to restoring peoples faith in the AMHA.
I have none at the moment, much as I respect the succinctness and professional approach of your reply it does not actually give any answers nor explain why things are the way they are.
Give us a voice.
What are you afraid of???
I cannot address the current issue since I am not currently on the board, but can give you some historical perspective, which may or may not help in your understanding. Seven years ago, when I was President of AMHA, one of my goals was to start mail in balloting because of a number of people wanting it. I personally, having attended almost every Annual Meeting/Convention since AMHA began, knew that I had on many occasions changed my mind, which was firmly set before the meeting, after hearing the discussions at the meetings, but wanted to represent my members of the Region that elected me, so investigated the ballot issue.
Unfortunately, in most instances, we found after much research that only a tiny fraction of our members participated in mail balloting for directors or even surveys. That led us to believe that same people, and likely not all of them, would be the ones voting on other issues. I don't remember the actual numbers, but I think that the usual vote was from 1% to 10% in most regions. The cost for those regional votes were somewhere in the range of $4,000, I believe, so the cost for the entire membership would likely be much more, likely in the range of $10-15,000. At the time, as now, I would imagine, we were trying to make sure that each project was self-funded so the question came, how would it be paid? After study, it was proposed that those choosing to vote "in absentia" request a ballot and pay the costs of the program. Since it would be a savings to only have people request a ballot, the assumption was that the cost would be similar to a "Regional Election" so using the amount of $4,000 and the "worst case" scenario, if 1% of our membership, or 120 people chose to "vote by mail" instead of attending the meeting, the cost per ballot would be $33. If the ballots were sent to everyone, using the cost of $15,000 and the same 120 people chose to send in ballots, the cost per ballot would have been $125. I don't recall anyone who worked on the idea at that time being in favor of it and the costs.
Of course, by now, the technology has improved greatly and perhaps the costs would be less prohibitive and there may be ways to do it. If you are a member of AMHA and want it, write your director NOW. It is less than two months from the Convention time. Write. No one is a mind reader, even your executive committee and your elected directors. Express your opinions clearly, briefly, and in writing. That way each director knows your desires and will take them to heart and physically take them to the meeting. At the current time, that is your weapon and aid. Many talk. Few write. It is human nature to take the easy route, GRIPE, rather that ACT. ACT by WRITING. If you are NOT a member of AMHA, you should be if you want to effect anything regarding the registry and the industry. If you want to have only a pet, or horses over 34", then you don't have to worry about AMHA and as Mike Want says, "God Bless".
This post is NOT an invitation for flaming or argument. It is a perspective from someone who has taken the time, money, and effort to be active for the industry. By the way, in spite of ideas to the contrary, I am not, nor have I ever been one of the "big rich farms." When I first became active on AMHA committees, I was making $17,000 as an assistant manager for a fast food restaurant, and took my vacation time to attend the meetings and national show. I sometimes clipped horse for shows at 1 in the morning after getting off work at midnight and slept in a stall at the shows because I could not afford the show AND a motel, so I understand the plight of many, many of you. I could go on, and actually did, but decided to take the judicious route and delete the remainder.
Very succinct BUT I have to take task with the statement that certain things have been voted on "by the membership" this patently is NOT true you only have to look at the reactions to these problems here on this board.
They have been voted on by the very small, non representational numbers of members present at the meetings IF you gave out postal voting, or even better on line, as has been requested over and over and over ad nauseum you would at least get a fair representation.
I would not necessarily get my way on measuring/hardship/ shows etc but at least I would have had my say, and I would know that the judgement was truly one of the membership instead of a few individuals lucky or determined enough to get to the meetings.
Your voting system is outdated and non-representational, it is time you upgraded it, and quickly, too.
I do truly believe that this one action alone would go a long long way to restoring peoples faith in the AMHA.
I have none at the moment, much as I respect the succinctness and professional approach of your reply it does not actually give any answers nor explain why things are the way they are.
Give us a voice.
What are you afraid of???
I cannot address the current issue since I am not currently on the board, but can give you some historical perspective, which may or may not help in your understanding. Seven years ago, when I was President of AMHA, one of my goals was to start mail in balloting because of a number of people wanting it. I personally, having attended almost every Annual Meeting/Convention since AMHA began, knew that I had on many occasions changed my mind, which was firmly set before the meeting, after hearing the discussions at the meetings, but wanted to represent my members of the Region that elected me, so investigated the ballot issue.
Unfortunately, in most instances, we found after much research that only a tiny fraction of our members participated in mail balloting for directors or even surveys. That led us to believe that same people, and likely not all of them, would be the ones voting on other issues. I don't remember the actual numbers, but I think that the usual vote was from 1% to 10% in most regions. The cost for those regional votes were somewhere in the range of $4,000, I believe, so the cost for the entire membership would likely be much more, likely in the range of $10-15,000. At the time, as now, I would imagine, we were trying to make sure that each project was self-funded so the question came, how would it be paid? After study, it was proposed that those choosing to vote "in absentia" request a ballot and pay the costs of the program. Since it would be a savings to only have people request a ballot, the assumption was that the cost would be similar to a "Regional Election" so using the amount of $4,000 and the "worst case" scenario, if 1% of our membership, or 120 people chose to "vote by mail" instead of attending the meeting, the cost per ballot would be $33. If the ballots were sent to everyone, using the cost of $15,000 and the same 120 people chose to send in ballots, the cost per ballot would have been $125. I don't recall anyone who worked on the idea at that time being in favor of it and the costs.
Of course, by now, the technology has improved greatly and perhaps the costs would be less prohibitive and there may be ways to do it. If you are a member of AMHA and want it, write your director NOW. It is less than two months from the Convention time. Write. No one is a mind reader, even your executive committee and your elected directors. Express your opinions clearly, briefly, and in writing. That way each director knows your desires and will take them to heart and physically take them to the meeting. At the current time, that is your weapon and aid. Many talk. Few write. It is human nature to take the easy route, GRIPE, rather that ACT. ACT by WRITING. If you are NOT a member of AMHA, you should be if you want to effect anything regarding the registry and the industry. If you want to have only a pet, or horses over 34", then you don't have to worry about AMHA and as Mike Want says, "God Bless".
This post is NOT an invitation for flaming or argument. It is a perspective from someone who has taken the time, money, and effort to be active for the industry. By the way, in spite of ideas to the contrary, I am not, nor have I ever been one of the "big rich farms." When I first became active on AMHA committees, I was making $17,000 as an assistant manager for a fast food restaurant, and took my vacation time to attend the meetings and national show. I sometimes clipped horse for shows at 1 in the morning after getting off work at midnight and slept in a stall at the shows because I could not afford the show AND a motel, so I understand the plight of many, many of you. I could go on, and actually did, but decided to take the judicious route and delete the remainder.
Last edited by a moderator:
