I would like to thank Alison Elrod, the editor of the MHW for being so kind to email me and help to get the the "base of the withers" by-law amendment questions sorted out.
This is her original email to me:
Hi Nikki,
I had been alerted as to some of the discussion going on at Lil Beginnings and just wanted to share some more info with you. I realize you have been looking at the rule process very closely and appreciate your openness and concern for the organization. I hope that this information will help clear up the rule regarding the base of the withers and would be happy to answer any further questions you may have.
_________________________________________
The rule to change measurement to the base of the withers failed through Show Rules in June 2007 as noted in the minutes. This means that the Show Rules committee did not think it was a good idea. HOWEVER…it also was sent to Bylaws and because it was submitted that way, it automatically goes to the membership for vote with a recommendation to pass or fail from the Bylaws committee. At that point in time the membership can do as they wish – they can pass something they have been recommended to fail, and they can fail something they have been recommended to pass. So…this was brought up by Bylaws for a membership vote at the 2008 Annual Meeting, and the membership voted to pass it.
Show Rules GR-020-E, page 69 #737
The height verification of the Miniature Horse shall be determined by measuring the vertical distance from the base of the withers last hairs of the mane to the ground with the front two (2) legs vertical and in line with or parallel to the measuring device, and the back of the hocks in a vertical line with the horse’s buttocks. The last hairs of the mane refers to the last coarse (longer) hair of the horse’s mane. Any softer body hair, left longer so as to be considered as an extension of the mane, should be differentiated from mane hair and should not be included as part of the mane when measuring. The horse’s head and neck shall be in a natural position. The animal must stand squarely on all four (4) feet. No height allowance will be made for excessive foot. After the horse is set up for measuring by the handler, said handler may not touch the horse, i.e. stretching the head up forward, moving the feet; touching the back or pressing down on any part of the back until the measurer removes the measuring stick.
(Amended 2-21-03, effective 01-04)
Note: This will also change Article XI, Section 4 (sent to Bylaws) and the Standard of Perfection
Failed.
Bylaws
Susan Arnold reported the Bylaws committee met and did have a quorum. The committee has discussed implementing a Code of Conduct and Code of Ethics and will bring recommendations to the Board at a later date. All Bylaws submitted will be presented to the membership during the 2008 Annual Meeting.
The minutes from the 2008 Annual Meeting will reflect that this Bylaw passed by the vote of the membership.
Please feel free to let me know if you have any other questions I can help out with.
Sincerely,
Alison Elrod
Editor
Miniature Horse World
[email protected]
www.amha.org
The following is my response in questions and her reply to those questions:
Hi Alison,
Thank you for being so kind and taking the time to email me with this information. I want to apologize to you and anyone on your staff and the AMHA office if I have offended anyone for questioning the validity of the proposals. It certainly was not my intention to shine a bad light on anyone.
I did see this information on the minutes. I did see where the proposal failed as it was presented as a rule change instead of a by-law change. My question - wouldn't it then need to be re-submitted as a proposal for a by-law change? And if it was re-submitted as a by-law change it should have come under the Rules and Regs heading of the minutes on page 16.
[Alison Elrod] Rules and Regs and Bylaws are two totally separate committees. This is where some of the confusion may be stemming from. If you look at the current 2008 Rule Book, the Rules and Regs committee monitors anything on pages 30-58. Bylaws monitor the material on pages 5-29. And Show Rules monitors anything on pages 68-144. (Let me know if you need a copy of the rule book – they are free for members. We will post it online as well within the next two weeks).
The proposal was originally submitted to Show Rules and Bylaws Committee as it affected the Rule Book material monitored by both committees. (therefore it would not have needed to be resubmitted) Anything that is submitted as a Bylaw automatically moves forward for membership vote with a recommendation to pass or fail from the Bylaws committee. The Show Rules committee however has the option to fail a proposal which leaves it “dead on the floor” at the June meeting. By Show Rules failing a proposal, it does not stop it from moving forward with Bylaws. It merely indicates that the Show Rules committee does not recommend this proposal.
This being said, the Bylaw change to measure at the base of the withers is what was passed by the membership. The fact that Show Rules failed the proposal did not even matter at the 2008 Annual Meeting. Every Bylaw change that is too be discussed at the June Board Meeting is posted online approximately 30 days prior to that meeting. They have since been removed as they are no longer valid but I could email you a copy if you would like to review them.
As the minutes are written, it would appear that the path the proposal took to get to the 2008 meeting was a bit ambiguous. And this I believe is why questions are being raised.
What I am seeing is that the original proposal failed, on page 5, BUT, at the bottom of that proposal is a note: "This will also change Article XI, Section 4 (sent to Bylaws) and the Standard of Perfection.) Then, it is referenced on page 2, under Bylaws, that "All Bylaws submitted will be presented to the membership during the 2008 Annual Meeting.) The bases appear to be covered doing it this way, but to avoid confusion and question, it should have been added as a by-law change on page 16. I am sure this was probably an oversight but would have eliminated alot of questions if it had been done this way. [Alison Elrod]
This reference only means that if Show Rules HAD passed this with their approval, it affected more than just Show Rules content. It also had implications towards the Bylaws and Standard of Perfection. If Show Rules had passed this it would have still had to go back to Bylaws as their recommendation to the membership for vote at the Annual Meeting. This topic would NOT have been brought up by Show Rules at the Annual Meeting. It would still have come from Bylaws with the support/or lack thereof of the Show Rules Committee.
The Bylaws are not listed in the June minutes as they were posted online 30 days prior and ALL move forward to the Membership for vote. They are also included in the December Miniature Horse World 60 days prior to the Annual Meeting. Page 16 refers to the Rules and Regs proposals which as I mentioned are totally separate from Bylaws.
The following is my own summation (Nikki):
To sum this up - There are three different committees, Rules and Regs, Bylaws and Show Rules. (In reading the minutes, I confused the Rules and Regs posting with the Bylaws. I thought the bylaws were surely posted in the minutes, a reasonable assumtion, so thought the Rules and Regs was where they had been put.) It was stated that the proposal was submitted to both the Show Rules and By-Laws Committees. As stated in the paragraph from Alison just above - "The Bylaws are not listed in the June minutes as they were posted online 30 days prior and ALL move forward to the Membership for vote."
They were also included in the December MHW as stated above.
I personally do still have a problem with the fact that the Bylaw proposals are not listed in the June minutes as the Show Rule proposals are, but since they were posted on line and in the MHW, everything appears to be valid.
I personally am going to let this rest as I feel my own questions have been answered and hope that it helps to answer others' questions as well.
Again, my thanks to Alison.
Nikki Faubus
This is her original email to me:
Hi Nikki,
I had been alerted as to some of the discussion going on at Lil Beginnings and just wanted to share some more info with you. I realize you have been looking at the rule process very closely and appreciate your openness and concern for the organization. I hope that this information will help clear up the rule regarding the base of the withers and would be happy to answer any further questions you may have.
_________________________________________
The rule to change measurement to the base of the withers failed through Show Rules in June 2007 as noted in the minutes. This means that the Show Rules committee did not think it was a good idea. HOWEVER…it also was sent to Bylaws and because it was submitted that way, it automatically goes to the membership for vote with a recommendation to pass or fail from the Bylaws committee. At that point in time the membership can do as they wish – they can pass something they have been recommended to fail, and they can fail something they have been recommended to pass. So…this was brought up by Bylaws for a membership vote at the 2008 Annual Meeting, and the membership voted to pass it.
Show Rules GR-020-E, page 69 #737
The height verification of the Miniature Horse shall be determined by measuring the vertical distance from the base of the withers last hairs of the mane to the ground with the front two (2) legs vertical and in line with or parallel to the measuring device, and the back of the hocks in a vertical line with the horse’s buttocks. The last hairs of the mane refers to the last coarse (longer) hair of the horse’s mane. Any softer body hair, left longer so as to be considered as an extension of the mane, should be differentiated from mane hair and should not be included as part of the mane when measuring. The horse’s head and neck shall be in a natural position. The animal must stand squarely on all four (4) feet. No height allowance will be made for excessive foot. After the horse is set up for measuring by the handler, said handler may not touch the horse, i.e. stretching the head up forward, moving the feet; touching the back or pressing down on any part of the back until the measurer removes the measuring stick.
(Amended 2-21-03, effective 01-04)
Note: This will also change Article XI, Section 4 (sent to Bylaws) and the Standard of Perfection
Failed.
Bylaws
Susan Arnold reported the Bylaws committee met and did have a quorum. The committee has discussed implementing a Code of Conduct and Code of Ethics and will bring recommendations to the Board at a later date. All Bylaws submitted will be presented to the membership during the 2008 Annual Meeting.
The minutes from the 2008 Annual Meeting will reflect that this Bylaw passed by the vote of the membership.
Please feel free to let me know if you have any other questions I can help out with.
Sincerely,
Alison Elrod
Editor
Miniature Horse World
[email protected]
www.amha.org
The following is my response in questions and her reply to those questions:
Hi Alison,
Thank you for being so kind and taking the time to email me with this information. I want to apologize to you and anyone on your staff and the AMHA office if I have offended anyone for questioning the validity of the proposals. It certainly was not my intention to shine a bad light on anyone.
I did see this information on the minutes. I did see where the proposal failed as it was presented as a rule change instead of a by-law change. My question - wouldn't it then need to be re-submitted as a proposal for a by-law change? And if it was re-submitted as a by-law change it should have come under the Rules and Regs heading of the minutes on page 16.
[Alison Elrod] Rules and Regs and Bylaws are two totally separate committees. This is where some of the confusion may be stemming from. If you look at the current 2008 Rule Book, the Rules and Regs committee monitors anything on pages 30-58. Bylaws monitor the material on pages 5-29. And Show Rules monitors anything on pages 68-144. (Let me know if you need a copy of the rule book – they are free for members. We will post it online as well within the next two weeks).
The proposal was originally submitted to Show Rules and Bylaws Committee as it affected the Rule Book material monitored by both committees. (therefore it would not have needed to be resubmitted) Anything that is submitted as a Bylaw automatically moves forward for membership vote with a recommendation to pass or fail from the Bylaws committee. The Show Rules committee however has the option to fail a proposal which leaves it “dead on the floor” at the June meeting. By Show Rules failing a proposal, it does not stop it from moving forward with Bylaws. It merely indicates that the Show Rules committee does not recommend this proposal.
This being said, the Bylaw change to measure at the base of the withers is what was passed by the membership. The fact that Show Rules failed the proposal did not even matter at the 2008 Annual Meeting. Every Bylaw change that is too be discussed at the June Board Meeting is posted online approximately 30 days prior to that meeting. They have since been removed as they are no longer valid but I could email you a copy if you would like to review them.
As the minutes are written, it would appear that the path the proposal took to get to the 2008 meeting was a bit ambiguous. And this I believe is why questions are being raised.
What I am seeing is that the original proposal failed, on page 5, BUT, at the bottom of that proposal is a note: "This will also change Article XI, Section 4 (sent to Bylaws) and the Standard of Perfection.) Then, it is referenced on page 2, under Bylaws, that "All Bylaws submitted will be presented to the membership during the 2008 Annual Meeting.) The bases appear to be covered doing it this way, but to avoid confusion and question, it should have been added as a by-law change on page 16. I am sure this was probably an oversight but would have eliminated alot of questions if it had been done this way. [Alison Elrod]
This reference only means that if Show Rules HAD passed this with their approval, it affected more than just Show Rules content. It also had implications towards the Bylaws and Standard of Perfection. If Show Rules had passed this it would have still had to go back to Bylaws as their recommendation to the membership for vote at the Annual Meeting. This topic would NOT have been brought up by Show Rules at the Annual Meeting. It would still have come from Bylaws with the support/or lack thereof of the Show Rules Committee.
The Bylaws are not listed in the June minutes as they were posted online 30 days prior and ALL move forward to the Membership for vote. They are also included in the December Miniature Horse World 60 days prior to the Annual Meeting. Page 16 refers to the Rules and Regs proposals which as I mentioned are totally separate from Bylaws.
The following is my own summation (Nikki):
To sum this up - There are three different committees, Rules and Regs, Bylaws and Show Rules. (In reading the minutes, I confused the Rules and Regs posting with the Bylaws. I thought the bylaws were surely posted in the minutes, a reasonable assumtion, so thought the Rules and Regs was where they had been put.) It was stated that the proposal was submitted to both the Show Rules and By-Laws Committees. As stated in the paragraph from Alison just above - "The Bylaws are not listed in the June minutes as they were posted online 30 days prior and ALL move forward to the Membership for vote."
They were also included in the December MHW as stated above.
I personally do still have a problem with the fact that the Bylaw proposals are not listed in the June minutes as the Show Rule proposals are, but since they were posted on line and in the MHW, everything appears to be valid.
I personally am going to let this rest as I feel my own questions have been answered and hope that it helps to answer others' questions as well.
Again, my thanks to Alison.
Nikki Faubus
