I've been looking on the AMHA website and see there are "letters of intent" from people running for President and Executive board positions. Can someone explain how this works? It is my understanding that these positions are filled at the convention. So are these the only people running, because there is a blurb there that says they "should" submit the letter and bio 60 days in advance, but it is then followed up by a "they don't have to". I'm confused. Seems like it would be easier to make an informed decision if everyone put their information out there. So can somebody kinda fill me in on how this generally works?
Question for AMHA people
- Thread starter icspots
- Start date
Help Support Miniature Horse Talk Forums:
Riverdance
Well-Known Member
I disagree with the 60 day intention being optional. It should be mandatory, so no one can try and sneak in.
Unfortunatly there are some people who intend to run for office, but do not want others to know till the meeting.
Perhaps they are trying to get people to come to the meeting that will vote for them and therefore win. It is a shame that our officers are chosen by the selcet few who can afford to go to the meetings.
Unfortunatly there are some people who intend to run for office, but do not want others to know till the meeting.
Perhaps they are trying to get people to come to the meeting that will vote for them and therefore win. It is a shame that our officers are chosen by the selcet few who can afford to go to the meetings.
OK, I guess I don't understand why the 60 day rule if it is optional. If I'm hearing this right Riverdance, you're saying it is possible for people to basically slide in under the radar so to speak? It still doesn't make sense to me, as I as a member would be more inclined to vote for those individuals who have enough integrity to "put themselves out there for scrutiny", or are confident enough in their qualifiations to share them with people in writing. Maybe I'm still not fully understanding the process.
Echo Acres
Well-Known Member
I have never been real active in AMHA with only having minis for 4 years. The first year I was a member, the last couple I have not been. I recently sent in my AMHA membership again for 2009, and looking to get more involved by attending a few shows. I don't know a whole lot about the election for president, but sounds kind of underminded to me.
I would think that an organization of that size would want more people to vote than those who can attend the convention. This is for a person who will be running the whole organization. Why do a few people get to vote and everyone else is left out. I know some people say if you really feel strongly about an issue, rule change, or election, then make sure you are there. Well sorry folks, but that is not always possible. I for one don't have the money to take the trip for a meeting. Would love to, but can not justify it. Also I have 2 little kids that I don't have daycare for while I am gone. There are also people who are not physically able to attend as well. SO just because people can't make it to the meeting, doesn't mean they don't give a hoot about the organization. If they can send out ballots for board members, why can't the president be done the same way? Also for a position this important to the organization, darn right they should post something to all the members or public (future members) on their intentions while being in office.
To me it sounds like someone with an agenda could collect a group of supporters, show up at the convention with these people and surprise I am running and have all these people to vote me in so I win...not a good impression with me.
Hopefully someone that is up with AMHA procedures can come on here and clarify.
I would think that an organization of that size would want more people to vote than those who can attend the convention. This is for a person who will be running the whole organization. Why do a few people get to vote and everyone else is left out. I know some people say if you really feel strongly about an issue, rule change, or election, then make sure you are there. Well sorry folks, but that is not always possible. I for one don't have the money to take the trip for a meeting. Would love to, but can not justify it. Also I have 2 little kids that I don't have daycare for while I am gone. There are also people who are not physically able to attend as well. SO just because people can't make it to the meeting, doesn't mean they don't give a hoot about the organization. If they can send out ballots for board members, why can't the president be done the same way? Also for a position this important to the organization, darn right they should post something to all the members or public (future members) on their intentions while being in office.
To me it sounds like someone with an agenda could collect a group of supporters, show up at the convention with these people and surprise I am running and have all these people to vote me in so I win...not a good impression with me.
Hopefully someone that is up with AMHA procedures can come on here and clarify.
Riverdance
Well-Known Member
I am affraid that is just what is going to happen this year. I have heard rummor that someone is running for President who does not want to be known till he gets to the meeting with his followers and then spring it upon the group that is there that he is running for president. Kind of an underhanded why to try and be president.
We have marestare for auctions for AMHA where people can get on line and bid, why can we not set it up with that. Members who are watching the meeting on their computers, be able to vote? We could plug in our membership number, which could only be used once, then vote. All could be done during the weekend of meetings and a tally be announced by the last day. This would give ALL members a chance to vote and then all people running for office will have to declare 60 days before in order for all members to know who is running, and can have an educated vote. The way it is now is really unprofessional, possibly allowing the wrong people in. Kind of seems like the way elections were run in Chicago when gangsters got in to office.
I would think it would not cost much more to do it that way, just a quick program set up. Heck we have poles done all of the time here on Lilbeginnings.
I too would like to go to the meeting, especially in San Diego (want to go to the zoo), but being a Realtor, there is not much money coming in right now and I can not justify going there verses feeding my horses.
We have marestare for auctions for AMHA where people can get on line and bid, why can we not set it up with that. Members who are watching the meeting on their computers, be able to vote? We could plug in our membership number, which could only be used once, then vote. All could be done during the weekend of meetings and a tally be announced by the last day. This would give ALL members a chance to vote and then all people running for office will have to declare 60 days before in order for all members to know who is running, and can have an educated vote. The way it is now is really unprofessional, possibly allowing the wrong people in. Kind of seems like the way elections were run in Chicago when gangsters got in to office.
I would think it would not cost much more to do it that way, just a quick program set up. Heck we have poles done all of the time here on Lilbeginnings.
I too would like to go to the meeting, especially in San Diego (want to go to the zoo), but being a Realtor, there is not much money coming in right now and I can not justify going there verses feeding my horses.
Last edited by a moderator:
Hmmm, back room, closed door deals, yep sounds like the old days in politics. I just can't understand that with the number of people who have viewed this thread that SOMEONE doesn't know enough about what is going on to enlighten us. Surely somebody on the AMHA board has some integrity besides those few that have actually been upfront with the membership as a whole. I really don't think I'm fully understanding this, because if it is, as it appears on the surface there is alot of really unethical activity going on with our Association, and I'd like to believe that it really isn't all that prevelant.
C
C.A.R.E.
Guest
The members of C.A.R.E. are in agreement with everything said on this post, and would like to inform everyone interested that we are again in the process of re-submitting our amendment to vote by mail or internet ballot.
For those of you that don't know the background, this amendment was submitted to every officer and director separately, well in advance of the June, 2008, Board of Directors meeting. We asked the directors only to submit our amendment to allow the membership an opportunity to vote at the 2009 Annual Meeting. This could have been done within the powers given to the Board for a marjority vote of the directors. See Article VI, Section 4 (E). Not one director would even present our amendment to the Board at the meeting.
I am including our amendment sent to the Board at the end of this post. Please note that the amendment includes a suggested method of paying for the cost of voting by mail or internet ballot. We are currently working on wording at this time before it is mailed to the AMHA office. We would appreciate any suggestions from AMHA members to changes in wording or any ideas you may have.
Also the new bylaw Article XIX, Section A, that went into effect on 1-1-09 now requires, "All proposed bylaw changes must be presented with fifteen (15) co-signatures of active AMHA members." We do have the required 15 signatures already, but would appreciate any of you that would like to join us in supporting the amendment to allow the membership to vote and take part in the decisions that AMHA makes. The final wording of the amendment will be posted here on L'il Beginnings before we mail it off to the AMHA office.
As to the comments about the new bylaw Article IX, Section 4, that went into effect on 1-1-09 that states that "By two months prior to the Annual Meeting each year, any eligable Director (including those to be seated) who wish to run for an office SHOULD submit a biographical sketch to the AMHA National Office." C.A.R.E. will also be submitting an ammendment to this bylaw, changing only the word "SHOULD" to "MUST". If any of you would like to support this amendment as one of the co-signers, we welcome you to join us in this also.
To give some additional information as to the Article IX, Section 4 amendment, it was submitted by Sheryl Peterson, Director at Large, with the original amendment with the word MUST instead of SHOULD. This was listed on the amha.org website as C/Documents and Settings/alison/My Documents/Alison's Documents/Website/bylaw impact statement for june 2007.doc. The word MUST was replaced by the word SHOULD sometime between the June 2007 Board meeting and the printing of the amendments to be voted on at the 2008 Annual meeting in the Horse World (see December 2007 issue, page 172) We can find no mention in any Board minutes why or when the wording was changed.
PLEASE NOTE: For any AMHA member in good standing that is wishing to have their name added to these proposals/ammendments, please send a private message or email and include your full name, AMHA member number, full mailing address and email address to contact you. We are currently waiting to hear back from Kristy at AMHA on a couple of questions we had in regards to properly submitting these. We want to make sure it is done correctly.
We agree with comments made on this post, that all directors MUST submit a biography if they plan to run for office at least two months prior to the Annual meeting. This will certainly be necessary if the membership is ever allowed to vote by mail or internet ballots. Amending a bylaw that does not give a complete and definate directive is a waste of time and money.
We have also heard the rumor that one person is planning to run for president as a nominee from the floor and has not declared his intentions. We should all take notice of the bios submitted and the ones that run as nominees from the floor, with a "surprise" announcement. I believe at this time that only three directors have declared to run for president and announced their intent on the AMHA website.
Again, we appreciate all suggestions on writing these two bylaw changes. We also believe if there is any one issue that will help re-build the memberships interest and participation in AMHA it is allowing the entire membership to have a vote, without having to personally attend the meeting and pay $25.00 to vote.
The C.A.R.E. Group
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[SIZE=10pt]Article VI, Section 4 Voting (A) [/SIZE]
(A) Regular Members
All Regular Members who have attained the age of ninteen (19) years as of thirty (30) days preceding such meeting and who have been Regular Members for at least six (6) months are entitled to vote on any matter before the Annual Meeting or special meeting. ADD THIS SENTENCE (Each Regular Member may vote either in person by attending the Annual Meeting, or by mail-in ballot, or by an internet vote.") Whenever in these bylaws the term member or members shall be used unless otherwise specified. It shall mean a member(s) in good standing having the right to vote.
Note: Just for clarification, that no other amendment needs to be made for Lifetime Members.
Lifetime members are included in this section, see Article IV, Section B, Which states, "For the purposes of these bylaws the term "Lifetime Members" shall be deemed to include "Regular members" except where otherwise specified."
The way to explain to the members that the Board has the power given to them in two Artilces of the Bylaws to MAKE this amendment to be voted on at the 2009 Annual Meeting.
One of the bylaws that gives the Board this power is:
Article V, Section 3 Powers of the Board
Which states, "The Board of Directors shall have the power and authority to MAKE, amend, repeal and enforce such rules and regulations, not contrary to law, the Articles of Incorporation or these Bylaws, as they may deem expedient and necessary concerning the conduct, management and activities of the Association, etc?
[SIZE=10pt]The other Bylaw that gives them the power is:[/SIZE][SIZE=10pt]Article VI, Section 4 (E) [/SIZE]
Special Measures which states in part. "Proposals to amend a Bylaw, amend the Articles of Incorporation, or dissolve the Corporation may be proposed at the Annual Meeting and voted upon at the next Annual Meeting. Proposals to amend a Bylaw, amend the Articles of Incorportion, or dissolve the corporation may be made by a petition signed by at least five (5) percent of the voting members as of the April 1st preceding the meeting, OR BY A MAJORITY OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS, "
The Board has the power to make an amendment to allow members to vote without having to attend an annual meeting. We the membership have the right to insist that the Board make this amendment in order for the 11,900 members of the 12,000 member AMHA says we have to have a voice in how our Association is operated and how our money is spent. Remember that less than 100 members including 23 directors made decisions for all of us at the 2008 Annual Meeting.[SIZE=10pt] [/SIZE]
[SIZE=10pt][/SIZE]To remove obstacles as requested.
Post all proposed amendments to bylaws, rules and regulations and show rules in their FINAL FORM as they are to be voted on at the annual meeting, in the Miniature Horse World and or official correspondence by November 15, of each year. Mail same proposed amendments to every member with ballots for voting by mail by December 1, of each year. This date will satisy the requirement of 60 day notice before the annual meeting of all proposed amendments, as per our bylaws. Return ballots to accounting firm and handle voting procedure exactly as the handling of voting for directors. Members will submit a fee with ballot to accounting firm. This fee should help offset any great expense to AMHA for mail ballots and tabulation of votes.
Accounting firm will submit the result of the votes on the amendments as passed or failed to the AMHA President no later than 10 days prior to the annual meeting. The results of the tabulation of votes will NOT be opened until the Annual Meeting is in progress. The President will read the results of the voting tabulations, after the votes of the members present and voting at the meeting have been counted for each amendment. The amendment will then be recorded as fassed or failed.
Accounting firm and AMHA office will keep results of votes on file for one year and will supply written report to any member who shall request the report.
The fee for voting by mail ballot shall not exceed $25 per voting member.
To start voting by mail, only proposed amendments by mail ballot will be implemented. As computer software becomes available, AMHA will include internet voting along with mail ballots to those members without internet access, that request to vote by mail.[SIZE=10pt]Rationale: AMHA is constantly looking for ways to increase membership. The opportunity to provide the members a chance to take part in the decisions of the association with voting by mail ballot or internet ballot, will encourage the increase in membership, and will halt the steady loss of members and the decline in horse registrations that AMHA is now facing. The entire membership will have a chance to become active in the operations of their Association. [/SIZE]
The cost of conducting the annual meeting can be drastically reduced, and save the Association quite an expense. The year end audit for the year 2007 reports that the fee for the 2007 Annual Meeting was ($41,239), forty one thousand, two hundred and thirty nine dollars. This amount of money covers the expense of roughly only a few over one hundred members including directors that attend the Annual Meeting and make the decisions for all the membership.
The fee of $25 per voting member will be eliminated when for those members who choose to vote by internet ballot, when computer software is availabe. This fee of $25 per mail ballot is necessary to help cover cost of voting tabulation, postage and printing. This fee is still equal to or less expensive for members, as currently each voting member has to pay $25 to attend the Annual Meeting in person and vote. The fee is $100 per member to attend the meeting and vote if the member does not make their reservations at least (7) days in advance of the meeting.
For those of you that don't know the background, this amendment was submitted to every officer and director separately, well in advance of the June, 2008, Board of Directors meeting. We asked the directors only to submit our amendment to allow the membership an opportunity to vote at the 2009 Annual Meeting. This could have been done within the powers given to the Board for a marjority vote of the directors. See Article VI, Section 4 (E). Not one director would even present our amendment to the Board at the meeting.
I am including our amendment sent to the Board at the end of this post. Please note that the amendment includes a suggested method of paying for the cost of voting by mail or internet ballot. We are currently working on wording at this time before it is mailed to the AMHA office. We would appreciate any suggestions from AMHA members to changes in wording or any ideas you may have.
Also the new bylaw Article XIX, Section A, that went into effect on 1-1-09 now requires, "All proposed bylaw changes must be presented with fifteen (15) co-signatures of active AMHA members." We do have the required 15 signatures already, but would appreciate any of you that would like to join us in supporting the amendment to allow the membership to vote and take part in the decisions that AMHA makes. The final wording of the amendment will be posted here on L'il Beginnings before we mail it off to the AMHA office.
As to the comments about the new bylaw Article IX, Section 4, that went into effect on 1-1-09 that states that "By two months prior to the Annual Meeting each year, any eligable Director (including those to be seated) who wish to run for an office SHOULD submit a biographical sketch to the AMHA National Office." C.A.R.E. will also be submitting an ammendment to this bylaw, changing only the word "SHOULD" to "MUST". If any of you would like to support this amendment as one of the co-signers, we welcome you to join us in this also.
To give some additional information as to the Article IX, Section 4 amendment, it was submitted by Sheryl Peterson, Director at Large, with the original amendment with the word MUST instead of SHOULD. This was listed on the amha.org website as C/Documents and Settings/alison/My Documents/Alison's Documents/Website/bylaw impact statement for june 2007.doc. The word MUST was replaced by the word SHOULD sometime between the June 2007 Board meeting and the printing of the amendments to be voted on at the 2008 Annual meeting in the Horse World (see December 2007 issue, page 172) We can find no mention in any Board minutes why or when the wording was changed.
PLEASE NOTE: For any AMHA member in good standing that is wishing to have their name added to these proposals/ammendments, please send a private message or email and include your full name, AMHA member number, full mailing address and email address to contact you. We are currently waiting to hear back from Kristy at AMHA on a couple of questions we had in regards to properly submitting these. We want to make sure it is done correctly.
We agree with comments made on this post, that all directors MUST submit a biography if they plan to run for office at least two months prior to the Annual meeting. This will certainly be necessary if the membership is ever allowed to vote by mail or internet ballots. Amending a bylaw that does not give a complete and definate directive is a waste of time and money.
We have also heard the rumor that one person is planning to run for president as a nominee from the floor and has not declared his intentions. We should all take notice of the bios submitted and the ones that run as nominees from the floor, with a "surprise" announcement. I believe at this time that only three directors have declared to run for president and announced their intent on the AMHA website.
Again, we appreciate all suggestions on writing these two bylaw changes. We also believe if there is any one issue that will help re-build the memberships interest and participation in AMHA it is allowing the entire membership to have a vote, without having to personally attend the meeting and pay $25.00 to vote.
The C.A.R.E. Group
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[SIZE=10pt]Article VI, Section 4 Voting (A) [/SIZE]
(A) Regular Members
All Regular Members who have attained the age of ninteen (19) years as of thirty (30) days preceding such meeting and who have been Regular Members for at least six (6) months are entitled to vote on any matter before the Annual Meeting or special meeting. ADD THIS SENTENCE (Each Regular Member may vote either in person by attending the Annual Meeting, or by mail-in ballot, or by an internet vote.") Whenever in these bylaws the term member or members shall be used unless otherwise specified. It shall mean a member(s) in good standing having the right to vote.
Note: Just for clarification, that no other amendment needs to be made for Lifetime Members.
Lifetime members are included in this section, see Article IV, Section B, Which states, "For the purposes of these bylaws the term "Lifetime Members" shall be deemed to include "Regular members" except where otherwise specified."
The way to explain to the members that the Board has the power given to them in two Artilces of the Bylaws to MAKE this amendment to be voted on at the 2009 Annual Meeting.
One of the bylaws that gives the Board this power is:
Article V, Section 3 Powers of the Board
Which states, "The Board of Directors shall have the power and authority to MAKE, amend, repeal and enforce such rules and regulations, not contrary to law, the Articles of Incorporation or these Bylaws, as they may deem expedient and necessary concerning the conduct, management and activities of the Association, etc?
[SIZE=10pt]The other Bylaw that gives them the power is:[/SIZE][SIZE=10pt]Article VI, Section 4 (E) [/SIZE]
Special Measures which states in part. "Proposals to amend a Bylaw, amend the Articles of Incorporation, or dissolve the Corporation may be proposed at the Annual Meeting and voted upon at the next Annual Meeting. Proposals to amend a Bylaw, amend the Articles of Incorportion, or dissolve the corporation may be made by a petition signed by at least five (5) percent of the voting members as of the April 1st preceding the meeting, OR BY A MAJORITY OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS, "
The Board has the power to make an amendment to allow members to vote without having to attend an annual meeting. We the membership have the right to insist that the Board make this amendment in order for the 11,900 members of the 12,000 member AMHA says we have to have a voice in how our Association is operated and how our money is spent. Remember that less than 100 members including 23 directors made decisions for all of us at the 2008 Annual Meeting.[SIZE=10pt] [/SIZE]
[SIZE=10pt][/SIZE]To remove obstacles as requested.
Post all proposed amendments to bylaws, rules and regulations and show rules in their FINAL FORM as they are to be voted on at the annual meeting, in the Miniature Horse World and or official correspondence by November 15, of each year. Mail same proposed amendments to every member with ballots for voting by mail by December 1, of each year. This date will satisy the requirement of 60 day notice before the annual meeting of all proposed amendments, as per our bylaws. Return ballots to accounting firm and handle voting procedure exactly as the handling of voting for directors. Members will submit a fee with ballot to accounting firm. This fee should help offset any great expense to AMHA for mail ballots and tabulation of votes.
Accounting firm will submit the result of the votes on the amendments as passed or failed to the AMHA President no later than 10 days prior to the annual meeting. The results of the tabulation of votes will NOT be opened until the Annual Meeting is in progress. The President will read the results of the voting tabulations, after the votes of the members present and voting at the meeting have been counted for each amendment. The amendment will then be recorded as fassed or failed.
Accounting firm and AMHA office will keep results of votes on file for one year and will supply written report to any member who shall request the report.
The fee for voting by mail ballot shall not exceed $25 per voting member.
To start voting by mail, only proposed amendments by mail ballot will be implemented. As computer software becomes available, AMHA will include internet voting along with mail ballots to those members without internet access, that request to vote by mail.[SIZE=10pt]Rationale: AMHA is constantly looking for ways to increase membership. The opportunity to provide the members a chance to take part in the decisions of the association with voting by mail ballot or internet ballot, will encourage the increase in membership, and will halt the steady loss of members and the decline in horse registrations that AMHA is now facing. The entire membership will have a chance to become active in the operations of their Association. [/SIZE]
The cost of conducting the annual meeting can be drastically reduced, and save the Association quite an expense. The year end audit for the year 2007 reports that the fee for the 2007 Annual Meeting was ($41,239), forty one thousand, two hundred and thirty nine dollars. This amount of money covers the expense of roughly only a few over one hundred members including directors that attend the Annual Meeting and make the decisions for all the membership.
The fee of $25 per voting member will be eliminated when for those members who choose to vote by internet ballot, when computer software is availabe. This fee of $25 per mail ballot is necessary to help cover cost of voting tabulation, postage and printing. This fee is still equal to or less expensive for members, as currently each voting member has to pay $25 to attend the Annual Meeting in person and vote. The fee is $100 per member to attend the meeting and vote if the member does not make their reservations at least (7) days in advance of the meeting.
Riverdance
Well-Known Member
By coming through the back door and not announcing ones intentions to run for Presedent till the meeting, is just wrong, and I would have to suspect that there are reasons why they do not want to announce before hand, and are bringing enough people with them to the meeting to perhaps get themselves voted in. Perhaps they know there would be no way for them to get in otherwise.
Unfortuanatly, it seems that the directors do not want to see this rule change because perhaps they all feel that it is alright to be sneaky and underhanded. It does not say much for who we have running the club.
I happen to be a big AMHA person and am not bashing AMHA in any way, but feel that we as members, have every right to be informed of who is running, well in advance, and have the right to vote even if we do not have the money to go to the meetings. I have been to several meetings in the past, more than some directors I know, but being a Realtor, money is now tight and I can not justify spending the money to go to the meeting.
Unfortuanatly, it seems that the directors do not want to see this rule change because perhaps they all feel that it is alright to be sneaky and underhanded. It does not say much for who we have running the club.
I happen to be a big AMHA person and am not bashing AMHA in any way, but feel that we as members, have every right to be informed of who is running, well in advance, and have the right to vote even if we do not have the money to go to the meetings. I have been to several meetings in the past, more than some directors I know, but being a Realtor, money is now tight and I can not justify spending the money to go to the meeting.
I had hoped someone would have given a reason as to why the wording was changed from must to should. I know in the past Jody had been harpooned several times after posting why on some threads but I had always appreciated her time and effort.
Unfortunately the way it stands it looks like the back door was intentionally left open. Which is very different from the facade of rules and regulations the governing bod gives to why things can or can not be done. Again there may be a logical reason why but with out any clarification on point one is left to assume a presidential hopeful who will NOT openly post their intentions on the very associations that they wish to governs website, bluntly, realizes their bio does not stack up against the compition.
I am not for wide spread voting on the issues, however if we are given a voice to elect directors why can we not vote for president? Perhaps one who understand procedure a bit more can clarify on point but seems like a shift in timelines could have both directors and presidential hopefuls on the same ballot.
Unfortunately the way it stands it looks like the back door was intentionally left open. Which is very different from the facade of rules and regulations the governing bod gives to why things can or can not be done. Again there may be a logical reason why but with out any clarification on point one is left to assume a presidential hopeful who will NOT openly post their intentions on the very associations that they wish to governs website, bluntly, realizes their bio does not stack up against the compition.
I am not for wide spread voting on the issues, however if we are given a voice to elect directors why can we not vote for president? Perhaps one who understand procedure a bit more can clarify on point but seems like a shift in timelines could have both directors and presidential hopefuls on the same ballot.
mistyrose
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Nov 30, 2002
- Messages
- 553
- Reaction score
- 0
First this is the first year this has been in effect so lets not bash it too bad. Before all nominations took place at the annual meeting.
The wording was changed so the choice would not be restricted if only one person came forward before the meeting. Also what if everyone who declared ahead of time were people you didn't want. It gives the membership the chance to nominate someone who might not nominate themselves.
Can we have a year or so to test it as it is before everyone tears it to bits? This is a new way, lets give it a chance.
The wording was changed so the choice would not be restricted if only one person came forward before the meeting. Also what if everyone who declared ahead of time were people you didn't want. It gives the membership the chance to nominate someone who might not nominate themselves.
Can we have a year or so to test it as it is before everyone tears it to bits? This is a new way, lets give it a chance.
My-Lil-Pony
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Nov 12, 2008
- Messages
- 164
- Reaction score
- 0
I have to disagree that it makes sense, if the people making a bid do so 60 days in advance, then surely so can the "preferred" candidate. Further I find the statement, "someone we don't want" offensive. Who is "we"? I don't think this needs to stand for several years to "test it", if there are good candidates let them come forward in an open and upfront manner, otherwise like sdmini I'm left to assume that an unqualified "puppet" is being snuck in through the backdoor, blindsiding the open candidates and I'm having a tough time seeing that as something positive for the further advancement of the association. If someone were to pull that off, I would hope that their presidency would meet with a great deal of scrutiny, because if they aren't open in running, they sure as heck won't be open in office
mistyrose
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Nov 30, 2002
- Messages
- 553
- Reaction score
- 0
Susan Arnold, who was Bylaws Chair at the time this took place has asked me to post the following for her to clear up your questions as to how this occurred.
Bill just happened to be looking at this website and saw the comments about the Bylaw change regarding biographical sketches for presidential candidates. Bill has just registered us, but we are not yet authorized to post replies.
I have researched my committee reports and found the report for the June 2007 meeting, which should clear up the rumor that this was changed “mysteriously.” Here is exactly what my Bylaws Committee Chair report stated:
The committee does recommend with the following changes: Second line add “eligible” before Director. Third line change “must” to “should.” Strike: “In the event that no biographies are received for any one of the offices, section 5 will apply.” Replace with: “Additionally, candidates may be nominated from the floor but will be required to present a biography at the meeting. All candidates should be prepared to answer question from the floor regarding their qualifications.”
Sheryl was called, and she concurs with the changes.
The requirement for Committee Chairs to present a written report to the AMHA office was a Bylaw that I submitted and is now in effect. The reason I submitted that Bylaw change was in part due to situations such as this – to remove any question as to why or how rule proposal content changes prior to voting by the membership. The AMHA office should have copies of all committee chair reports that are submitted.
Thanks for your input in this regard. Since we are unable to post, could you copy and paste my comments in hopes of clearing up the confusion?
This is now my comment back
I never said someone 'we didn't want' I said you didn't want referring to the individual AMHA member.
Bill just happened to be looking at this website and saw the comments about the Bylaw change regarding biographical sketches for presidential candidates. Bill has just registered us, but we are not yet authorized to post replies.
I have researched my committee reports and found the report for the June 2007 meeting, which should clear up the rumor that this was changed “mysteriously.” Here is exactly what my Bylaws Committee Chair report stated:
The committee does recommend with the following changes: Second line add “eligible” before Director. Third line change “must” to “should.” Strike: “In the event that no biographies are received for any one of the offices, section 5 will apply.” Replace with: “Additionally, candidates may be nominated from the floor but will be required to present a biography at the meeting. All candidates should be prepared to answer question from the floor regarding their qualifications.”
Sheryl was called, and she concurs with the changes.
The requirement for Committee Chairs to present a written report to the AMHA office was a Bylaw that I submitted and is now in effect. The reason I submitted that Bylaw change was in part due to situations such as this – to remove any question as to why or how rule proposal content changes prior to voting by the membership. The AMHA office should have copies of all committee chair reports that are submitted.
Thanks for your input in this regard. Since we are unable to post, could you copy and paste my comments in hopes of clearing up the confusion?
This is now my comment back
I never said someone 'we didn't want' I said you didn't want referring to the individual AMHA member.
C
C.A.R.E.
Guest
[SIZE=10pt]Article IX, Section 4, is a bylaw passed by the membership that attended the 2008 annual meeting. Bylaws are meant to be enforced as a directive of government of it's members and regulation of it's affairs. Bylaws are not meant to be tested for a year to see if they work.[/SIZE]
When this bylaw was written and printed in the minutes of the June 2007 Board meeting it was written as a bylaw with a directive of government. Changing the word MUST to SHOULD, changes the whole intent of the bylaw and prevents it from being enforcable. Why do we need to clutter up our rulebook with bylaws that can not be enforced? This rule could or should have been a standing rule, however, not a very good one.
A simple announcement to all eligible directors that they should submit a biographical sketch to the AMHA office to be placed on the website if they wanted to run for office would have been a good idea.
This bylaw amendment should have been researched to determine if it could be effective on January 1, 2009. If the research had been done it would have been known that the portion of the rule that states, "By two months prior to the Annual meeting each year, any eligible Director (including those to be seated) who wish to run for an office should submit a biographical sketch to the AMHA National office", was impossible to follow. Two months prior to the annual meeting would have been a deadline of December 20, 2008. This bylaw did not go into effect until January 1, 2009.
If the wording was changed so the choice would not be restricted if only one person came forward before the meeting, why take the time to pass such a rule? The comment that before this bylaw all nominations took place at the annual meeting is confusing, because there is no change with this bylaw. All nominations still take place at the Annual Meeting.
Those directors that have submitted their biographical sketches have made it available to the entire membership to know of their background, experience, and ideas they have to improve AMHA. Those that make the choice to not submit any imformation about themselves deprive the membership that does not attend the annual meeting of any knowledge or experience they have.
Those that have commented about a "backdoor" into a nomination by keeping it secret certainly do have a point. All things considered this new bylaw is not enforcable, was passed without consideration of it's effect date, will just cause confusion and dissension among the members.
When this bylaw was written and printed in the minutes of the June 2007 Board meeting it was written as a bylaw with a directive of government. Changing the word MUST to SHOULD, changes the whole intent of the bylaw and prevents it from being enforcable. Why do we need to clutter up our rulebook with bylaws that can not be enforced? This rule could or should have been a standing rule, however, not a very good one.
A simple announcement to all eligible directors that they should submit a biographical sketch to the AMHA office to be placed on the website if they wanted to run for office would have been a good idea.
This bylaw amendment should have been researched to determine if it could be effective on January 1, 2009. If the research had been done it would have been known that the portion of the rule that states, "By two months prior to the Annual meeting each year, any eligible Director (including those to be seated) who wish to run for an office should submit a biographical sketch to the AMHA National office", was impossible to follow. Two months prior to the annual meeting would have been a deadline of December 20, 2008. This bylaw did not go into effect until January 1, 2009.
If the wording was changed so the choice would not be restricted if only one person came forward before the meeting, why take the time to pass such a rule? The comment that before this bylaw all nominations took place at the annual meeting is confusing, because there is no change with this bylaw. All nominations still take place at the Annual Meeting.
Those directors that have submitted their biographical sketches have made it available to the entire membership to know of their background, experience, and ideas they have to improve AMHA. Those that make the choice to not submit any imformation about themselves deprive the membership that does not attend the annual meeting of any knowledge or experience they have.
Those that have commented about a "backdoor" into a nomination by keeping it secret certainly do have a point. All things considered this new bylaw is not enforcable, was passed without consideration of it's effect date, will just cause confusion and dissension among the members.
Last edited:
Again, very well said Mona. Sometimes my fingers just take over and things don't come out right! LOL I've been told that this thread makes AMHA "look bad", if that is the case, I apologize as that certainly was not my intent. I really believe that AMHA is the association for everybody, it provides wonderful avenues to promote minis for beginners, do it your selfers, and professionals alike. The fact that were are allowed to sound off, and express our concerns without fear of reprisal is also a testament to the strength of the organization. That being said, I do think that if we, as members want to continue to move forward in a positive way we need to be diligent so as not to allow backsliding into good old boy politics, we have seen first hand the devestating effect that type of thing can have on the association. We need to address this issue as it is, IMO a sloppy piece of legislation that opens the door for misconduct, and simply needs to be tightened up to keep everybody on the straight and narrow.
I occured to me that I have been somewhat negligent in introducing myself to the forum, so here is a brief history. I came from full sized Paint and QH's (still have a bunch of them) to minis 11 years ago, and yes they are like potato chips, I currently own approx. 50 of them. They are, with the exception of a couple all dual registered with AMHA/AMHR, I show them with both Associations, with no preference to either. I feel passionately about these wonderful little horses and just want our associations to remain strong and growing because if they fail then all those papers are virtually worthless. I live in the upper midwest where it is brainfreezingly cold right now, and am longingly looking forward to spring!
I occured to me that I have been somewhat negligent in introducing myself to the forum, so here is a brief history. I came from full sized Paint and QH's (still have a bunch of them) to minis 11 years ago, and yes they are like potato chips, I currently own approx. 50 of them. They are, with the exception of a couple all dual registered with AMHA/AMHR, I show them with both Associations, with no preference to either. I feel passionately about these wonderful little horses and just want our associations to remain strong and growing because if they fail then all those papers are virtually worthless. I live in the upper midwest where it is brainfreezingly cold right now, and am longingly looking forward to spring!
Similar threads
Latest posts
-
-
-
-
-
Is it possible to get all the loose hair off your shedding mini?- Latest: Marsha Cassada
-
-
-
-
-
We are finally getting somewhere!
- Latest: Standards Equine