What can we do to ensure rules are being followed by our AMHA BOD and EC?

[Mona]

I am posting this on behalf of CARE, with hopes that we, as members of AMHA, can somehow put our heads together to try to figure out a way that we can hold the AMHA BOD and EC accountable for not following the rules and bylaws of our Association. Your constructive input in this matter will be welcomed, and we look forward to hearing your thoughts and ideas.

The rules were broken with the implementation of new judging system, and we have recently heard that the Board again voted at their October teleconference meeting to violate the rules once again by returning to the old judging system. They have overturned the members vote and given the members no input on the new rule when they passed it.

Libby Rosen (Mistyrose) told in her post (here on LB) of the judges rotating in each division, and not each class as the rule states. The Board passed two bylaw changes at their June meeting that had not even been written, let alone gone through the proper (and LEGAL, according to our Bylaws) flow chart and rule change procedure.

We are wasting our time hoping the Board will wake up and make some attempt to follow the rules that the membership has approved for management. It is very obvious this Board has no intention of doing what is right, they will do just what they want to do. They do it wrong, they change it back. They learn nothing, while the membership supports their violations and pay the price, often, financially.

The word we got from the October Board meeting, is that the three Championship Shows lost $18,000. If this is true, when you think about losing $18,000 of the membership's money on the three Champion shows, so just a small percentage of the members can attend the show, has got to stop. AMHA can not afford these shows. The reason for having these shows in the past was because the people that show their horses increase the value of the horses for members that don't show when it comes to selling horses. Well, from the results of several recent auctions, it is quite clear that even sales of the offspring of World Grand Champions does not make much difference in the selling price of many horses today.

We would also like to make mention of our upcoming AMHA elections. Before you cast your votes on whom you want to represent you in AMHA, we ask members to discuss with their candidates for their area, what their feelings are in regards to whether or not they will stand up for what is right and just in our association, to ensure the rules are followed, or will they just go blindly along with the "general concensus" of the other BOD and EC members as they continue to break the rules. We will say that we know not ALL current or past EC and BOD have been dishonest, and easily railroaded by the majority, but the majority seem to be taking over. There is no sense in an association such as our AMHA having rules and bylaws written and published if they are not going to be followed. PLEASE be sure to ask your area candidates where they stand on what you feel are important issues, and how they plan to represent you if they are elected for your area.

I am also pasting below a copy of a statement and CARE's reply, that was made in the recent AMHA World Judges thread. We felt it was related to the problems mentioned above, so are including it here as well.

Yes, we did return to the old system, the petition that was in the show office had the desired effect. Now, we will have to search for other ways to reduce costs.If any of you have suggestions on how to reduce costs of the regional and world shows, please contact your board members, and you can also send them to me since Tom O'Connell seems to have 'recruited' me for a new committee to work on reducing costs of the Eastern show. We are also searching for a new location for that show as well. We have come up with three groups of three directors from each region to work on their regional show.

Hi Jody. Thanks for this information. Where can we find in the rule book that a petition is acceptable to change a show rule without going through the proper bylaws and flow chart that the members voted must be followed? The only place we can find a petition mentioned in the rulebook is Article 6, Section 4 (E) Special Measures. The petition is only allowed to amend a Bylaw, amend the Articles of Incorporation, or disolve the corporation. The article states: "Proposals to amend a Bylaw, amend the Articles of Incorporation: 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 preceeding the meeting or by a majority of the Board of Directors, and notice of such proposals shall be published in the Miniature Horse World or by mail to all members, at least sixty (60) days prior to the next Annual Meeting or Special Meeting. A petition does not cover amending Show Rules no matter how many signatures are received.

How many signatures were on the petition at the show office, and how many signatures are required on the petition to amend a show rule? How many signatures are needed on a petition to get the "desired effect" you speak of?

According to the AMHA rulebook on page 143, the procedure to amend a show rule does not mention anything about a petition. It states that the show rules may be amended at any Annual Meeting of the Association as per Article XIV of the Bylaws within a 60 day period. Article XIV says The Annual Meeting shall ratify the criteria for approving and the policies for approved American Miniature Horse Shows and shall approve show rules. It also states that when deemed necessary the Board of Directors shall exercise their power upon any of the above rules and policies, as per Article V, Section 3(A).

Article V Section 3 (A) says The Board of Directors shall have the power and authority to make. amend, or repeal and enforce such rules and regulations, not contrary to law, the Articles of Incorporation or these Bylaws.

According to Article XVI-Amendment of Rules, if the Board voted to change the show rule WS-025 again in the manner that they did at the October 15, 2008, meeting that vote would be contrary to the bylaws. As stated in this article there is a requirement of prior notice which the rule must go through. It refers to the flow chart on pages 57 and 58 to be followed. It states that all rule amendments must be published in their finished form in the Horse World or official correspondence not less than 60 days prior to the Annual meeting.

Section D of this bylaw also says that a rule is not subject to amendment by change, addition or repeal until it has been in force for at least two (2) calendar years. This rule WS-025 was amended in June 2007, by the board for the purpose of saving money, and has only been in effect one year. This bylaw says that limitation can be waived by the Board of Directors upon finding of exceptional circumstances which (1) concern the safety, health, or well-being of the horse and/or exhibitor (2) materially benefits AMHA's programs or its financial stability, or (3) involves compelling circumstances. These three concerns certainly could not give the Board a reason to quickly change a show rule just because signatures of members on a petition don't like the rule. There is no mention of any petition in any part of the show rules, or the bylaw to amend the show rules. This rule will be more costly to AMHA's financial stability. Had the board followed the rules and bylaws and allowed the members proper notification of the amendment to the rule, and allowed the members to vote on the rule at the 2008 Annual Meeting this problem could have been avoided.

The minutes of the June 2007 Board meeting stated that the LOC committee had extensively researched the amendment to WS-025 before they and the Show Rules committee recommended it to the Board to be passed. Why weren't the problems with the rule discovered before it was used?

When can the members of AMHA expect the Board of Directors to start following the rules that the membership has approved for the management of AMHA. A lot of money and time has and continues being spent to make and amend new rules that are not enforced.

Also another director (Libby Rosen) has posted here on Lil Beginnings that the World Show Judging System used at the 2008 World Show, allowed the judges to rotate after each division not each class. She gave the example of one set of judges would judge the division of senior stallions and rotate before the division of senior mares. Is Libby correct on how the judging was done at the show?

Please answer these questions for us so that we can all understand exactly what the Board is doing.

Thank you. CARE (Concerned Advocates for Rule Enforcement)

 

[bingo]

Mona, I have no suggestions but wanted to thank you and your group. I am sure it is not easy to be doing what you are doing but someone had to do it and it has been way to long in coming.

I appreciate you and your group going above and beyond. Instead of joining the complaining you put some time and research into learning our rules and by-laws and doing what you can to fix it.

Thank you for looking out for our registry and trying to ensure the rules put in place are actually followed!

 

[esty]

''The word we got from the October Board meeting, is that the three Championship Shows lost $18,000. If this is true, when you think about losing $18,000 of the membership's money on the three Champion shows, so just a small percentage of the members can attend the show, has got to stop. AMHA can not afford these shows. The reason for having these shows in the past was because the people that show their horses increase the value of the horses for members that don't show when it comes to selling horses. Well, from the results of several recent auctions, it is quite clear that even sales of the offspring of World Grand Champions does not make much difference in the selling price of many horses today.''

I can't believe one bad year would make you want to do away with Championship shows, All the Years these shows were breaking even and even making money everyone was fine with them. I have never attended a Championship show with increasing my horses worth as any part of why i was going ! I also believe it was only one show that lost money not all three.

 

[Mona]

Thank you bingo for your support and understanding of our efforts.

esty, thank you also for your response. It's not so much "wanting to" get rid of these shows, as it is a financial situation. AMHA is not in great financial shape right now...they are struggling and in these tough economic times, it is only going to get worse. There will need to be cutbacks made, so if course the first place to look, are to the areas that are currently "financial burdens".

And let's not forgot, just because CARE mentions it as a possibility/area to cut costs, does not mean it will become a reality. It is just a place to start in helping to get AMHA back on the road to financial success in these hurting times.

 

[wpsellwood]

Hey Mona, its always good to have checks and balances.

I for one couldnt believe the juding system could be changed to begin with. It was just done. I prefer the 5 judge system and its not because Im disgruntled with our placings.

As for the rotating of judges for each class, I was out there showing and they were rotating each class when I was either there showing or watching. We would sit up there and figure which group of judges we were going to get 6-10 classes later. We showed both youth, amt, and open.

 

[Katiean]

I am posting this on behalf of CARE, with hopes that we, as members of AMHA, can somehow put our heads together to try to figure out a way that we can hold the AMHA BOD and EC accountable for not following the rules and bylaws of our Association. Your constructive input in this matter will be welcomed, and we look forward to hearing your thoughts and ideas.
The rules were broken with the implementation of new judging system, and we have recently heard that the Board again voted at their October teleconference meeting to violate the rules once again by returning to the old judging system. They have overturned the members vote and given the members no input on the new rule when they passed it.

Libby Rosen (Mistyrose) told in her post (here on LB) of the judges rotating in each division, and not each class as the rule states. The Board passed two bylaw changes at their June meeting that had not even been written, let alone gone through the proper (and LEGAL, according to our Bylaws) flow chart and rule change procedure.

We are wasting our time hoping the Board will wake up and make some attempt to follow the rules that the membership has approved for management. It is very obvious this Board has no intention of doing what is right, they will do just what they want to do. They do it wrong, they change it back. They learn nothing, while the membership supports their violations and pay the price, often, financially.

The word we got from the October Board meeting, is that the three Championship Shows lost $18,000. If this is true, when you think about losing $18,000 of the membership's money on the three Champion shows, so just a small percentage of the members can attend the show, has got to stop. AMHA can not afford these shows. The reason for having these shows in the past was because the people that show their horses increase the value of the horses for members that don't show when it comes to selling horses. Well, from the results of several recent auctions, it is quite clear that even sales of the offspring of World Grand Champions does not make much difference in the selling price of many horses today.

We would also like to make mention of our upcoming AMHA elections. Before you cast your votes on whom you want to represent you in AMHA, we ask members to discuss with their candidates for their area, what their feelings are in regards to whether or not they will stand up for what is right and just in our association, to ensure the rules are followed, or will they just go blindly along with the "general concensus" of the other BOD and EC members as they continue to break the rules. We will say that we know not ALL current or past EC and BOD have been dishonest, and easily railroaded by the majority, but the majority seem to be taking over. There is no sense in an association such as our AMHA having rules and bylaws written and published if they are not going to be followed. PLEASE be sure to ask your area candidates where they stand on what you feel are important issues, and how they plan to represent you if they are elected for your area.

I am also pasting below a copy of a statement and CARE's reply, that was made in the recent AMHA World Judges thread. We felt it was related to the problems mentioned above, so are including it here as well.

Yes, we did return to the old system, the petition that was in the show office had the desired effect. Now, we will have to search for other ways to reduce costs.If any of you have suggestions on how to reduce costs of the regional and world shows, please contact your board members, and you can also send them to me since Tom O'Connell seems to have 'recruited' me for a new committee to work on reducing costs of the Eastern show. We are also searching for a new location for that show as well. We have come up with three groups of three directors from each region to work on their regional show.

Hi Jody. Thanks for this information. Where can we find in the rule book that a petition is acceptable to change a show rule without going through the proper bylaws and flow chart that the members voted must be followed? The only place we can find a petition mentioned in the rulebook is Article 6, Section 4 (E) Special Measures. The petition is only allowed to amend a Bylaw, amend the Articles of Incorporation, or disolve the corporation. The article states: "Proposals to amend a Bylaw, amend the Articles of Incorporation: 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 preceeding the meeting or by a majority of the Board of Directors, and notice of such proposals shall be published in the Miniature Horse World or by mail to all members, at least sixty (60) days prior to the next Annual Meeting or Special Meeting. A petition does not cover amending Show Rules no matter how many signatures are received.

How many signatures were on the petition at the show office, and how many signatures are required on the petition to amend a show rule? How many signatures are needed on a petition to get the "desired effect" you speak of?

According to the AMHA rulebook on page 143, the procedure to amend a show rule does not mention anything about a petition. It states that the show rules may be amended at any Annual Meeting of the Association as per Article XIV of the Bylaws within a 60 day period. Article XIV says The Annual Meeting shall ratify the criteria for approving and the policies for approved American Miniature Horse Shows and shall approve show rules. It also states that when deemed necessary the Board of Directors shall exercise their power upon any of the above rules and policies, as per Article V, Section 3(A).

Article V Section 3 (A) says The Board of Directors shall have the power and authority to make. amend, or repeal and enforce such rules and regulations, not contrary to law, the Articles of Incorporation or these Bylaws.

According to Article XVI-Amendment of Rules, if the Board voted to change the show rule WS-025 again in the manner that they did at the October 15, 2008, meeting that vote would be contrary to the bylaws. As stated in this article there is a requirement of prior notice which the rule must go through. It refers to the flow chart on pages 57 and 58 to be followed. It states that all rule amendments must be published in their finished form in the Horse World or official correspondence not less than 60 days prior to the Annual meeting.

Section D of this bylaw also says that a rule is not subject to amendment by change, addition or repeal until it has been in force for at least two (2) calendar years. This rule WS-025 was amended in June 2007, by the board for the purpose of saving money, and has only been in effect one year. This bylaw says that limitation can be waived by the Board of Directors upon finding of exceptional circumstances which (1) concern the safety, health, or well-being of the horse and/or exhibitor (2) materially benefits AMHA's programs or its financial stability, or (3) involves compelling circumstances. These three concerns certainly could not give the Board a reason to quickly change a show rule just because signatures of members on a petition don't like the rule. There is no mention of any petition in any part of the show rules, or the bylaw to amend the show rules. This rule will be more costly to AMHA's financial stability. Had the board followed the rules and bylaws and allowed the members proper notification of the amendment to the rule, and allowed the members to vote on the rule at the 2008 Annual Meeting this problem could have been avoided.

The minutes of the June 2007 Board meeting stated that the LOC committee had extensively researched the amendment to WS-025 before they and the Show Rules committee recommended it to the Board to be passed. Why weren't the problems with the rule discovered before it was used?

When can the members of AMHA expect the Board of Directors to start following the rules that the membership has approved for the management of AMHA. A lot of money and time has and continues being spent to make and amend new rules that are not enforced.

Also another director (Libby Rosen) has posted here on Lil Beginnings that the World Show Judging System used at the 2008 World Show, allowed the judges to rotate after each division not each class. She gave the example of one set of judges would judge the division of senior stallions and rotate before the division of senior mares. Is Libby correct on how the judging was done at the show?

Please answer these questions for us so that we can all understand exactly what the Board is doing.

Thank you. CARE (Concerned Advocates for Rule Enforcement)

It has been my experiance that elected officials will do as they please. For example "The people of Reno voted down the Reno Train Trench". However, guess what they built. You Gessed it "The Reno Train Trench". As for the rest of your post and putting it in the proper form, since my near death expeariance in June (I mean I almost died) I have a hard time with things that don't just come out and say what was changed without all of the leagle explanation. So Mona, Just for me so I can understand what is going on, Please, put it in simple english. And I do mean simple because it all just gets messed up in my head. If you want to PM me with the short version that would be fine or post it here. Please.

 

[Mona]

Katien, I pm'd you, but will also make a post here in regards to your request.

At the June, 2007, Board meeting the Board overturned the members vote for a five judge system for the World Show, and voted to change it to a three judge system of rotating the judges after each class. The Board did not follow any of the rules to amend a show rule as found on pages 57 and 58 of the rule book, that the membership had voted must be followed. They just voted to change the rule.

The Board did not bring the rule change to the 2008 Annual meeting in order for the membership to vote yes or no on the rule. They started the new rule at the 2008 World Show, members did not like the rule and gained signatures on a petition left in the show office to go back to the old five judge system. According to Director Jody Hoch's post on here on L'il Beginnings, the Board voted to go back to the old rule, and once again did so without following the proper rule amendment procedure. She stated that the signatures on the petition gained the "desired effect" and the Board changed the rule. There is no rule in the rule book that we can find allows for a petition to change a show rule.

Hope this helps you understand better. I know the rules are confusing.

And further to add, for those of you questioning the financial standings of the Championship Shows, it is our understanding that the Central and Eastern Champion shows lost money this year. In 2007 the Central show lost money and the Eastern made a very small profit. The Eastern shows have lost money for several years in the past.

You might want to email the AMHA treasurer and ask for an accounting of the shows and the actual loss for each show for the last few years, that is how we get our information. We did hear about the $18,000 loss as a report from a director from the October 15, Board meeting.

We at CARE certainly don't want any shows cancelled if they financially benefit AMHA and the majority of the membership. Due to the reported loss of membership revenue and about $100,000 in lost registration revenue in 2007, the financial situation of AMHA is declining. In looking at the latest financial statement, September 30, 2008, it appears that the Association operated at a loss for four months this year. It looks like membership, registration, and show revenue is also down for the first nine months. These are the reasons for our comments about continuing with the Championship shows. It is our opinion that it could be a financial drain that might need to be eliminated for a few years.

 

[Michelle@wescofarms]

Well maybe the AMHA board thought they were the AMHR board that didn't need to go before the members for a vote! (Just kidding there!) But seriously Mona, watchdog groups like CARE in every industry and government body are what tends to keep people honest and inline - unfortunately it's a pain to constantly have to be on guard at all times with mismanagement.

I've said this before serving as an elected official for non-profits is not glorious work, I appreciate everyone who is willing to serve - as they're giving of their time, and energy to technically benefit me and everyone else involved. I also honestly don't believe that the majority of the people that do work for either registry do it with bad intent. Some may be self-serving that's human nature, but the majority I do sincerely believe are trying to make things better - even if I do not agree with their idea of better! Thing were the registry or even your local club would be without the 4-5 individual willing to make things happen? We may not like the direction they take, but then who is to blame? Those of us that complain but do not want to get involved!!!!

So as far as making the Board perform according to the established rules - do what your doing. Hold they're feet to the fire, make the answer for their actions.

Regarding the changes to the judging - haven't a clue there why they did and then undid it especially in the fashion you reported. I don't know that there is a judging system that someone won't complain about though so what's a good one? Got me!

As for getting the shows to at least break even if not make money, I'm not sure of the statistics but a few years ago when they did away with the qualifying for the Championship shows attendance was much higher. Many people (especially those without deep pockets) cannot afford to drive the distances and attend shows to qualify from what I've heard/read, but would go to the Championship Show as it's a 'big' show. What is the point of qualifying for a regional Championship Show anyway? I'm sure someone will have a valid reason to, but with the lack of shows in many regions its really short sighted IMHO. I'm in Area 9 (California), there are in Northern California maybe - and I mean maybe - 2-3 shows a year. Oregon/Washington - 4-5 and SoCal maybe 1-2, Arizona a few also. The majority of the shows from my location are 8+ hours away.

Not to get on a rant about this but if some of the classes/divisions were combined it would speed up the shows too which could cut time/reduce costs. I mean do we really need a divisions for mens and a ladies driving classes (an example)?

Anyway, thanks for keeping us informed Mona. I know this last year or so my apathy has been deep for the industry as a whole.

 

[Shaladar]

And further to add, for those of you questioning the financial standings of the Championship Shows, it is our understanding that the Central and Eastern Champion shows lost money this year. In 2007 the Central show lost money and the Eastern made a very small profit. The Eastern shows have lost money for several years in the past.
You might want to email the AMHA treasurer and ask for an accounting of the shows and the actual loss for each show for the last few years, that is how we get our information. We did hear about the $18,000 loss as a report from a director from the October 15, Board meeting.

We at CARE certainly don't want any shows cancelled if they financially benefit AMHA and the majority of the membership. Due to the reported loss of membership revenue and about $100,000 in lost registration revenue in 2007, the financial situation of AMHA is declining. In looking at the latest financial statement, September 30, 2008, it appears that the Association operated at a loss for four months this year. It looks like membership, registration, and show revenue is also down for the first nine months. These are the reasons for our comments about continuing with the Championship shows. It is our opinion that it could be a financial drain that might need to be eliminated for a few years.

I don't know anything about the C.A.R.E. group, but are any of them on the BOD or EC of AMHA? If not, why aren't they? (don't need or want names) If the group is really so concerned, why don't they become part of the EC/BOD? That way, your group would get their information first hand, in person, instead of he/she said. Also, how many of your group attended the World Show? And saw first hand how the Judges were rotated? And saw the petition in person? Or for that matter, the Championship shows? The Western Championship Show was well attended and the competition was TOUGH !!! Go look at the results.....see the quality of the horses and the size of some of the classes. All the top trainers from the West Coast were there. With incredible horses!!! A Champion or Grand Champion at that show is something to be proud of and means a lot !!!!!

If the C.A.R.E. group doesn't like the way things are run, then step up to the plate, get involved , in person, and start changing things.

Just my own opinion.

Sue

Oh , and Michelle

....this year, there were 6 AMHA shows, with a total of 22 Judges to have your horse(s) judged and points earned, within 3 hours driving time from me , (most around 1 -2 hours)( and you live just down the 505 from me) not counting the Western Championship show. 4 of the shows were 4 Judge Shows, one was 3 Judges, and one I think had 2 Judges (I didn't go to that one)

edited to add: the show in Walnut Creek had 3 Judges, not 2.

 

[Mona]

I don't know anything about the C.A.R.E. group, but are any of them on the BOD or EC of AMHA? If not, why aren't they? (don't need or want names) If the group is really so concerned, why don't they become part of the EC/BOD? That way, your group would get their information first hand, in person, instead of he/she said. Also, how many of your group attended the World Show? And saw first hand how the Judges were rotated? And saw the petition in person? Or for that matter, the Championship shows? The Western Championship Show was well attended and the competition was TOUGH !!! Go look at the results.....see the quality of the horses and the size of some of the classes. All the top trainers from the West Coast were there. With incredible horses!!! A Champion or Grand Champion at that show is something to be proud of and means a lot !!!!!
If the C.A.R.E. group doesn't like the way things are run, then step up to the plate, get involved , in person, and start changing things.

Just my own opinion.

Sue

None of the CARE group is a member of the AMHA BOD/EC at this time. Some of our advisors have been in the past. Some did have horses shown at the World Show this year.

We do get our information straight from the AMHA minutes of the meetings and the rule book. What you call "he said/she said", does not get any action from our group.

What we said that was reported to us about the Oct. 15, BOD meeting came through one director who was at the meeting, and another director that posted to answer questions on this forum. Since it takes up to 60 days or more for the minutes of the meeting to be published on the AMHA website we report how our information was recieved until the minutes are published. We therefore report what was reported to us by directors only, and we have not been wrong. If we are you can be sure we will issue a correction to any statement that we have made that is wrong.

As for seeing the petition in person, no we did not see it. We would not need to see it to know that it is not allowed within our rule book to be considered when amending a show rule.

We do not question the quality of horses, or the tough competition at any of the Championship Shows. We understand that several trainers attend these shows, and that some members enjoy showing at the shows. That is wonderful.

I think you misunderstand our point about the financial loss of these three shows for AMHA. If only 200 or 300 horses are shown out of the 160,000 AMHA says is registered, and 100 to 200 members out of the 12,000 AMHA reports, maybe you will understand the loss of money for the majority of members that do not show. Our group will not make the decision as to whether to continue with these shows, we just point out the financial loss to the Association. We would much rather see our Association stay in business to register horses for all our members than to see shows continue that are poorly attended and financially drain the AMHA.

We as a group are doing all we can to help members of AMHA understand the rules that the membership has passsed to manage the AMHA. We want the rules to be enforced or changed following the proper procedures. When members spend their time and money to attend the Annual meeting and vote to pass these rules, we believe the rules should be enforced. We do not believe it is right for the BOD to overturn the memberships decision except in an extreme situation. Do you agree with that idea?

We are doing our part to as best we can to step up and change things, and we have a lot of support from members that appreciate our efforts.

Thank you for your suggestions, we appreciate them and hope you have a better understanding of our work.

 

[gvpalominominis]

Oh my.... I thought that we had horse shows to promote and support miniature horses.... I didn't realize that it was just to make money. = ) And I'm sure it's not just to make sure the hired heads have a continued salary.... at least I'd hope not.

I can only speak for myself... but to me, the Regional Championship shows (which by the way... for our region isn't even held in our region) are for the qualifying horses within that region to exhibit their horses in one location and as a prelude and for additional qualifying ability for the World Championship show. Some local area shows don't pull enough entries to qualify, nor do they have shows available every weekend within a reasonable driving distance. We're not all in Texas you know : ) Since we are a 'whole' group spaced across the nation, just like many companies with multiple locations, some locations may help support the weaker/less populated areas to stay open for continued success overall. I don't think it would be fair to allow some areas to continue their regional shows and others not have that opportunity because their numbers are not as strong.

Of course, 'making money' at an event surely helps for continued support, promotion and provision of events for the membership and enthusiasts all to enjoy. But I also agree as mentioned above, that you don't kill an idea, event or business because of one bad year.... especially when the general economy itself is a big factor. I'm sure as with every budget.... there are ways to 'cut down' on expenses however.

To address the question of the original post... I totally agree that there needs to be some big changes and examinations of the lack of following and the lack of enforcement of the rules of our club by both the BOD and the members themselves. It is far too easy for the BOD to just say... it’s not AMHA's problem to shed themselves from their responsibilities and addressing the issues. It’s called being made to have accountability. The overseers of this enforcement however... I think need to be derived from our club membership designation and not just from what some might call a vigilante group. Now, I don't mean that in a derogatory way or to even reflect how I feel, I just mean it should also be created by a proper directive.

Unfortunately, the way our rules are currently written, the BOD is who 'appoints' and oversees the committees (except for Show Rules and Licensed Officials Committee).... so I'd think that would kinda defeat the purpose. Curious though.... what does the Licensed Officials Committee do?

 

[Minimor]

We do not believe it is right for the BOD to overturn the memberships decision except in an extreme situation. Do you agree with that idea?

When the members voted in favor of changing the measurement spot from the last mane hair to the base of the withers, did C.A.R.E. not plead for the BOD to overturn that decision? But now C.A.R.E. is complaining about the fact that the BOD can and does overturn the decisions made by members who spend the money to vote at the annual meeting? So it's okay for the BOD to overturn the members' vote if C.A.R.E. determines that it should be done?

As for the answer given by the one director regarding how judges were rotated at the World show, a member that attended that show came on afterward and stated that the judges did rotate for each class, not for each division, and yet another member has said the same thing earlier on this thread. So maybe the director that gave that answer on an earlier thread was mistaken, and it was her answer that was 'wrong'--not that the judge rotation was 'wrong'? I wasn't there so I cannot say either way, but I would suggest asking around to a few more people before making too much fuss about how that particular rule was broken. I think this is where the he said/she said comment came from in an earlier post.

I think the associations do need to follow the rules, but it helps if watchdogs makes sure they have their facts absolutely 100% right. If the watchdogs complain too much about things which turn out to be inaccurate, they lose credibility.

Considering some of the other things that money gets thrown away on, I don't personally see a problem with continuing to hold the Regional shows. I hate to see any shows being discontinued--no matter what, shows are a very good way to promote horses, and I say that as someone who doesn't show a lot and cannot afford to show 'big time'...not enough time, and not enough money.

 

[bingo]

Minimor I am not a member of C.A.R.E but I think if I remember correctly one of the issues they had with the new and now non existent rule of measuring at the withers was that particular rule was voted in without proper procedure.

I could be remembering wrong but I think that was what started the group in the first place?

I would have to go back to some of those threads and research it to help my memory.

 

[wpsellwood]

When the members voted in favor of changing the measurement spot from the last mane hair to the base of the withers, did C.A.R.E. not plead for the BOD to overturn that decision? But now C.A.R.E. is complaining about the fact that the BOD can and does overturn the decisions made by members who spend the money to vote at the annual meeting? So it's okay for the BOD to overturn the members' vote if C.A.R.E.

I was thinking the same thing. Isnt that what happened?

 

[Minimor]

Bingo, yes, that was partly it, but there was also discontent with how so few could vote in something so major, and how that was wrong...and now they are saying:

When members spend their time and money to attend the Annual meeting and vote to pass these rules, we believe the rules should be enforced.

It just gets all a little too complicated (read that "two faced" if you want the less polite version?) for me to be impressed by where this group is going with all of this. This thread does not IMO lend credibility to the C.A.R.E. group.

 

[Humhill]

When members spend their time and money to attend the Annual meeting and vote to pass these rules, we believe the rules should be enforced.

I know this is another can of worms, but this is another problem I have. I think you should be able to "absentee vote." Those of us that work full time and use all our vacation time going to shows should still be able to vote. We pay our membership dues too. We deserve to have the opportunity to decide what happens.

Anyway, I don't understand how the national organization can lose money on a regional show when a local club and put on a show at the same location and made money from it. And it can't have anything to do with decorations -- that same club provided the center ring for that particular regional show.

Edited for spelling

 

[topnotchminis]

Thank you bingo for your support and understanding of our efforts.

esty, thank you also for your response. It's not so much "wanting to" get rid of these shows, as it is a financial situation. AMHA is not in great financial shape right now...they are struggling and in these tough economic times, it is only going to get worse. There will need to be cutbacks made, so if course the first place to look, are to the areas that are currently "financial burdens".

And let's not forgot, just because CARE mentions it as a possibility/area to cut costs, does not mean it will become a reality. It is just a place to start in helping to get AMHA back on the road to financial success in these hurting times.

I am just gettng into showing, but instead of doing three championship shows why don't they do one in a part of the country that is about midway?

 

[Viki]

I believe (and I'm sure EVERYONE will correct me if I'm wrong), in part, the Championship shows were set up to be like Mini World shows, for those that couldnt go to World. In part, to finish qualifying for World, for those that could/can. I'm really glad we have all three Championship shows! I believe they have added to the excitement, enjoyment & promotion of the American Minature Horse.

Viki

 

[gvpalominominis]

Thank you bingo for your support and understanding of our efforts.

esty, thank you also for your response. It's not so much "wanting to" get rid of these shows, as it is a financial situation. AMHA is not in great financial shape right now...they are struggling and in these tough economic times, it is only going to get worse. There will need to be cutbacks made, so if course the first place to look, are to the areas that are currently "financial burdens".

And let's not forgot, just because CARE mentions it as a possibility/area to cut costs, does not mean it will become a reality. It is just a place to start in helping to get AMHA back on the road to financial success in these hurting times.

I am just gettng into showing, but instead of doing three championship shows why don't they do one in a part of the country that is about midway?

We already have ONE national Championship show.... its called WORLD. The Regional Championships are just that..... "REGION" shows. So if we "get rid" of the regional shows that are so called "financial burdens".... I guess that leaves it to become a monopoly for the rich and more heavily populated areas.... giving greater point advantages to certain areas. If you get rid of one, you'd have to get rid of them all... in fairness.

Where did the losses come from within each show... was it lack of entries? was it judges salaries? was it the facility expense? elaborate set ups and displays? Some areas are just more expensive to have events. So an area could actually draw more entries, but because the facility cost twice as much to obtain, does that meant that that area shouldn't be allowed to have a show? I don't know about other areas, but we just don't have that many facilities around here to choose from that can house our shows... even local ones.

It brings it right back around to "Why do we have a club in the first place... to make money?" If so... then let it be privately run then. Or do we want to all support miniature horses across the nation.... or should we just pick and choose those in certain areas to support where they make money? Where are those areas by the way? In fact, that's a good question.... which areas shouldn't be able to have shows and which should?

I think the problem of AMHA's finances do not just come from a few shows that don't make money! Let's open up those books and do a little house cleaning. Maybe we need to do a "hatchet job" across the board on spending... LOL LOL

 

[targetsmom]

If I understand it correctly, the original issue of this post involved the BOD changing the rules on judges at the AMHA World Show. Now, I don't expect to ever go to an AMHA World Show, so I really don't care how the show is judged. BUT I MIGHT WANT TO GO TO A REGIONAL SHOW SOME DAY. I think the REAL issue here is the decision making by the AMHA Executives and Board. The attempt to change the measuring rule is, to me, a brilliant example of how decisions are made without identifying the real issue that needs to be addressed and factoring in all the possible ramifications. If the real issue is finances, then I would not be at all surprised, but I would offer a few suggestions:

1. To increase registrations: establish a "breeding stock" division or whatever you want to call it, for the over 34" minis that are otherwise eligible for registration. This will not only keep them in the registry but ALL THEIR PROGENY too.

2. To increase show revenue, look at how other registries are doing and see if anything can be learned. There was a thread on here a short time ago about where people like to show, and I know a lot of people really like the Pinto shows. That is where I show and I see the class sizes getting huge with people coming over from AMHA. The Pinto Association also has creative ways to earn money from special shows by requiring points in those shows (World, Jubilee, etc) to earn their higher awards. Of course the Association fees for those shows are huge.

3. Think very hard about eliminating the Regional Shows when members are also feeling the financial pinch. POLL THE MEMBERS. Will the 40-50 entries in perfomance classes at the World show attend their Regional Show? Can you offer Regional Futurities?

4. Think about encouraging shows/classes/ awards for the little guy. How often do you hear of someone bragging about an AMHA ROM or award, other than something from the World show? But how about an AMHR HOF or Pinto Championship? People chasing the points they need for these awards will attend shows.

And lastly, we can all VOTE and contact our Directors, even if we can't run for office.