Meet Policy Update

[Mike Gilbert]

Becky, you seem to be using it just fine.  What exactly is not to like?   Where are you running into problems?  We can't fix things if we don't know what the problem is.

[Russ Blair]

I see there have been plenty of suggestions over the weekend. I also see some members are mistaking this discussion about MEET POLICY changes as a discussion to voice other complaints. I would just like to ask that they please start another topic if there are issues they would like to discuss OTHER than meet policy changes in order to keep this discussion on track.

I will also like to add that this discussion is my way of allowing our members to ad input to any changes to our current meet policy and also to bring up any areas that they feel would benefit with some clarification. Our by laws do not require that I or any board of directors allow this type of discussion be held when changing policies as article 3 of our by laws state "Policy decisions require the President to allow a discussion period by the board followed by a vote, with only a consensus needed for issues of lesser importance. " . So please remember this is truly an act of good faith, not a requirement governed by our constitution or its by laws.

One last note before I go back to work, when I begin this discussion with the current elected board members and we finalize our new meet policy please don't get upset when or if your suggestion is not included. With all of the suggestions made so far, I am sure that there will be some wording a member may not agree with.

I believe there is room for some compromise and ways of improving our initial proposal, but I will admit that my thoughts and thinking align with Mike Gilbert's thoughts and beliefs. There are some things that I feel need to be implemented to ensure our sanctioned meets hold value, merit and worth. Just like our Master Exhibitor status should hold some value and worth. This is not 2015 and we are not a newly founded organization. Our Ameraucana Alliance is one of the largest and most active breed specific clubs out there right now. We do not need the publicity that we needed when we started this Alliance in 2015, so requiring more to have sanctioned meets than we did when we started just makes sense to me. I am not saying this is what will happen, this board has not even begun discussing this. One of the board members is studying for midterms and we are in no hurry to rush our decision.

I am still reading all the suggestions, and I will be starting a discussion with the remaining board members very soon. I apologize for the confusion my original post may have created.

Thanks

[Becky J Pelton]

So Russ what you are saying is basically it does not matter what the members say, the board along with your self are going to do as you please and make the final decision.  Please explain to me why you even opened the discussion if it does not matter what we say.   Seems to me like you are running this group as more of a dictatorship then a democracy.  I feel in matters such as this every member that wants to be heard needs to have  input in the way this Alliance is run. 

[Becky J Pelton]

Becky, you seem to be using it just fine.  What exactly is not to like?   Where are you running into problems?  We can't fix things if we don't know what the problem is.

I'm going to open another post as requested by Russ

[Mike Gilbert]

So Russ what you are saying is basically it does not matter what the members say, the board along with your self are going to do as you please and make the final decision.  Please explain to me why you even opened the discussion if it does not matter what we say.   Seems to me like you are running this group as more of a dictatorship then a democracy.  I feel in matters such as this every member that wants to be heard needs to have  input in the way this Alliance is run.

Becky, I don't think that is fair to Russ or to the rest of the Board.  It does matter what members say, but not all members are going to agree on every topic or policy.  Besides that, the club according to our Constitution (which is available to read on the website btw) does say the affairs of the club shall be governed by the Board of Directors at all times.  We want and need member input (which is not actually required by the Constitution) so we can make better informed decisions.  That said, our current Board is comprised of four Directors and the president (Russ) and we have not yet taken a final vote on this subject.  Dictatorships are not comprised of a Board of Directors, but of a single dictator.  We are NOT a democracy.  Neither is our federal government; we were created as a Constitutional Republic.   We, the Alliance, must abide by our Constitution and Bylaws.  There is a method by which they can be amended detailed in our Constitution.   Also, we have an election once every two years in which all members can vote for their president and directors.  If enough don't like the way things are going, they can vote to "throw the bums out" and elect new representatives. Unfortunately, many of our otherwise well-qualified members hold dual membership with another Ameraucana club, so they are not eligible to run for office.   

[Laurie Ashley - Selah Farms]

Another question for you guys:  If the limit is imposed of only 3 "approved" requests per member.  How would the member know if the meet is approved or not, in time to not miss deadlines for other shows they may also like to see as a potential meet, if its like a month later, etc? 
Example:  I submitted a request for the upcoming January show, North East Poultry Congress.  NEPC has their own catalogue deadline (which is passed now) which required our club representative in charge of meet placement to confirm the meet requests, send in our media information for printing in the catalogue, etc.
 I, as the requestor, am left completely out of the loop to even know if this was done or not? I wouldn't even know if this was an accepted meet or not for a couple of months still as I have to wait for the upcoming AA Newsletter to find out if its printed in there, and in the mean time I am sitting on my other two requests, not wanting to waste them on other shows, if this one gets approved.  And if it doesn't get approved, then I have let other deadlines pass by, and missed those other show opportunities.
 
In the past, I basically shot-gun approached it by sending in all of my future show meet requests, all at the beginning of the year, to ensure I had those in with ample time and advance notice of any newsletter and host show committee deadlines.
 
So how the board feels it should work is: I just pick 3 shows for the year, and hope it all works out?  Am I understanding this correctly?




 

[Mike Gilbert]

Laurie, if Scott acts on your request promptly, he should probably notify you by email or text as soon as he has confirmation.  Can you think of or suggest a better solution?  Keep in mind he is a volunteer and has a job and a life outside of Ameraucana Alliance.  He may travel or take vacations from time to time.  But I know Scott and feel he is as capable and diligent as anyone.  Also articulate I might add - maybe you saw his article on the front page of Poultry Press?
Once you are notified, it should be your responsibility as the requestor to make a post on the Alliance Forum (and FB if you felt that would help) that details all the relevant information a prospective exhibitor at that show would need to know in order to make his/her entry and lodging accommodations.
As a practical matter, have you ever had a meet request turned down?   That would be very rare in my estimation.  There will be some circumstances we just can't control.  For example, the Beaver Pigeon and Bantam Club show recently had their show shut down during the week before it was to be held - due to HPAI in the same county.  There was supposed to be an Alliance meet at that show.  Also, I previously suggested folks who like a lot of meets and would actually participate in them can enlist the help of other members to apply for meets.   That doesn't solve the problem of new members who may not know of others to help out, but newer members should probably get a couple of shows under their belt before requesting meets anyway.  There is no substitute for experience.

[Becky J Pelton]

Mike, then can I suggest another change to the By-Laws ?  I fell if you are taking into consideration all member we should be allowed to vote on changes to the By-laws and Constitution.  Because at this point any changes to the Constitution and its By-Laws are only able to be changed by a very small portion of our members and not the entire body.   Should I open another forum for this comment also ?

[Mike Gilbert]

You can if you like, but any changes to the Constitution and Bylaws must be voted on by the entire membership.  That is one thing the Board of Directors can not do on their own.  Policy changes are made by the Board, but they are not part of the Constitution and Bylaws.  Perhaps it would be a good idea to go to the website and open the tab where the Constitution and Bylaws can be read?

[John W Blehm]

Mike, then can I suggest another change to the By-Laws ?  I fell if you are taking into consideration all member we should be allowed to vote on changes to the By-laws and Constitution.  Because at this point any changes to the Constitution and its By-Laws are only able to be changed by a very small portion of our members and not the entire body.   Should I open another forum for this comment also ?

The topic is about the Meet Policy. As Mike said, the Constitution/By-Laws is not part of this discussion. Go to our Alliance site, Ameraucana.org. A tab there will take you to the Constitution and the Downloads tab will reveal the club's Policies and other documents. 

[Russ Blair]

Becky, I assure you that running this club like a dictator is the farthest thing from my intent. In fact, I was running this club per Article 1 of our By-Laws.

Article 1 - President
The President shall be Chairman of the Board and responsible for the execution of the Constitution & Bylaws
[/b]

I hastily written my reply and I can see where my statement could appear harsher than I meant. I truly believe this current board will definitely take all the suggestions into consideration when we resume discussions about a new meet policy. I just don't want anyone to get upset if there's something in it, they do not agree with. It truly is our constitution, by-laws and our policies that Govern our Ameraucana Alliance. I strongly recommend all our members go to our website Ameraucana.org and read them. That is where everything is downloaded for all our members to access and read.

Becky you also asked about changing our constitution and by-laws.

Mike, then can I suggest another change to the By-Laws ?  I fell if you are taking into consideration all member we should be allowed to vote on changes to the By-laws and Constitution.  Because at this point any changes to the Constitution and its By-Laws are only able to be changed by a very small portion of our members and not the entire body.   Should I open another forum for this comment also ?

Here is Article 10 of the by-laws that governs that

"Article 10 - Amendments
Any proposal to amend or alter the Constitution and/or Bylaws of the Ameraucana Alliance shall be submitted to the President by October 1st of an election year.  He or she will in turn submit the proposal to the entire Board of Directors who will vote whether to place the proposal before the membership for a vote.  Proposals passed favorably by the Board of Directors shall be included on the ballot with the biennial election of officers. If adopted the amendment shall become effective on January 1st following the election. The amended Constitution and Bylaws shall be included with the Winter Newsletter."

Laurie Ashley you asked "How would the member know if the meet is approved or not, in time to not miss deadlines for other shows they may also like to see as a potential meet, if it's like a month later, etc"

I assure you that Scott has carbon copied me on every meet request he has sent out. He has also carbon copied me on all his confirmation emails that he sends to the members that requested the meet when he receives confirmation where he also asks them to start a topic on our forum to promote the new meet. Scott has always been quick to send them out after he receives them. The problem is not Scott; the issue is 1. Superintendents are not responding to his emails acknowledging they have been accepted or 2. members have accidently given the wrong contact information. Which may be due to the wrong information being posted elsewhere where they obtained their information for all we know. (yes, this has actually happened) All any director can do is send out the request to the "person of contact" they are given, we cannot force them to respond or confirm the meet was accepted. We are actually dealing with a show now that published in their catalog that they were hosting a sanctioned meet when it was never accepted by them. The director at that time sent it out to the contact information provided but they never responded or confirmed the meet request was accepted and that a sanctioned meet was placed, so it was never published in one of our newsletters. Try explaining to the member that requested a meet and then sees it advertised in a catalog, but the meet was never confirmed and published in a newsletter, so it is not sanctioned.  which the current meet policy states it has to be in order for it to be a sanctioned meet. 

 " Club meets may be placed by the Director in charge of meets when a member requests a meet for a specific show, he/she
plans to exhibit Ameraucana at, in time for the meet to be publicized in the quarterly Ameraucana Newsletter prior to the
show's entry deadline. "

I truly appreciate you asking, perhaps the director in charge of placing meets should also start carbon copying the members that request meets when they send out meet request. That way our members know when the director sends out the meet request, and when the contact person confirms the meet. This is exactly what this discussion was started for 

[Laurie Ashley - Selah Farms]

I would think adding the Requesting Member as a CC would be sufficient, that way we would at least know when it was sent to the host club.  And allow us to be a bit more aware and involved in the process, instead of just left out in left field hoping things align right 

I can also volunteer to be a helper for meet requests, if that would be beneficial to the board.  I have a good many contacts with a majority of shows all over the country, and can donate a few hours a week to helping track down contact information, emails, phone numbers, forms, whatever is needed or may be missing. 
(have noticed myself information for listed show contacts are often out of date, or incorrect people listed...heck our OWN meet form we send out to the host club has incorrect names still on them in places )
I am willing to help if its genuinely needed. I don't want to impugn honor, or step on toes. But truth is we as general membership were told at the meeting dinner that we were overwhelming the director in charge of meets, thus the reason for the limitations on number of requests allowed per member.  So... allowing the workload to be shared and delegated, would eliminate the need to limit requests, yes?

I officially think no major changes are needed to current Meet policy as is, if people are required to be personally responsible for their own show reports, and their own follow ups with host clubs. 

[Russ Blair]

Laurie I truly appreciate your willingness to help it is much appreciated and I will relay this to the board members when we resume our discussions on this matter. I do need to clarify one thing you mentioned

“But truth is we as general membership were told at the meeting dinner that we were overwhelming the director in charge of meets, thus the reason for the limitations on number of requests allowed per member.”

I never said meet request were overwhelming the director, Scott Lepak, at our annual meeting. What I said was “one of the reasons I started the discussion on needed changes to our current meet policy with the board of directors was due to the fact in the first month of the new board assuming their responsibilities, there were three members that all sent meet request in within the same week. Some of those meet request emails contained 8-12 meet request with one member requesting a meet to be placed at a 600 entry show 1,000 miles from their house that they have never attended and did not attend.” I don’t recall mentioning anything about Scott being overwhelmed, in fact Scott has never complained one time of having to uphold his duties. He has actually went above and beyond in his attempts to place meets. Meaning I have witnessed him send multiple emails and not receive any replies from the show contact given. Again I truly appreciate your willingness to help and it will be mentioned to the board, thanks.

[Rebecca G Howie]

Over the past two years I have seen multiple instances where the owner/breeder/exhibitor was not present at the show. The birds were brought and shown by another person in the owner's name. In a real emergency (sudden illness, broken limb, birth or death) I can understand that. It should be a rare event. We have plenty of time to make arrangements in our work, school and social lives to determine whether we can attend a specific show before sending in an entry form. Multiple occurrences of an exhibitor not present is not acceptable and not fair to other exhibitors present.

I suggest that a requirement be added that the exhibitor MUST be present at a show to receive awards. As a side note I have seen that statement in some show catalogs.

[Mike Gilbert]

Over the past two years I have seen multiple instances where the owner/breeder/exhibitor was not present at the show. The birds were brought and shown by another person in the owner's name. In a real emergency (sudden illness, broken limb, birth or death) I can understand that. It should be a rare event. We have plenty of time to make arrangements in our work, school and social lives to determine whether we can attend a specific show before sending in an entry form. Multiple occurrences of an exhibitor not present is not acceptable and not fair to other exhibitors present.
I suggest that a requirement be added that the exhibitor MUST be present at a show to receive awards. As a side note I have seen that statement in some show catalogs.

Becky, I think your concept is a good one.   But how do you propose such a rule would be enforced?   I struggle with that, envisioning all the different scenarios that could come into play.  For example, what happens when no one reports it?  How would we know for sure if reported emergencies were real or not?  What about juniors, who often have conflicting school events?  What if it is a newer exhibitor at the show that other members don't know yet, and don't meet them at the show for some reason?  What happens to relationships when someone games the system and finds out or suspects who snitched?  Perhaps you have good answers to these questions; if so, please share them here.