GSDCA-WDA BYLAW Change Proposal - Page 10

The special board meeting conference call information is on the "Official GSDCA-WDA" Facebook page.  I'm not sure how those who don't use FB are supposed to know about the calls.

The issue here is to motivate the WDA membership to speak your individual minds.  WDA members, please VOTE.  There is still time.  

Wallace has chosen not to vote.  OK.  He is allowed to be apathetic. 

Many WDA members hope that Wallace's behavior will not become the model for the organization.

Wallace, you can and will do what you want, no one is asking you to do anything different.  Vote or don't vote on the bylaws amendments.  Some of the rest of us are concerned about the direction of the GSDCA-WDA and want a say in its direction.  Many of us have regional directors who make very little effort to hear what their regions members are interested in and don't provide any feedback on what the board is voting on.

I do not belong to WDA and I have NEVER done FB.  Have heard that it is dangerous to post there.  Do not need more lists and more problems.  So, if I belonged, what a mess.  Heard here that posts are easily deleted.  I do not need that mess.

Well, well, well--a deep subject for thought--and today, there are lots of thoughts about which to think!  For starters, don't miss dialing in tonight for one of the Board's infamous Conference Calls.  An agenda of 6 items has actually been published for tonight's event, but my money says they will probably not get passed #1 unless they really don't want to dwell on the counting of the ballots.  If you worry about having to identify yourself, get together with a friend or two, and put the call on speaker phone.

And speaking of counting the ballots, more interesting information keeps surfacing.  For instance, it seems that Mr. Hartman, an outspoken opponent of the by law proposals, actually contacted the Board, saying he was against the whole process, but he wanted to be involved in counting the ballots.  Dan Yee granted Mr. Hartman's request--smart move on the part of Mr. P.O.O.  Then Mr. Yee appointed General Director Gene Kalvaitis, a consistent voice for the members despite overwhelming opposition from other Board members, as another vote counter--another smart move, and then Mr. Yee appointed newly elected Region 6 Director Larry Vizcant as the third ballot counter--still another smart move.  Notice that all the controversial Board Members and Officers were not among the chosen in an attempt to create an atmosphere of openness and fairness and.....harmony.

This whole even has been scripted down to the last detail.  The symbolism of having this controversial event held in Philadelphia a city in which our basic American freedoms and most cherished documents, The Declaration of Independence; the Articles of Confederation; The Constitution of the United States and its first ten amendments-The Bill of Rights; took root, and in the state of Pennsylvania where nearby Gettsburg gave voice to Abraham Lincoln's famous address which concluded with reference to "....a government of the people, by the people, and for the people..." made my creative side begain to imagine what it would be like to attend that particular segment of this Board meeting.

The scene is set and the production begins.  Since General Director Mary Gattone has been appointed Chair of the Ballot Tellers and I am not sure what that function entails, I have taken literary license and placed her on a platform replete with video cameras overlooking the ballot counting area, and she is busily directing her video assistants, who will stream the activities in real time to the Pedigree Database and to Facebook, while she also tweets simultaneously to her Twitter account.  The count down begins, the sound system is turned on, and to the tune of "There's No Business Like Show Business," our three Ballot Tells enter.  Now, no one is going to accuse them of anything untoward--as they are all encapsulated in Hazmat suits, but with clear facemasks to avoid any charges by already irrate members that substitutions were made.

Calmly and harmoniously, the rest of the Board and Officers sit behind the glare of the bright lights illuminating the ballot counting area.  However, if one listens carefully, one can hear the words to a medley of "What a Wonderful World This Could Be" and "The Board Will Teach the Members to Sing in Perfect Harmony" (with credit to Michael Jackson's original "I'd Like to Teach the World to Sing in Perfect Harmony.)

At last, the ballot counters signal that all 3 of them have agreed on the final vote tally.  And here, ladies and gentlemen, I leave it to you to choose the ending.  In Ending #1--if the proposals fail, there will be a sudden blackout on the screen and an immediate loss of picture and sound, followed by an announcement of a temporary outage that is being worked on.  End of story---until damage control can come up with a story to spin.  My guess is that it will be along the line that despite the fact the the members defeated proposals which the Board knew were best for the members, the Board in its omnipotent and understanding way will find other avenues to "help the members to better understand" the next round of proposals....and you know there will be a next round.    In Ending #2--if the 3 proposals pass, the ballot counters will exit stage left and a fog machine will create a mist through which the Board and Officers will mystically pass onto a raised platform to acknowledge their anointment as the chosen masters of the WDA.  To add the appearance of divine intervention and to sooth the fears of the defeated, opposing membership, a recorded version of the Mormon Tabernacle Choir singing "Amazing Grace" will add solenmity to the occasion.  After which, the first order of business will be to change the title of President to an expanded version of the one used by the late Kim Jung II of North Korea--Dear Leader Everlasting.  Thus, that means that henceforth, the current President would be "affectionately" be referred to as Mr. P.O.O.D.L.E.

However, on a more serious note, I am deeply troubled by what I have been told is one of the rules of the ballot counting procedure which were sent to directors and officers.  It states that some of the envelopes/ballots have already been separated from the rest as "irregularities." This was done by the 2 members named by Mr. Yee to confirm and to verify the ballots as they are received and that would be Ms Joy Schultz, WDA Office Manager and Region 2 Director, and WDA Secretary and Monitor/Censurer of the WDA Facebook Site.  How could the envelopes be considered irregular--let me count the ways:  Did the member, as a protest, dare to remove the identifying return address label;  Did the member simply forget to put his or her signature under the return address;  Did the member forget to dot the "i's" or cross the "t's" in his or her name; Did the member use manuscript instead of cursive writing, or Did the member perhaps write a suggestion as to what the Board could do with the ballot?  Or...were these "irregularities" found on ballots that were in envelopes which were opened before Ms Schultz received the order from on high not to open the envelopes.  In that case:  Did the lines of the "X" intersect outside the parameter of the box;  Did the member darken the box rather than use an "X;"  Did some quirky individual choose to use a different letter of the alphabet than "X" to indicate a choice?   But, more importantly, what is going to be done with these ballots with "irregularities" and who is going to make that decision?  The members deserve to know and they deserve to know now!!

And once again, thinking back to the Declaration of Independence, John Hancock reportedly signed his name so large because he wanted King George, who was known for having very poor eyesight, to be able to read his signature without his glasses, knowing full well that he would be summarily hanged if he were ever captured by the British.  Now, fortunately, none of us is in danger of hanging, but retribution does loom large.  Nevertheless, while each of us may like or dislike some or all of the current Board members and officers, that does not mean that we and they cannot "agree to disagree" on some issues and still maintain friendly relationships if that is the case at present.  Therefore, I once again encourage you to proudly sign your name (large, if so inclined) even if you disapprove of the process, mark you ballot--"No" to all three of the proposals, and then mail it as soon as possible.  Many members of the United Schutzhund Clubs of America left that organization because "in America, no one should be telling someone else what organizations he or she can or cannot belong to," and, yet, if these 3 proposals are passed, the WDA Board is taking away other cherished freedoms in America and that is the right of members to be heard by the Board the members have elected to represent them and of the right to a secret ballot.

Mr. Payne, I sense and understand your frustrations about the number of clubs who never offer shows and/or trials and are content to show or trial on the efforts and work of those clubs who do.  This is extremely unfair and is a situation that badly needs to be addressed by the Board.  I would encourage you to speak to your Regional Director or to contact a General Director to have this issue addressed.  In turn, I hope you are better able to understand the frustrations of those of us who feel this Board is not listening to the membership now, and, if these 3 by law proposals pass, will never listen to the membership.  Good luck to you.

bump

I usually don't comment on this or any board except to have fun on FB.....but as a member of the "WORKING" dog association I am bewildered by the number of people on the board who have NOT titled a dog whether it is in AKC or SchH (ooooops) IPO.
Some of us have spent years and years training our dogs, some of it came easy some not so much. But we actually did it!
I find it difficult to feel comfortable with a board that has so few people that have been 'out there' making decisons for the rest of us. I have watched many movies about being a cop, but it still doesn't make me one.
The only way we can keep this organizaiton a working organization is by our vote and jacking up the quorum is just going to keep the real membership muted.
Th USa club is leaps and bounds ahead of us in trialing and titling......why?
~Pat

I am bewildered by the number of people on the board who have NOT titled a dog whether it is in AKC or SchH (ooooops) IPO. I find it difficult to feel comfortable with a board that has so few people that have been 'out there,  making decisons for the rest of us. I have watched many movies about being a cop, but it still doesn't make me one.

Right on, beaugsd!  Wouldn't it be interesting to have each WDA Board Member and Officer list the dogs that they have shown and/or titled and when? 

Th USa club is leaps and bounds ahead of us in trialing and titling......why?

Perhaps if this Board truly had the best interest of the members and the betterment of the breed in mind instead of perpetuating self-interest projects, then perhaps the WDA Board would have more time to focus on important things, such as ways to encourage more trials, shows, titling, etc.

And speaking of the Board keeping the members MUTED, how about our Mr. Point of Order, Dearest Leader Everlasting (P.O.O.D.L.E.) keeping his own Board members and Officers "MUTED" last night during the Conference Call?  Supposedly there was too much background noise, so our august leader found it necessary to MUTE people, who then had to punch in a couple of numbers in order to be able to talk again. Was this a practice session for the next Membership Meeting, or is it that he just enjoys the sound of his own voice so much?

You don't encourage, you don't ask, you don't shame, you make it mandatory that each club have a trial once a year.  They have tried the encouragement route for years and it haven't worked.  Doing the same things over and over and expecting a different result is insanity!  The GSDCA-WDA was created for one main reason and that was to be the "WORKING ARM" of the GSDCA.  Some where along the line it GSDCA-WDA became GSDCA-DA the Working is not so important anymore.

The GSDCA-WDA have lost appox 10 clubs in the last 2 years and I was just informed today that one more club will be leaving in my region (region 3)  As I said before we are worrying about the wrong things at this rate of losing clubs in ten years we will not have to worry about a quorum if we don't increase trials all you will have left is the NASS.   I've brought the lost of clubs and lack of trials to the board last year and nothing was done,  it was as if it didn't matter.  And as I read these post it still doesn't matter to the board or a lot of WDA members, what seem to be more important is fighting over power plays.  Oh, the board cares about the Big Shit, Nationals, the up coming WUSV 2013,  Universal Sieger Show and the NASS but the heart and soul of all working organization is the local trials that's what make a working organization great not how many people show up at a meeting, not who's voted in or appointed,  not how long one stays in office.

I voted No to all three by-laws and will continue to vote against the board's "wishes" until they DO  look at what is important for the Working Dog Association - more trials, more clubs and more judges.   I am honestly starting to believe that WDA is a sham when it comes to wanting to be a working dog organization, specifically IPO.   Don't have to look far to see it....look at the number of upcoming trials or past trials this year, look at the last magazine that came out....other then the misquoted (from the members that actually made the rules) comments about the "new rules"...there was not one thing in there about IPO - and those comments were useless...just one persons interpretation of the rules - not anything specific about the rules themselves.   I'm sure that they would not even have half the active members or the active clubs had it not been for the JA and as Wallace pointed out......they are losing ACTIVE members and clubs at least monthly.     As stated before...it's like having to decide which is the worst of two evils = WDA = few trials, few judges and few concerns about the working dog aspect of the organization and then there is the UScA = JA = giving up the right to chose between trialing at another "competing" USA organization = no balls to even name WDA.   To be honest, the ONLY reason I renewed my membership with WDA is so that my votes for the current by-laws would be counted, as I was informed by the office that if I did not renew by a specific date - my vote would not count.  In both organizations very few if any of the board members are actively training and titling dogs in the sport of IPO, they don't feel the brunt of their decisions or lack of trials/training at the club levels like the members who are actively pursuing titles/training do and it's becoming apparant that they don't care - it seems to be all about "power" to them.  The few members in both organizations that are actively training somehow see to it that higher level  trials that they intend to compete in are held either at their home field or at least in their region - I guess that would be one incentive for higher level competitors to join the board (insert sarcasim here).   It seems that there is only one organization now that does not require one to give up their rights , or have a lack of club/trial if they want to compete in the sport of IPO = DVG.   I'm just disgusted with the politics and in the sport as a whole anymore - maybe I should go back to wearing blinders and think of what is BEST for me (training/trials etc) - to heck with the politics......as I really do enjoy training and the time spent with my dogs.