 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
|
It is the responsibility of our elected Officers and Board to preserve and protect the Doberman. We insist that they have not acted responsibly!
__________________________________________________________________________
In 2004, in an effort to protect the breed and discourage the demand for and the production of albino Dobermans (a genetic defect) a motion (4-26) was passed. This motion banned albino Dobermans from competing in all DPCA events. However at our 2011 National, an Albino Doberman WAS invited, WAS welcomed, WAS allowed to compete and was celebrated in photos on the web.
The Officers and Board chose to rescind motion 4-26 and pass Motion 12-19 allowing albinos to compete in Doberman Pinscher Club of America events . Sheila DiNardo, Albino Chairperson was NOT heard from. Tony was the 1st V.P. at the time of passage of Motion 4-26 and voted to approve it. He was 1st V.P. in the 2011 fiasco when he went to the AKC for guidance over the AKC Delegate or the President. The Albino Chair, Sheila DiNardo, Tony DiNardo, the 1st V.P. who voted to approve 4-26 along with 2011 President, Jeff Brucker were all present at the national.
"The albino petition presented to the DPCA board of directors has been deemed invalid per the DPCA Constitution and By-laws."
Jeff Brucker -
DPCA President
"The cut off time for petition signatures is Thursday March 29, 2012 6 PM EST. Petition signatures received after the stated cut off time will not be counted." Jeff Brucker DPCA President
The Board was unsure if the method used to present the petition was valid and parties friendly to Dr. DiNardo. and the Board. The AKC and 2 Parliamentarians were consulted resulting in a decision against accepting the petition.
From: Jim CrowleyJXC@akc.org
Chapter 6, Section 7 of the Rules Applying to Dog Shows, which also applies to Companion events, does give a club the authority to make special regulations or additional rules governing its events " provided such regulations or additional rules do not conflict with any rule of The American kennel Club. Chapter 11, Section 14 prohibits a club from in any way discriminating between exhibitors and entrants.
A technicality that should have been addressed but the President and Board were doing everything in their power to do bad things without looking bad.
MOTION 12-39 (Shorr/J. Brown) TO POSTPONE. voting on 12-38 until a ballot of the membership reveals what is desired by the members of the DPCA.
Again avoiding looking bad, but still sweeping the controversy under the boardroom carpet. but ...A point of order was called by Helsdon, Motion 12-39 is Ruled Out of Order by President Brucker It seems that the "my way or the highway" governance rule is in full effect. SO... MOTION 12-40 (Shorr/Helsdon) TO LAY 12-39 ON TABLE. Seeing that no progress was being made it was suggested that 12-39 be tabled. i.e. buried never to be seen again!
"Whereas a nonbinding, advisory opinion of an AKC staff member opined that the application of Board Motion 04-26 might violate AKC regulations prohibiting discrimination where the sole criteria for the award or event in question is derived from AKC statistics" is a clear admission that the AKC DOES NOT HAVE STANDING AT DPCA events ... and still nothing is done. And yet, there exists a bona fide question about the extent to which AKC has the constitutional authority to overrule the decision of the Board of an AKC Parent Club that has properly exercised its power under Art. IV, Section 4 of the AKC Charter
The additional stipulation was, " the additional requirement that the dog must be of an allowed color as defined in the standard of the breed"
With the passage of Motion 12-34, Breeders in order to be listed in the breeder's directory must put a statement on their personal websites, i.e. " We do not condone or support the breeding of the "white"/albino Doberman as it is a genetic mutation with some serious physical consequences. Learn more here
Motion 12-34
For the motion: Penny Cary, Beverly Purswell, Naomi Shorr, Debi Sternberg, Jeff Brucker, Julie Stade, Ellen Hanley, Sandy Teague, Sam Moceri
For the motion: Penny Cary, Beverly Purswell, Naomi Shorr, Debi Sternberg, Jeff Brucker, Julie Stade, Ellen Hanley, Sandy Teague, Sam Moceri
Pres. Brucker said, "Photos of uncropped and/or undocked Dobermans will be posted as warranted on the DPCA website, the Facebook page and in printed publications."
Motion 12-17 (Jacobsen/Teague) that photographs of uncropped Dobermans would be allowed on the DPCA website.
Motion 12-20 (Teague/Moceri)
Move to rescind Motion 12-17 (Jacobsen/Teague)
Kathy Davieds , DVM exhibits and supports uncropped Doberman Pinschers (see, attn Breeders & exhibitors)
"Director Jeff Helsdon suggested that we invite Karen Kissinger to shoot a video with Sprite telling her story, doing public relations about why Albinos should not be bred, and posting the video on the DPCA website. It was stated that she has a brochure that she hands out for educational purposes stating why Albino Dobermans should not be bred, pointing out heath issues, light sensitivity, etc. The Board agreed that the video would be a good idea; President Brucker will contact Karen and ask if she is interested."
NOTE: None of this every came to fruitition but it illuminates the thinking of Helsdon (see discussion)
There is also Brucker looking for a volunteer to Chair the Albino Committee
"May 10, 2012
Dear Parent Club:
The American Kennel Club and Eukanuba take great pride in the fact our
Parent Clubs have played an important role in our National Championship. We thank your members who dedicate their time and creativeness for the cornerstone attraction; Meet the Breeds, the attractive club ads that are sent in and the huge support of the Parent Club Medallion Trophies that are prized collectibles.
With our upcoming plans to offer all classes at the National Championship we would like to have your input on your breeds' judge.
We have re-instituted a past program where we ask the Parent Club(s) for input in the selection process. We would like each club to reply with a list of up to five (5) individuals you consider most knowledgeable of your breed.
We would like to have your choices on file as potential judges of future events, and you may update as needed. You can email your selection to mlc@akc.org or mail me:
Michael Canalizo
American Kennel Club
260 Madison Avenue
New York, NY 10016"
MOTION 12-53 (Teague/Hanley) EUKANUBA: Move that the DPCA submit the following names of judges to the AKC for the
2015 AKC / Eukanuba National Championship judging panel.
1. Mrs. Judith A. Brown
2. Dr. Anthony DiNardo
3. Ms. Sheila DiNardo
4. Dr. May S. Jacobson
5. Ms. Betty Leininger
For: Brucker, DiNardo, M. Brown, Teague, Hanley, Cary, Jacobson, J. Brown, Ross
Against:
Abstain: Stade
No vote cast: Shorr, Sternberg, Purswell, Helsdon
Motion Passed
The ballot for the DPCA Board election mailed to the membership did not include the resume of each candidate, and the ballot for the DPCA Board election mailed to the membership could have been clearer that a member may vote for up to three candidates and quoting the A.P.M. that requires a resume of 200 words or less.
To appoint Judith A Brown to fulfill the balance of Debi Sternberg's term as Recording Secretary.
For: DiNardo, M. Brown, Stade, Teague, Hanley, Jacobson, J. Brown, Helsdon, Ross, Purswell
Against: none
Abstain: Cary
No vote cast: Shorr
Motion Passed
Motion 13-10 (Teague/Helsdon)
To approve the Judges' Education Committee to be chaired equally by Faye Strauss, Bob Vandiver, Jeffrey Brucker and Gwen DeMilta. Changed the J.E.C. structure to appoint 2 handlers to co-chairs.
Reverses motion 13-10 and makes Faye Strauss made sole chair of J.E.C. again.
This will be the first time in over a decade that Anthony DiNardo is NOT a DPCA officer/Director or Delegate. Incoming President Helsdon opined, "Should
we fail to accomplish those things which we
have within our power to achieve, the fault, dear
Brutus, is not in our stars, but in ourselves."
other Officers are First Vice-President: Michelle Santana, Second Vice-President: Dr. Mary-Helene “Mimi” Brown MD, Recording Secretary: Theresa Mullen, Corresponding Secretary: Sandy Teague, Membership Secretary: Lesley Reeves-Hunt, Treasurer: John Schoeneman and Delegate to the American Kennel Club: Janet Van Wormer. New Directors include Sharon Pflueger , Faye Strauss and Adrian Woodfork for the 2014 - 2016 term
All Board correspondence and documents will be contemporaneously available to DPCA Members. This does NOT apply to Executive Sessions Meetings. A further motion was made to table Motion 13--40.
With an online video and support from many in the DPCA, Helsdon garners the most votes. He expresses a desire to heal the wounds with his message in the Winter, 2013 Pipeline. “So let us begin: to bind our wounds and heal our hearts, pledging to discuss those questions we face not with rancor, nor looking upon the instant means available in our electronic age as a forum for invective, but instead with mutual respect. "
"Mr. Helsdon continued the meeting with a review of previous Administrative Manual (APM) revisions, changes and additions. Most of the discussion was confirming what the board has previ ously discussed over the past several months. Some additions were made." - Meeting Minutes of the BoD
Because the approval process at AKC requires a couple of months - the AKC Board voted on Janet Van Wormer's acceptance as the DPCA Delegate to the AKC as soon as possible so that she will be approved to attend the Delegate Meeting in December. Expensesw to be covered by the DPCA.
The BoD voted to name Jan Van Wormer as the DPCA representative to the NAIA Conference, November 2 and 3, 2013, Orlando , Florida and to pay expenses not to exceed $1200.00.
Van Wormer connected with Adrian Hochstadt, JD, CAE who directs the AVMA's state legislative and regulatory initiatives. Also Van Wormer met Pat Mixon, Her areas of expertise are healthcare, veterinary medical issues, agriculture, and other business and association related legislation.
To temporarily assist during the excused absence of L. Michelle Lewis who was seriously injured in a vehicle accident. As a result L. Michelle was unable to attend the National and the BoD was charged with naming a replacement. This assignment would later be made permanent and L. Michelle Lewis would then be appointed to the vacated Mullen seat on the Board.
As a result of suspected "taping" of the GTM, the Michigan attorney advised that the DPCA should discontinue the practice of allowing an audience of the membership at our Board Meetings. He advised since we are not a public entity, we are not bound by Law to allow for attendance by the General Membership to our monthly meetings.
Up to $2,000. can be spent on creating a video explaining DPCA finances? Rather than invest money in a forensic audit of the DPCA books - the officers and Directors have decided it would be better to create a video to explain ALL about the DPCA financial workings. That way the members could better understand how their monies are handled in the boardroom.
DPCA to send another $5,000 to NAIA as done previously. The motion was made by Jan Van Wormer to continue the DPCA support to the National Animal Interest Alliance. The NAIA is dedicated to promoting animal welfare, supporting responsible animal use and strengthening the bond between humans and animals. Please read the NAIA policy statements on their home page.
This is an exchange of Mullen's Board seat for the R.S. position and L. Michelle Lewis will assume Mullen's seat until the 2014 elections. There was also a motion to accept minor changes to the recording secretary section of the APM.
President Helsdon has introduced a new Line Item Budget Form for committees to submit their annual budge along with two other new forms; DPCA Bailment form and Special Projects Event form. The Judges Education Committee Chair discussed her budget with the board before Motion 14-22 was proposed by Jan Van Wormer and seconded by Jacobson to approve a budget of $4,000 as requested by the JEC Chair, Faye Strauss. It was passed unanimously.
To approve the appointments of new Chairs for these following Committees Motion 14-28 was proposed by Van Wormer: Achievement Recognition-Obedience, Sandy Svendsen; Annual Awards-Performance, Sandy Svendsen; Historian, Joanne Duncan; Junior Showmanship Achievement Recognition, Michelle Santana; Legislative Director, Marylyn DeGregorio; Medical Research Evaluation, May Jacobson.
Motion 14-32 (Lee/Jacobson)
To create a Health Education Coordinator and appoint Kathy Davieds as Chair.
In favor: Santana; Jacobson; Van Wormer; Schoeneman; Lee; Reeves-Hunt; Mullen
No vote: Brown; Pflueger; Strauss; Teague
Motion passes.
Bonnie Bailey, PEC Chair presented the ad for the AKC Eukanuba Invitational Souvenir Program to be given to the approximately 25,000 people who attend this event. The ad portrays the Doberman as a magnificent and versatile breed.Motion 14-39 (Lee/Teague) To approve the ad prepared by Bonnie Bailey, PEC Chair replacing one photo.
The DPCA Board authorized a half page ad in the AKC/Eukanuba National Championship Official Show Guide. Over 25,000 spectators were anticipated at this event, where the Show Guide is considered a keepsake souvenir. T he Public Education Committee extends a special T hank you! To Sandy Teague who designed the ad
Motion 14-40 (Van Wormer/Pflueger)
To accept Motion 14-39 as amended by 14-40 to purchase a half page ad prepared by Bonnie Bailey, PEC Chair, for $1200 to be placed in the AKC Eukanuba Invitational show guide program.
Motion 14-45 (Lewis/Lee)
To substitute the wording? Loyal Companion? in place of? Guardian? in the DPCA branding message adopted by the Public Education Committee.
For the Motion: Woodfork; Santana; Schoeneman; Van Wormer; Reeves-Hunt; Lee; Strauss; Pflueger; Jacobson; Lewis; Brown; Mullen.
Against the Motion: Teague
Motion passed.
This committee will make recommendations to the Board about whether the Board should have an audit of its financial statements conducted, or establish Agreed Upon Procedures for specific purposes like reviewing internal controls and safeguarding of DPCA assets. The FRAC should report back to the Board in a timely manner about its progress and make recommendations about what direction the Board should take, estimate the cost, recommend who should be hired, and to help draft the engagement letter with the independent CPA chosen by the Board.
The FRAC will then oversee the independent financial review process and report back to the Board with the written report of the independent CPA.
The FRAC will also make sure that revisions or recommendations made by the CPA, such as about the organization?s internal controls, are implemented.
Motion 14-49 (Santana/Strauss)
To appoint JANET VAN WORMER as 2014 National Show Chair effective immediately.
Motion passed unanimously.
Motion 14-51 ( Van Wormer/Lee)
To appoint to the FRAC Committee, Shirlee Walker as Chairperson, Elaine Hopper and John Schoeneman as committee members.
Motion passed unanimously
Motion 14-53 (Pflueger/Teague)
Preamble: In order to update the APM.
Motion: To change Article I, Sections B, C & E changing the number of calendar days a motion will be in the discussion period from seven to five days and the number of calendar days a motion will be in the voting period from seven to five days, also.
Motion passed unanimously
Motion 14-56 (Van Wormer/Reeves-Hunt)
Preamble: In order to ensure that the DPCA is kept abreast of all recent legislative developments throughout the U.S., and to ensure that the DPCA is best able to coordinate our legislative efforts with the efforts of other AKC member clubs.
Motion: That the DPCA should reimburse Marylyn DeGregario for her expenses incurred in attending the AKC Legislative Conference
Motion 14-59 (Reeves Hunt/Lee)
Preamble: To ensure the Mid-Year Meetings are not financially cumbersome to Officers and Directors.
Motion: To allow Officers and Directors to request reimbursement for expenses incurred while attending the DPCA Mid-Year Meeting. Reimbursable expenses to be limited to Economy airfare or mileage reimbursement at the current IRS rate, whichever is less; Airport parking; Airport to hotel transfers; Hotel room rate and a $50.00 per day meal allowance. Receipts must be submitted to receive reimbursement.
For the motion: Santana; Reeves-Hunt; Van Wormer; Lee; Lewis; Woodfork; Jacobson; Strauss; Pflueger; Mullen.
Against the motion: Schoeneman; Teague.
Motion passed.
Motion 14-63 (Van Wormer/Jacobson)
Preamble: The resignation of Jeff Helsdon as DPCA President left a vacancy in the position of President, which is automatically filled by the First Vice President Article III: Section 4 of the DPCA By-Laws. This leaves a vacancy for the position of the First Vice President position.
Motion: That Morris M. (Skip) Lee be approved by the board to fill the vacancy left by Michelle Santana for First Vice President.
Motion passed unanimously
This petition was concerning the board's attempt to substitute the wording ?Loyal Companion? in place of ?Guardian? in the DPCA branding message adopted by the Public Education Committee.
Motion 14-68 (Mullen/Van Wormer)
Preamble: Whereas a petition with signatures with at least the required 5% of the membership according to the C&B, and was presented to the board of directors, containing a motion for their consideration.
Motion: To rescind Motion 14-45.
Motion passed unanimously
Motion 14-72 (Van Wormer/Mullen)
Preamble: Due to the unexpected changes within the board of director positions.
Motion: I propose we cancel the April 25 and 26, 2014 mid-year meeting.
For the Motion: Lee; Brown; Schoeneman; Mullen; Reeves-Hunt; Van Wormer; Woodfork; Strauss; Pflueger; Lewis; Jacobson.
Against the Motion: Teague.
Motion passed.
Motion 14-75 (Jacobson/Teague)
Preamble: Health issues that continue to plague our Dobermans are some of our highest priorities. The DPCA wants to assist researchers with the development of treatments and cures of common diseases, especially DCM.
Motion: It is moved that the DPCA award a grant of $10,000 to Dr. Amara Estrada, University of Florida , to assess the ability of treating DCM using gene therapy and $25,000 to Dr. Richard Vulliet, University of California Davis , and ReGena-Vet Laboratories to begin treatment of DCM Dobermans with stem cell (MSC) products.
The motion passed unanimously
Motion 14-77 (Woodfork/Reeves-Hunt)
Preamble: In order to synchronize our official documents.
Motion: To retain SteveSteve Britton, Professional Registered Parliamentarian, to review the DPCA governing documents, and makes suggestion (s) for changes in writing. The governing documents including the Certificate of Incorporation and any amendments filed to it, the DPCA By-Laws and all Standing and Special Rules of Order contained in the DPCA Administrative Manual. Mr. Britton will be paid at the rate of $100 per hour, pro-rated to the quarter hour. Payment is limited to $1,500 until further review by the board.
Motion passed unanimously.
Motion 14-85 (Lee/Pflueger)
Preamble: To accomplish the restructuring of the committees.
Motion: To create a new committee, the National Specialty Fund Raising Committee with Stacy Simms as the Chair; to dissolve the Communication Co-Ordination Committee; to consolidate the Annual Awards Conformation/Performance Committees with Karen Thompson as Chair; Karen DeGrazia-Fox will be the Archivist Chair with Jeff Brucker as a committee member.
The Motion passed unanimously.
Motion 14-88 (Teague/Jacobson)
Preambles: One of the responsibilities of the DPCA is to educate prospective purchasers of Doberman Pinschers about responsible breeders. The advertisements which the DPCA finances in generic dog publications such as Dog Fancy are designed to drive those prospective purchasers away from Albino breeders and High-Volume breeders, who also advertise in those publications, and toward responsible breeders who are members of DPCA.
Motion: That the Board approve the immediate expenditure necessary to continue our current advertising in those publications in which we have been advertising as an important public educational service of the DPCA.
Motion passed unanimously.
Motion 14-91 (Lee/Lewis)
Preamble: The Administration Procedures Manual, the APM, is in the process of being reviewed and updated. In a careful review it?s been discovered that some previous updates to the APM included in the October 14, 2013 version are in conflict with the current C & B.
Motion: To use the July 2008 version of the APM as a starting point and insert motions since 2008 with the motion number, who made and seconded the motion for easy reference to bring the APM up to date with current time and with the current C & B.
For the motion: Lee; Brown; Mullen; Reeves-Hunt; Schoeneman; Van Wormer; Jacobson; Lewis; Woodfork; Pflueger.
Against the motion: Teague.
No vote: Auch was dropped from the call.
Motion passed.
Motion 14-94 (Jacobson/Teague)
Preamble: Whereas never in the history of the DPCA have Officers and Board members been reimbursed for their expenses to attend a mid-year Meeting, and given the DPCA?s shrinking finances.
Motion: It is moved that it is in the best interest of the DPCA?s finances to rescind Motion 14-59.
For the motion: Lee; Brown; Teague; Schoeneman; Strauss; Jacobson; Auch.
Against the motion: Mullen; Reeves-Hunt; Van Wormer; Lewis;
No vote: Dropped from the call, Woodfork; Pflueger.
Motion passed
The letter in October addressed the issue of albinos competing in DPCA events. Motion 4-26 had NEVER been incorporated into the Administrative Procedures Manual A failure by the 2004 V.P. Tony DiNardo to do this job contributed to this embarrassment at the 2011 National. It was compounded by the 2011 V.P. Tony DiNardo running to the AKC to decide internal DPCA operational procedures.
An extensive re-submission of the petition to verifying every email addresse by more than a qualifying number of members was undertaken, accomplished and submitted to the BoD on March 16th. And that we were continuing to accept verified signatures
A political move by the Officers and Directors again thru up yet another blockade by imposing a time limit for completion. One breeder succinctly put it thusly; "There is no legal basis to impose a time limit".
In an effort to protect the breed and to discourage the demand for and the production of Albino Dobermans (a genetic defect) a motion was passed eight years ago. At the 2011 National this Motion was NOT followed. Members are insisting that the BoD follow their own rules. This wish has been transmitted to the Officers and Directors in MANY emails and phone calls. Accountability is the goal and those in charge are putting forth many excuses and finger-pointing without resolution.
It was pointed out to the BoD that the top 20 is strictly a DPCA function and AKC rules DO NOT APPLY to a DPCA function. And that Mr. Crowley did say the decision is DPCA's not the AKC's.
All membership efforts - including but not limited to phone and emails, personal conversations and a legal petition - were blocked by the Officers and Directors.
In order to avoid the embarassment of voting , the BoD wanted to poll the whole membership on their dereliction of their duty. It was suggested that the BoD seek guidance from the members on this issue with 12-39:
In part says: "
that there is no guarantee that we would prevail in an appeal to AKC it is obvious that the Board of Directors must know exactly what the majority of the membership wants the Doberman Pinscher Club of America Officers and Board of Directors to do in this regard.
With the next Motion 12-40, the BoD voted to deep six this whole mess and stop embarassing themselves. Other things are falling apart as the Albino Chair, Sheila DiNardo resigns and President Brucker is compelled to advertise for a replacement. If the Board votes - the mebership will then see who is stalling and who supports their position.
UNABLE TOPROTECT THE BREED. And we point out the admission of the errors committed, " an Albino Dobermans had an invitation extended to attend the 2011 Top 20 Obedience Competition at the Doberman Pinscher Club of America National Specialty through no fault of the Top 20 Obedience Committee, which was unaware of the clear policy of the club expressed in Motion 04-26 because that policy had not been memorialized in the Administrative Procedures Manual nor otherwise conveyed to that committee." DINARDO's FAILURE
Motion 12-41 was Helsdon's motion to return to 4-26 that established the policy of the Doberman Pinscher Club of America that Albino Dobermans "shall be ineligible for nomination for all conformation and performance awards, certificates, and competitions of the DPCA"
With 12-40 an attempt to table, i.e. bury, 12-39. This motion shows a deeply confused BoD with 1 against, 2 abstaining, and 4 not voting!
This expansion into private property of members seems to cross this line prompting one breeder to quip online,
"In light of their recent vote on 12-41, I will not comply and I will encourage other breeders to do the same." and another top say, " they are not against albinos at our internal Top Twenty , but Motion 12-34 forces DPCA breeders to advertise them on our web sites ?"
"It is bullying, interference, control, a move against civil liberties. It is also poorly worded. They refuse to fix the top twenty mess, but expect members to tell the world all about albinos. I'm sorry, it constitutes advertising for albinos. Remember the old hollywood mantra, "There's no such thing as bad press." It sounds actionable to me."
..whereas the motion 12-17 & 12-20 speak ONLY to the DPCA website. A-N-D Brucker widens the allowance to include Facebook AND printed publications which is in direct conflict with the actual motion passed by the BoD!. While NOT always observed in the past - ALL SUCH Presidential proclaimations, MUST be subjected to approval by the Board - this was NOT!
"Looks like a conflict to me." says a past DPCA President
In a letter to the Officers & Directors of the DPCA on March 23, 2012 a call was made to abolish the crop/dock committee and replace it with a "Standard Preservation Committee"..
" You hit the nail right on the head !!!! With this,,,,,I am shaking my head over this whole thing,,,,,, what on earth has happened to these people ? I thought they were intelligent people, guess not !!!!!!!!! "
" This idea of dragging out the albino issue in public is ludicrous and absurd."
" This will most certainly accomplish two things: Enlighten the public to the fact there * is * such a thing as a white Doberman, and to create the allure and demand for people to want one even more! "
Dr. DiNardo brazenly put his name and the wife's up for judging at the Eukanuba. Here are those voting to send DiNardo et al to the AKC for Eukanuba consideration. (Nominated in red)
For: Brucker, DiNardo, M. Brown, Teague, Hanley, Cary, Jacobson, J. Brown, Ross
This self-enrichment at the hands of the Officers of the DPCA prompted one member to write the following letter that was then sent to the AKC ...
" Mr. Canalizo,
As a member of the Doberman Pinscher Club of America, I would like to express my outrage at the blatant actions of our
BoD. Please visit the www.2undoit.com web site to see my objection to Judy Brown and May Jacobson. Tony DiNardo and Mrs.
DiNardo are well known in our breed for their unethical behavior when it comes to judging and payback assignments for those that
help them out politically.
This latest motion of the BoD naming the new President, his wife, and the ex wife of the recently resigned President, Jeff Brucker,
smack of all that is wrong with AKC dog shows, our parent club, and the self serving politicians that have been in office far too long.
Our Board has lost its way and we are trying desperately to undo the damage they have done to our breed since October 2011.
Dismantling our Standard incrementally was only the beginning, but their latest stunt is the cherry on top ! "
(letter on file from DPCA member in good standing at 2undoit.com)
Mistakes yet again by Ellen Hanley on a ballot causes a ripple of discontent from the membership. The Board's reation was to direct the President to correct the error. President DiNardo ignores the Board and declares the current ballot acceptable.
The President unilaterally overruled this directive by the board, but the board's position is clearly supported by the A.P.M!
When the President's handler is put on equal footing on the Judges Education Committee it smacks of impropiety, especially when it comes from DiNardo who stands to benefit personally. A former member addressed this issue with the President with the result that it would be rescinded later. (See 18 below)
Sanity has visited the Board and restored J.E.C. to its former self altho' what happened to Bob Vandiver's voice on this proclaimation? This too has been noticed Board members!
The new election cycle brought in some long-needed changes to the DPCA superstructure - Tony DiNardo has been given his walking papers.
1. His legislative efforts are marred by an attempt to stack the Judges Education Committee in his favor,
2. Nominating himself and the wife for plum Eukanuba judging assignments and
3. For failing over the years to update the A.P.M. which escaped notice until the Albino fiasco of 2011 just to mention a few of his misguided efforts.
The word "transparency" is being tossed about without any real concept of what it means. It means in this context - audit. 2undoit has alerted the members of this fact. See more here
"So let us accomplish great things. Together we cannot fail. This has always been true. Should we fail to accomplish those things which we have within our power to achieve, the fault, dear Brutus, is not in our stars, but in ourselves." - President's Message from Pipeline.
Members receive the words amicably but look for REAL action.
2undoit has pointed out that no fewer than 14 changes to the APM are rushed thru the approval process by the Board. The changes are being made without so much as a 'Preamble' or even a 'Whereas' and for these reasons, are NOT legal... yet they continue on unchallenged?
The former President - who promised so much and delivered SO LITTLE! - is put on the fast track to the DPCA Delegate to the AKC. She volunteered according to sources. This delegate position, since 2000 has been primarily the exclusive property of or control by either DiNardo or Helsdon. Why Van Wormer?
2undoit is of the opinion that an all expense paid visit to Orlando, Fl, to the tune of $1,200.00 is questionable financially. Van Wormer and Patti Strand, NAIA founder, have reportedly been friends for years. Patti Strand has made the statement that the NAIA would NOT financially support anti-cropping and docking legislative issues. And it should be mentioned that Jan Van Wormer made the motion to continue supporting the NAIA @ $5,000.00 per annum - 2undoit asks, "to what end and for what purpose? "
2undoit finds that every time the BoD does the Harlem Shuffle it marginalizes the voting membership and other than correspondence to the BoD protesting this appointment process as a way to avoid the balloting of the membership - WELL the members will have nothing to (officially) say UNTIL next election this is!.
Once again, 2undoit is right to mention that the internet is a semi-public environment where someone, somehow can see what is being carried on as business. Expedient, yes! Efficient, yes! Secure, NO! The latest example is of illegally recording the BoD meeting and disseminating it on non-DPCA chat groups.
2undoit feels that motion by Van Wormer is PURE WASTE. She proposed the motion AND selected the committee. It seems to be an attempt to dodge the audit from an outside source that would answer ALL financial questions. A video is an attempt to side-step an audit - no more - no less!
2undoit is careful not to proliferate misinformation. And so we reluctantly mention the rumors of financial troubles that are rampant among the members. Furthermore the NAIA has said it will not financially support cropping/docking. If you look at their policy statements you WILL NOT see a position on these beneficial procedures.
2undoit has long stood for the rights of members and is quick to point out when they are being marginalized. The member's votes seem to be, AGAIN. Also it is noted that the motion made to "accept minor changes to the recording secretary section of the APM' WITHOUT ANY SPECIFICITY? LEGAL?
Comparisons to and contrasts of BoD actions can point out areas of inconsistancies. It is puzzling that one committee has a budget made public, one committee out of 47 give or take a couple. This does not count the numerous sub-committees that the membership is totally unaware of, aren't published and work behind the scenes. Where are these other budgets - what is the bang for the buck here there and everywhere?
2undoit must ask, "Does it seem that committee chairs are approved and published piecemeal" Here are 6 of the 47 or so committee chairs. Other chairs will be announced later but why isn't the entire lot approved and published together? That is with the exception of new committees, resignations and the like that cannot be anticipated. And while they are at it, why not trim the dead weight from the blossoming number of committees, esp the non-performing one!
2undoit must ask, "WHY?" Approving this PROMOTION are breeders who must have their heads in the sand to be ignorant of the HSUS connection with Ms. Davieds and blind to the members wishes to remove her from office.
In favor: Santana; Jacobson; Van Wormer; Schoeneman; Lee; Reeves-Hunt; Mullen
2undoit has alerted folks to the noncropping, nonbreeder positions of Bonnie Bailey, P.E.C. In retrospect THIS AD is an example of the "smooth machiney" of the DPCA officers working at the Demolition Derby. In a motion from van Wormer the board moves to then immediately change the ad. There will be a 'dust-up' on the ad at a later date.
We alerted members of the board confusion. And this ad will be addressed later by the board (despite the look at and look at again, and again) with objections to the use of the word, "Guardian". This ad fiasco can be compared to the "LOGO" issue which was precipitated by ... Jan Van Wormer in a major way; but then compounded by serious mishandling by several members of the board resulting in paying two artists for the same thing? This is yet another example of the loose-cannon approach by JvWormer, a prime example of board mismanagement as well as lack of leadership by M. Santana. Tsk! Tsk! Tsk!
The Board addressed the use of the word Guardian that has been used to “brand” the DPCA for public writings , advertisements, photo captions and logo developed by the Public Education Committee. Each Board member had input during the discussion and it was determined that “loyal companion” better portrayed our Dobermans as the word is in our Standard.And whoops, 2undoit is there to point out, there it goes again - in questioning of the twice approved ad.
2undoit has been privy to much rumbling about DPCA finances. This motion is a Van Wormer creation to take the heat off the top dog at the DPCA.
The task outlined for this committee is to either choose an audit or establish AGREED UPON PROCEDURES. Whatever they may be? And with a 501c3 organization in operation for over a decade, are there no agreed upon procedures NOW? And the talk of reviewing internal controls and safeguarding DPCA assets sounds like they ARE experiencing sloppy bookkeeping practices at the present.
FRAC is going to make recommendations on the direction, cost, choice of CPA, implementation and oversight of the whole financial "examination".
This puts the entire financial process under the cover of a committee, removes accountability and in effect, buries the whole audit question.
It is said in corporate circles that if you can't get a nonperformer to settle down and work WITH the team - give them busy work - as it sometimes has the effect of making them trustworthy and responsible.
2undoit points out that not only does JvW put the idea on the table and vote to approve it, but nowJvW is picking the committee members. Is this too much individual control?
Two more APM changes with a preamble that DOES NOT meet constitutional requirements. It is totally insufficient to say "in order to update the A.P.M.". Robert's Rules of Order is very specific on the formation of a motion, detailing the wording, sequence and preamble - none of which are observed here. 2undoit suggests that additional information be required.
While it may be a coinsidence, 2undoit asks the obvious question of Janet Van Wormer. It has been suggested that Van Wormer wanted a 'buddy' at the meeting with her and proposed this motion to get Marylyn DeGregorio to attend? AND THEN GOT IT APPROVED by the BoD to have the membership pay for that! 2undoit also points out that the DPCA is giving NAIA $5,000. on a Jan Van Wormer motion!
2undoit and many, many others noticed that - for the first time ever, Board members may request reimbursements for expenses incurred for attending a mid-year meeting. DPCA members were shocked to see "the best BoD ever" dipping into the company treasury with such a casual attitude but the good will is still running high and they will be forgiven later on. BUT is this really good governance? The discussion of reimbursements came at the National and continued for months until 14-59 was passed allowing Officers and Directors to seek reimbursements for the mid-year.
President Helsdon announced that all BOARD MEMBERS who request and receive a reimbursement will have their names announced in the' Members Only' section of the website. Helsdon resigned shortly after that DPCARep in January.
2undoit must mention that Jeff Helsdon has upon previous occasions, made the hasty exit offstage so this is really no surprise. Helsdon was set upon the UDC working sports to becoming an integral part of the DPCA. He was also determined to push military Dobermans despite overwhelming opposition to this program by the membership and the military! Seeing the number of resignations that occurred and the dust up about mid-year reimbursements, it may be surmised that he (Helsdon) had better things to do
The ongoing semantics battle continues - 2undoit supported a previous petition that met and exceeded all constitutional requirements to ban Albinos and it was summarily dismissed by the DiNardo administration. Despite its legality, they stalled, they questioned its legality and then DiNardo went to the AKC for a "ruling". Different story here as the wishes of the petitioneers is granted to a "much ado about nothing" battle over wording. First the BoD approved the word "guardian" , then immediately amended it and then questioned it, only to yield to the petition in the end. And despite the back and forth on wording, the board DID relent and listen to the members!
2undoit noticed that the online chatter was primarily blaming Jeff Helsdon after the BoD voted in favor of reimbursements for a mid-year meeting . Is was said that he was responsible for setting a trap for the unsuspecting BoD. "They were duped into voting for this motion" the supporters said.
In a clearly political move to assuage the members muted anger at this attempted dip into the company treasury, Van Wormer used her political savy to quash the planned mid-year meeting but not going so far as to kill the motion allowing this to occur in the future.
2undoit's first question must be, is there really a financial problem of some sort? If there is one, then this disbursement of monies seems, at least, to be reckless with the DPCA's stability. Responsible DPCA breeder have much suspicion about the spate of tests some members are embracing.
Medical research MUST be funded but it has to be with EXTREME DILIGENCE in the selection process and with a cure to be part and parsel of the research. Testing for the sake of testing DOES NOT benefit the Doberman in any way and cash outlays to researchers have always NOT borne fruit, and the selection process has NOT been without errors.
2undoit has long commented on C & Bl problems. This is an ongoing project that suffers immensely from neglect, the kind of neglect that Tony DiNardo inflicted upon it for the time he spent, responsible for, but NOT doing his job as 1st V.P.
Attorney Helsdon has had years of experience with these foundation documents and yet there are ALWAYS problems, and the membership seems to favor getting an attorney to 'fix' these problems. Again this is the case in 2014. It seems that outside assistance MUST be brought in(as current President Michelle Santana has done) as the attempted internal repairs have politically motivated and NOT in the interest of the breed?
2undoit has for all of its existance said that committee chairs have been a political tool for a number of the Officers. A count of the number of them (57 in 2013) can be compared to the Pipeline reports from these committees (approx. 41% reporting).
What are the other 59% of the Committee Chairs doing, and if there is nothing to report for more than 2 quarters, it must be obvious that this committee is NOT needed. Yet Presidents come and go but ALWAYS create a spate of new committees without cleaning up the redundancy. Will this admin be different?
2undoit applauds this effort at publicity. This is a good thing - to deter ALL Doberman puppy buyers from the albinos and to direct them to the DPCA But here too, a word of caution - not ALL the 'breeders' in the DPCA Breeders directory abide by the DPCA rules, the standard or C.O.E.
Here is an example:
Sorry, we couldn't care less about the DPCA standard.
We follow the standard of country of origin which is the
German standard. FCI standard number 141.
Phillip
www.Adlercrest-Dobermanns.com
Please reference # (46) above. While the 2008 may be a point of reference, it may not be the best- for reasons cited in the above referenced #46
That being said, a thorough update of the 2008 APM is underway so that the APM will reflect all the motions made to amend it. Concurrantly the 1st VP and Athy Conigliaro are working together in this effort searching for changes that were made to the APM WITHOUT a corresponding motion to authorize the change.
Kudos to these two for 'fixing' the neglect inflicted upon the APM by previous 1st VPs, namely Dr. Anthony DiNardo. Honorable mention goes to former President Jeff Helsdon who, at the 2013 National began a series of APM changes that he had been working on for some time.
2undoit believes strongly that this is a "tail-between-the-legs" political ploy. The BoD votes to rescind the all-expenses paid mid-year meeting. But please observe that these BoD members still want the reimbursements:
Against the motion: Mullen; Reeves-Hunt; Van Wormer; Lewis
These BoD members what to be reimbursed to go to the mid-year meeting and, possibly they even plan to propose to expand this reimbursemnt to ALL BoD meetings. 2undoit asks, is that what the membership wants, professional politicians?