ARC MEMBER COMMUNICATIONS

From: Suzan Otto
To: Gwen Chaney; Jeff Shaver; Deborah Shibley; Janet Fletcher; Ann Glynn; Jeff Gregg; Lynn Lopez
Cc: RottweilersRdocked@yahoogroups.com; AmericanRottweilerFriends@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Thursday, November 6, 2008 5:56:21 AM
Subject: [AmericanRottweilerFriends] Re: [RottweilersRdocked] Questions for the ARC VP

Dear Gwen, Jeff, and ARC Board of Directors,

As you are each aware, I have sent these questions to the ARC VP several times and received no response. I have asked him to forward these questions to you, but am perplexed to find that despite promises made to members for answers, my requests remain unacknowledged. It is a curiously silent response to reasonable questions that represent many ARC members' confusion. Please provide responses to each by number, so that your readers can sift through to easily identify the answers to the questions. In addition, it would be helpful if you would please confine your answers to the subjects presented.

In addition, please print this letter on the ARC website and in the ARK.
Thanks, Jeff, for working with the board to provide truthful answers.

1. Why not serve your members by acknowledging that Lynn Lopez rightfully remains the ARC treasurer and one of the most honorable and hard working volunteers the club has known - and the members have ELECTED? Why not act to save the club this division and this acrimony? Your percentages are in dispute, and the AKC has provided ARC guidelines on how to count abstentions. You know how this falls.

2. And if this bylaw applied to Lynn, why not other board members? Do you have a written record of these calculations being performed on the voting statistics of every ARC board member? What are the results of each? And what about previous board members? Why has Lynn been singled out in a manner inconsistent with others?

3. And is there truth to the rumor that Lynn was threatened not to disclose knowledge about discrepancies she found in the rescue fund disbursements? ? Were there similar threats made to other board members, and most recently resigned board members? Please elaborate and clarify - particulary on any knowledge you may have on the nature and form of these threats.

4. Were there two or more checks in excess of $1000 (or $2000?) written to CASH - from any of the rescue fund account(s)?? What are the facts on this?? Were ANY checks written to CASH from ARC or Rescue accounts? Were they written by someone close to the VP? Please clarify for all ARC Members.

5. Who took on the painstaking job of counting Lynn's every vote, including her absentions? Upon whose calculations did you rely to determine Lynn's percentage to such a close divide? Please provide the name of the person to the members.

6. Why wasn't your "vote counter" reprimanded by you, or your VP, in the usual way for not focusing more energy on BSL? Or chastised for not showing more concern for the impact of free range chickens on our grocery bills? Or shamed for being concerned for a national club when the world is facing imminent decline in natural resources? Why didn't this person, the "vote counter", receive the ubiquitous blistering imposed on the rest of us for concerning ourselves with matters like the plight of Lynn Lopez? Or (shhhh!) the desire to keep our breed docked?!! Why no reprimand for this person - whose work has only set loose a chain of heartache, anger, and bitterness among club members? And very apparently, endorsed by our president and vice president? And again, who is this person? The VP or someone close to him?

7. Lynn is simply honest. We all know that she will report accurately and play by the rules.
Is that a problem? For whom on the board? Should it be a problem for the membership to trust the board's treasurer?

8. What have you and the rest of the board done to include and work with Karen Sims and Lester Cerana? How have you shown them support as hard working board members? What more will they tell the membership you have done to alienate them and/or assist them in arriving at their conclusion that resignation was their best option in order to feel efficacious?

Lynn Lopez, Karen Sims, and Lester Cerana are members who have stood by our breed and volunteered hours upon hours of their time - and have been mistreated. You may choose to characterize any of us as "friends" but we do not know each other personally - hoping you won't (mis)represent our relationship to discredit my (or anyone else's) incredulity over the conduct of this board.

You may refer to me among others as a conspiracy theorist. That is HALF true (omit the theorist part). I am unequivocally convinced that a conspiracy was formed to remove Lynn (and to alienate Karen and Lester), and the painstaking manner in which Lynn's votes had to have been (mis)counted only validates that. Finally, as the recipient of past "conspiracy efforts" I recognize the pattern. I am sure at least one of you understands. :)

Juan Griego was a great board member, dedicated to those he represented - he doesn't deserve sarcasm or condescension regarding his contributions to the ARC. Some heartfelt thanks to Juan, even from the current board, would garner a great deal more good will than the current commentaries being presented to him and others about the work of the former board members, him included.

It is a tragedy that the ARC has become little more than a playground where bullies have been allowed to meet their personal needs - not only at the expense of exceptional volunteers, but as sadly, at the expense of the Rottweiler itself. You have bastardized positions intended to provide leadership by abusing your power and harming others vulnerable to that power. You have betrayed the members of this club, possibly as early as the election.

You need to put this club back together, person by person, Lynn Lopez included. She is still our treasurer, and there will come a time when every vote you have taken without her will be the source of legitimate challenge. You need to invite Karen Sims and Lester Cerana back and welcome their efforts in a collaborative manner. As said to VP Jeff Shaver multiple times in email curiously unacknowledged, you can be everyone's hero(es) in spite of the circumstances that have unfolded. This club means so very, very much to so many of us. I earnestly hope that is not the problem.

I look forward to your responses, straightforward and truthful - and if authored by your VP, unaccompanied by scorn, sarcasm, or any form of patronizing effluvia.

Thanks,
Suzan Otto
ARC Member

p.s. In addition, I respectfully request that there is no attempt by any of your board members to intimidate me from communicating with the board of ARC by attempting to damage my relationship with AKC as a result of this query. Your VP may be able to provide the board some historical insight into this request.

BOARD RESPONSE

Suzan,

We are in receipt of your letter via e-mail dated on 11/6/08. You are aware that all ARC Board communication must come directly to the Board. E-mail addresses are on the website and in the ARK to enable you to do that.

1. We are serving our members by abiding by and enforcing the Bylaws as recently amended by the membership. The current ARC Constitution and Bylaws can be found on the ARC website or a copy may be requested from the Policies & Procedure Chairman.

Lynn Lopez is not, and has not been, the Treasurer for the ARC since September 9, 2008. Having previously been notified with a private e-mail reminder that her votes were falling below the rates mandated in the bylaws of the ARC, those numbers did not increase resulting in automatic removal with no further action by the Board.

As far as a dispute in the percentage, when Board members cast votes, and before those votes are eventually published, each Board member has at least three separate opportunities to review their votes and make corrections with the Secretary if they feel their vote has not been recorded properly. The process works as follows:

A Board member makes a motion and if it receives a second, the motion and second are sent out for discussion. After everyone has an opportunity to discuss the motion and make proposed changes, notice is sent out by the Secretary that a vote will be conducted on specified days for the particular motion. Each Board member may vote in favor, against or abstain. Abstentions however should only be used when a Board member is directly involved or affected, such as a monetary stake in an outcome or a relationship with someone that is affected by the motion. An abstention should not be used simply to avoid taking a position on a motion.

Once the vote deadline passes, the Secretary publishes the results to the Board. Any Board member can, and some have with proof of their vote, make requests for changes in votes that they believe were recorded incorrectly. The vote can be sent out again with any changes for the Board members to see prior to being tallied for publication. Motions and votes are then published to the Board in a list with the votes prior to these being sent to the web master and the ARK Editor for publication. This is the 2nd opportunity for Board members to change their vote or make any “corrections” in the noted votes. Finally, the American Kennel Club requires that a list of motions conducted by e-mail be printed and signed by the Board members and kept by the Secretary, if ever needed, to confirm votes.

There has never been any such challenge or request for correction, to this Board’s knowledge, made by the former Treasurer as to the recording of her votes.

The decision as to what votes count as “participating” is either guided by our Bylaws, or Standing Rule provisions, if there are any, or Roberts Rules of Order: “ARTICLE VII. Parliamentary Authority. The rules contained in the current edition of Robert's Rules of Order Newly Revised shall govern the club in all cases to which they are applicable and in which they are not inconsistent with these Bylaws and any special rules of this club.”

Since the past ARC Board and the committee working on Bylaw revisions made no recommendation as to what votes would be counted as participating, Roberts Rules of Order applies. The independent parliamentarian for the ARC was consulted and confirmed that abstentions are not votes. The American Kennel Club has never told the ARC what votes should or should not be counted, as that is an individual club’s decision based upon their Constitution and Bylaws, Standing Rules or in this case Roberts Rules of Order.

You can visit Roberts Rules of Order Web Site: http://www.robertsrules.com/faq.html to see the explanation below as to why we are not counting abstentions as participating.
Do abstention votes count?
Answer:
The phrase "abstention votes" is an oxymoron, an abstention being a refusal to vote. To abstain means to refrain from voting, and, as a consequence, there can be no such thing as an "abstention vote."
In the usual situation, where either a majority vote or a two-thirds vote is required, abstentions have absolutely no effect on the outcome of the vote since what is required is either a majority or two thirds of the votes cast. On the other hand, if the vote required is a majority or two thirds of the members present, or a majority or two thirds of the entire membership, an abstention will have the same effect as a "no" vote. Even in such a case, however, an abstention is not a vote. [RONR (10th ed.), p. 387, l. 7-13; p. 388, l. 3-6; p. 390, l. 13-24; see also p.66 of RONR In Brief.]
2. There has been no singling out or inconsistencies as you state. This Bylaw applies to each and every Board member. Of course there is a record of these calculations as the Bylaw states “The Secretary shall keep a voting record of each Board Member. Any Board Member who fails to vote on at least 75% of all Board issues submitted within a 6 month period, shall be automatically removed from the Board.”

Other Board members who have been at or near that level and were provided the same friendly reminder by the Board that was sent to Ms Lopez. Those vote numbers then returned to above the 75% range as acceptable level and no further action was needed. Unfortunately, the former Treasurer didn’t bring her percentage up to acceptable after her reminder.

This new amendment to the Bylaws went into effect as of February 25, 2008. It was not retroactive so any votes previous to that date are not taken into account.

3. No one to our knowledge has ever threatened anyone to disclose or not disclose any discrepancies in any funds.

There has been much unsubstantiated rumor and out-right lies circulated on some chat lists regarding “rescue funds.” Although having been asked, the source of these rumors has never been divulged. The former Treasurer has never published, or made known, any “discrepancies” in any rescue fund disbursements. In fact, despite having all of the Katrina disaster rescue fund records for several months, Ms. Lopez took no action regarding these. And the past Board neither made any motions nor requested an investigation into the funds. The reason? There were no questions to be answered. Despite the unfounded rumors of a few (that have and are continuing to damage donations, solicitations and efforts for rescue and disaster aid), something unprecedented in the history of the American Rottweiler Club has been done to satisfy a handful of conspiracy theorists. A complete audit of the Katrina fund has been performed. Never in ARC history has any fund, account or the treasury received an audit or as much scrutiny as has been done in the audit performed on the Katrina fund. The results of that fund audit will be posted in the ARK for all to see. Please see “Audit Report - Disaster (Katrina) Accounts” elsewhere on the web.

Threats to resigned board members – Standing Rules for the Board of Directors for ARC, Section B, #1 states “All Board communications should be considered confidential.” From time to time, BOD members, including those recently resigned, are reminded of this rule. It was not issued as a threat, just a fact.

4. You raise a question about “two or more checks in excess of $1000 ($2000) written to cash” from the rescue account. Again, unsubstantiated rumor and outright lies are being circulated. Of course there are no checks written for CASH in any amount let alone in the thousands of dollars. It is time that rumors, half-truths and outright lies regarding the Katrina fund are put to rest.

5. As stated earlier the Bylaws, which the members voted on and approved, stipulates the SECRETARY keeps the voting record, so that would be Secretary, Deborah Shibley.

6. The members assigned this task to the Secretary when they approved the latest amendments to our Bylaws.

Per the results of the Bylaws amendments vote, published in the 2nd Qtr, ’08 ARK and on the website, the particular section regarding removal of Board members was approved by a vote of 253 to 28.

7. The current BOD has never said or insinuated anything concerning the lack of honesty of the past Treasurer. Her removal was due to lack of participation as a member of the Board.

8. The BOD, in spite of the Treasurer issues, has been able to work and meet some goals. The turnover to a new leadership is always trying in the beginning. There is much to understand and comprehend, and many ideas to be followed through with. It is unfortunate we lost two members during the removal of the Treasurer. It was their choice, and when asked to reconsider would not.

The Board of Directors has been, and will continue to be, open to answering any and all questions directed to the Board in written form.

The ARC Board of Directors