|
August 26th, 2006
To The AKC Board of Directors Collectively
The American Kennel Club
260 Madison Ave. 4th Floor
New York, NY 10016
Subject: AKC’s Guidelines for Conformation Dog Show Judges and
Correspondence On This Subject Through The Years
Dear AKC Board Members:
There is no need to read all of the enclosed letters which
represent a sampling of the many requests the SCJA has made
since 1989; however, we have enclosed them for ease of reference
(if interested) and for the information of those individuals NOT
on the AKC Board at the time they were written. In the enclosed
letters, the SCJA has repeatedly requested the objectionable
phrase “FAILURE TO COMPLY WITH THESE GUIDELINES SUBJECTS A
JUDGE TO POSSIBLE DISCIPLINARY ACTION.” be removed. This
phrase gives the Guidelines the status to impose
disciplinary action on individual judges contrary to the
provisions of AKC’s Bylaws.
The AKC Board policy was adopted in 1989 without a vote of
the Delegate Body after the Stanek trial, where as an AKC judge,
he awarded the CEO of his company’s dog Best in Show. (This
resulted in Stanek’s life suspension.) This is another example
of an AKC Board policy going on for seventeen years and being
used to discipline certain individuals on a selected basis while
ignoring others.
The only response the SCJA has received from the AKC on the
issue of the national judges organizations being offered the
opportunity to furnish input on matters affecting judges was the
positive action taken by Ron Menaker as indicated in an informal
note from Ron, who was an AKC Board member at the time. Shortly
after the incidents in 2003 which prompted the Chairman of the
Board to appoint the Conflict of Interest Committee, SCJA’s CEO
did have a personal conversation on behalf of the SCJA with AKC
President, Dennis Sprung. During that conversation, Dennis
indicated quite emphatically that the objectionable phrase
threatening disciplinary action to judges would be removed.
During this time frame, the undersigned also spoke personally
with AKC Chairman of the Board, Ron Menaker. During that
conversation, at Ron’s request, he was faxed a copy of his
personal handwritten note of December 4, 1997 to the undersigned
which had to do with judges’ input.
During this conversation, Ron suggested I contact the newly
appointed chairman of the Conflict of Interest Committee, Dave
Merriam, which I did. Dave, as he so often has done in the
past, responded and called personally to let us know that the
committee recommendations would, in effect, have the
Guidelines refer in a different manner to our judges, and
specifically that the threat of disciplinary action be removed;
in essence,
exactly what Dennis had indicated.
Ladies and gentlemen, the committee was appointed over two
years ago, and I note that the latest published copies of the
Guidelines, furnished last month, still have the
objectionable phrase (and we believe one without proper
authority ) in the Guidelines. The question is raised,
of course, has it been used to discipline any of our judges
since Chairman Menaker appointed the Conflict of Interest
Committee? The SCJA would like to once again recommend the
phrase “FAILURE TO COMPLY WITH THESE GUIDELINES SUBJECTS A
JUDGE TO POSSIBLE DISCIPLINARY ACTION.” be summarily removed
from AKC’s Guidelines and that the entire Guidelines
be rewritten as the SCJA has suggested through the years in a
manner more appropriate for guidelines and as the Chairman of
the Conflict of Interest Committee, Dave Merriam, agreed would
be happening.
Would it be asking too much to have a report in writing as
to the status of SCJA’s suggestions made through the years since
shortly after this questionable phrase was inserted in the
Guidelines in 1989? Also, we are talking about guidelines
for JUDGES. Why not, as our AKC Chairman agreed years
ago, have some input from our judges organizations? With all
due respect to the individuals, the judging experience of the
first two echelons of those responsible for writing and amending
the judges’ guidelines is non-existent. Compare this to the
hundreds of years of multiple-Group and all-breed judging
experience of the Board members of the national judges
organizations, and our request seems most reasonable.
Sincerely,
Wallace H. Pedé
Chief Executive Officer
WHP/kms
Enclosures: Previous SCJA Letters on This Subject
Copy to
James Crowley for Administration and Distribution to AKC Board
Members
SCJA: Dedicated to serving for the good of all associated with the dog world.
Handy links:
SCJA Cites AKC Charter/Bylaws re Delegate Duties June 2006
Delegates have "sole power" to make the Rules!
Not the AKC Board.
Senior Conf. Judges Assoc. Letter to the AKC Board April 2006
Individual Rights or AKC's Right to
Change The Rules in Mid-Game?
AKC
Conflict Of Interest Policy May 2006
The Policy That Launched A Rebellion
Senior Conf. Judges Assoc.
Letter To Members
No Judges' Associations Were Contacted, SCJA
Reacts, Seeks Input
Conflict Policy
Prohibits Learning New Breeds May 2006
Where Are Judges To Learn About
Plott Hounds and Icelandic Dogs?
____________________________________________________
DoodleDog's pup is not great with
snail mail yet but
if you copy and
PASTE THIS LINK
into a REGULAR
email message, then from your own contacts list, select as
many recipients as you want
this puppy can
handle it! He's his
daddy's boy - trained to help you share the news.... and he's a
keeper!
|
