Aug 30 2008
I think that the first course of action in regards to solving all that ails the PCA is to take a cold hard look at the board. We can look at the membership and tighten up the standards of membership but that will really achieve nothing because we have so few members. The board must be reorganized and each board member must have a constituency that they report to. Right now a board member is voted on an at large basis, and they are really not accountable to anyone; except maybe friends, family, and factions. Since board members are elected at large the easiest thing for them to do is to go along with the board because for all practical purposes that is their constituency. One of the reasons the framers of our Constitution divided our government into three branches, with one of the branches being divided into two parts was to ensure that everyone had a voice and yet there were checks and balances. That is what the issue is with the PCA, not everyone has a voice and there are no checks and balances (outside of lawsuits and or running to the AKC…oh, and lambasting others on the forums). If we were to start with the board and totally change the make up of the board we could solve quite a few problems easily. First off, we need to divide the USA into six sections geographically and each section would have one board member who would serve a two year term. The elections for this board member would occur among the PCA members who live in that region. They in effect would be electing “their representative” to the board and that board member would have to report back to them from time to time. Since everyone would be from the same region the opportunity to improve the communications between board members and membership would be greatly improved. Then we need to give the regional breed clubs representation on the board. Since we currently have 18 breed clubs and some are active and other are not then we need to develop a system to rate the breed clubs. One of the things that they need to be rated on is number of members within their geographical region. Then we need to rate the clubs on the number of events they hold every year. Then the top 8 clubs from whatever rating system is devised would then be offered one board seat per club that would be up for vote every year. This would give the individual regional clubs an incentive to grow and become active. It would also empower the regional club members to become more active in their clubs and tie these regional clubs to the parent club in a “win-win” relationship. Then you would have six board seats that would be voted on by the membership as a whole and these would be the “at large” board seats. This would give you a board of 20 and then it would have to be determined how long service would be for the regional board members and the at large board members. The club board members would only serve for one year since each club has its own elections annually. You would want to stagger the length of service so that you have adequate turnover and still board continuity. This would then give you a broader representation on the board and allow for direct communications between the board, the board members and their constituencies. This would also develop a sense of community within the regions and their board members and the clubs and their board members which is solely lacking today. It would also give the club greater accountability because of the issue of constituencies. It would also be envisioned that then these groups would become competitive in attempting to reach out to more members, new members, and create the type of environment where new ideas come to the board in a more logical fashion. Of course this would also open up the board’s operations to more people and give more transparency. Needless to say there would have to be term limits on all board positions and there would have to be some system to allow for recall votes. Then once all the board members are known the membership would then have to elect a President, Vice President, Secretary, and Treasurer from the recently elected board members and that would be on vote of all members. This also means that the voting process would have to be staggered. Then the by laws would all have to be reviewed and some things would not be allowed to happen or take affect until a new board takes over and some other things, like the breed standard would have to be the domain of the membership as a whole. This is a very cumbersome system and quick action would not be as readily achieved; but realistically a little less action and a little more thought just might be what our club needs at this time.