Newfoundland Club of America Board of Directors Meeting

Teleconference Meeting Minutes of July 30, 2003-

(Approved October 13, 2003)


President Tom Broderick called the teleconference meeting of the NCA Board of Directors to order at 8:03 p.m. on Wednesday, July 30, 2003. The following directors were present: Tom Broderick (TB), Jan S. Boggio (JSB), Jacqueline K. Brellochs (JKB), Aura Ellen Dean (AD), Jack Dean (JD), Roger Frey (RF), Sandee Lovett (SL), Mary L. Price (MLC), Robin Seaman (RS), Deb Wigal (DW), and Mary W. Price (MWP), AKC Delegate ex-officio.  Patti McDowell (PM), Roger Powell (RP), and Beverly Eichel (BE), ex-officio, arrived later.


Report of the President, Tom Broderick


Tom reported receipt of a letter from Purina which will be in the next agenda packet. The letter states that we have 204 members declared for the Purina Parent Club Partnership Program.  84 members have submitted weight circles resulting in $1,496.00.  The Program will terminate in February, 2004 at which time they’ll issue us a check for activities conducted by our Charitable Trust. The total amount for all the breed clubs stands at over $15,000.00.


Report of the First Vice President, Aura Dean


Aura reported receipt of a letter from the AKC updating the Parent Breed Club Flyer Program. Our flyer is now accompanying all Newfoundland registrations. (One Board member confirmed she had received a notice with one of her new registrations). A copy of the letter was included in the agenda packet.  It states the AKC will charge three cents for each flyer sent out.  If we want to make changes in the flyer, we’ll be charged at $50 per hour for any changes in the layout and graphic design.


Aura also reported details about the Marriott Hotel in Cleveland, as a location for the November face-to-face meeting.  The Marriott is about six minutes away from the airport, provides 24 hour shuttle service to and from the airport, the room rates are $89 plus tax, single or double occupancy.  A decision must be made if rooms will be shared.  The charge is approximately $8.50 per person for the continental breakfast, which they will provide on Saturday and Sunday. They will waive the meeting room cost on Friday evening but charge from $100 to $150 for Saturday and Sunday depending on what room is available.  If we are going to get a speakerphone, that will be an additional charge.  The hotel will permit dogs.


Tom asked if this met with everyone’s approval.  No one objected. A contract has been emailed to both Tom and Aura and they will go over it and finalize the details. Tom will sign the contract.


Patti McDowell joined the conference at 8:07 p.m.


Report of the Second Vice President, Sandee Lovett


Sandee stated that the committee business appears elsewhere on the agenda and she did not have anything else to report.


Report of the Recording Secretary, Jack Dean


Jack reported that the Board is saving a lot of time during the teleconferences by arranging for the next teleconference by email.  He has it worked out now so that replies go onto a spreadsheet and it is very simple to determine what days in conflict. He asked the Board members to please respond quickly to the list of tentative dates. 


There were some Board members who had problems hearing and staying connected at the last teleconference, so the Board is trying another service tonight..  It is not going to cost any more money and at the end of the meeting tonight the Board can decide to keep using this one, go back to the other one, or try to find a different one. .


It was requested that when the teleconference provider is finalized that the number to call be placed at the top of first page in the agenda packet.  Jack stated he would be glad to do that.


Beverly Eichel joined the teleconference at 8:13 p.m.


Jack further reported that the integrated agenda packet is working out very well.  We are saving maybe $25 to $30 a conference. The packet is printed on both sides of the paper, bound together, and it is a lot lighter.  That is saving us money on both the reproduction cost and on the mailing cost because we are sending them out first class at about $1.25 rather than priority mail which was $3.85.  When the last packet was mailed out on Thursday, he had emailed everyone asking them to let him know when their packet arrived.  It appeared that almost everyone had a packet by Saturday or Monday.


  Jack requested that all agenda items and committee reports be sent to him rather than sending them to the Board members individually. If a person sends them out individually rather than with the Board packet, you have the extra stamps and envelopes. There is a savings of at least $6.00 a meeting.


Report of the Corresponding Secretary, Robin Seaman


Robin stated she received a letter from the AKC notifying us that the National Specialty winners of Best of Breed, Best of Opposite and Awards of Merit (Selects) are invited to compete at Crufts in 2004. She received Crufts qualifying award cards for those Newfoundlands. 


Robin also received the list of nominees for the AKC’s 2004 Lifetime Achievement Awards in Conformation, Companion Events and Performance. Our vote is due by September 30th.   The matter will be on the September 10th Agenda.


She removed her agenda item on AKC sweepstakes fees at supported entries because it’s not applicable anymore.  The AKC has revamped its fees and no fee will be charged.  Robin will include this in the Regional Specialty Guide, which is being revised.


Report of the Treasurer, Mary L. Price


Mary reported:


NCA Operations






     Checking Account



     Savings Account












"Distinguished Member" Restoration


     Money Market Account









Uniform Trophy Fund



     Money Market Account










Tom Broderick asked Mary about a check he had signed for Northern California Rescue and if that was in the Charitable Trust. Mary L. replied that it was in the Trust.


Report of the AKC Delegate, Mary W. Price


At the September meeting, the delegates will be asked to vote on two amendments to the field trial rules.  One is related to qualifying stakes and the other holding a national championship stakes for English Setters.  She will vote in favor unless instructed otherwise. 


The other item is the election of delegates to serve on the standing committee.  Mary W Price has not yet received a list of nominees for the committee positions.  She will forward the information when it becomes available.


 The minutes of the AKC Board’s July meeting report consideration of a staff proposal for the development of an online litter registration capability using a pin code as the substitute for an owner’s signature.  The staff is still working on how to handle the signatures of coowners.     She will keep the NCA Board updated.


Questions for All Board Candidates


Jack Dean had placed two items on the agenda. Both were on the agenda for the annual meeting that candidates be requested to answer certain questions to provide the membership with more information and more insight into what the candidates feel and think about issues.  Since there was no quorum at the annual meeting, the membership did not vote on them. There was one modification made pursuant to a request at the meeting. 


These items had been on the agenda for several meetings but we have not yet addressed them.  Now there is some urgency.  By August 1st an official notice must be prepared for Newf Tide that will tell everyone not only who the candidates are, but also inform them and others that they may have to answer these questions.  If we don’t place the requirement in the notice, then how will we inform people who chose to run by petition that they have to answer these questions? 


Candidate Question on Problems Facing the NCA


Jack Dean moved and Jacqueline Brellochs seconded that all candidates for election to the NCA Board should be requested to answer the following question: “What do you think are the two biggest problems facing the NCA and how would you solve them?”


After discussion, the original question was expanded to include the Newfoundland breed because there are some things facing the Newfoundland breed that might not be strictly NCA operations at the moment.  It was pointed out that the purpose of the questions is to let the membership know how prospective Board members might handle problems.


Jack Dean amended his motion to read:  “What do you think are the two biggest problems facing the NCA and/or facing the Newfoundland breed and how would you solve them?”

Jacqueline Brellochs seconded it.


Discussion centered on making it clear that while candidates were being requested to answer the question, none is required.  This statement would be placed in the Newf Tide notice, along with the request for a biography.


A question arose as to what the language was in last year’s notice. The notice contained in part the language “The Board has directed and determined that all persons may respond with comments of 300 words or less for the first question and 500 words or less for the second question.”


One Board member asked if the candidates were required to answer those questions.  It was pointed out that last year the language stated “may respond.”  One Board member would have read that thinking he would have to answer the questions. 


After some further discussion, it was the consensus of the Board that Jack would compose the appropriate language and send it by email to the Board members.  It will be basically what was said the year before.  If anybody has objections with the way it is stated or has suggestions, they can be considered.


There was a vote and the motion passed unanimously


Candidate Question on Term Limits


The Board then considered the second question:   


Jack Dean moved and Jacqueline Brellochs seconded that that all candidates for election to the NCA Board should be requested to answer the following question: What do you think of term limits for committees and Board members and, if elected, would you voluntarily agree to a term limit and, if so, what would it be?


There was discussion between two Board members. One Board member felt that incumbents should not vote on this issue as you are asking people who may be running by petition to answer a question and they don’t have any input in setting the parameters of the debate. The other member stated that the item had been on the agenda for three meetings and no one has raised any other questions. The first Board member replied that he did not think there should be another question.  The other member stated that “Well, if the Board turns this down then it is also going to look like the Board members don’t want to answer the hard questions.”  One Board member thought the first question was harder.


The motion failed, 3 yes, 7 no, 1 abstention. 1 absent


Voting yes were TB, AD, JD (I think the Board members are trying to avoid the hard question of term limits because so many of them have been on the Board for such a long time they do not want this matter considered when they run for reelection)


Voting No were JSB, RF (I don’t feel the incumbents sitting on the Board should set the parameters for debate on this question when those who are running by petition do not have an opportunity for input and selection of questions and debate issues.), SL (I would like the required questions to have more relevance to the welfare of the Newfoundland breed and the purposes for which the NCA was organized), PM, MLP, RS (I would like to agree with both Roger Frey and Sandee.  I think they both have very good points), DW (I would ditto both Roger and Sandee and just add that we may need to develop a committee to formulate these questions for elections.)


Abstain JKB (I am torn between both sides to the question and that is why I abstained.  I think there are virtues to both sides.)


Absent RP


Candidate Question on their qualifications


JD moved and no one seconded to have the candidates answer another question: “What attributes do you posses that would be of special benefit if you were elected to serve on the NCA Board of Directors?”


The motion failed for lack of a second.


Roger Powell joined the teleconference at 8:40 p.m.


Direct Board Appointments to Breed Mentor List of the JEC


The Board next discussed the agenda item about direct appointment by the Board to the JEC Breed Mentor List.


A dialog ensued between two Board members.  The first Board member asked if the proposed mentors had gone through the application process and had they been turned down?  The second Board member responded that he did not believe they had, but when was the questionnaire available for them to apply? The first Board member stated that people had a right to come to the Board after they had been turned down. The second Board member replied that the Board has the power to appoint directly and has always had the power to appoint.


Board members asked if the questionnaire or application had been reviewed and approved by the NCA Board or if anyone knew of the existence of a questionnaire.  There were further questions on the approval process used by both the JEC and the NCA Board.


It was the consensus of the Board that because Henry Jurczyk, National Specialty Committee Chair had joined the teleconference that we come back to this matter at a later time.


Henry Jurczyk and Lee Ann Hughes joined the teleconference at 9:00 p.m.


Limited Edition Plates


There was discussion on the Limited Edition plates.  There are 39 decals left over from the original firing of the 2003 plates which could be fired onto new plates.  The back stamp will indicate “2003 2nd Edition” and “1/39”, “2/39”, etc. The NCA will wait to sell them at the 2004 National Specialty and there will be a notice in the packet.  There would be a limit of one plate per person and the charge would be $45.


Henry was not in favor of doing this but felt there seemed to be a push by others.  He thought we were setting a precedent and it cheapened the whole thing.  It would be two or three years that we have done something like this.  If people had read the packet, it was as plain as day when the Limited Edition plates were going to be sold.  They have been sold at the same time for the last two years.


There was an observation that some people were buying a large number of plates to stock up on the plates for resale.  Henry also added that a lot of people buy them for friends who are not there.


A question came up about what to do with unsold plates.


There was an extended discussion over the number of plates that were produced each year and the number left over.  The extra decals come from the fact that the decal vendor produced the proper number of decals but the firing vendor did not produce the proper number of plates.  Lee Ann used the number that was sent to her in an email.


One Board member asked what was the purpose of selling plates?  Is it essentially a fund raiser to subsidize the uniform trophy?


The unsold plates can be sold at the next National Specialty.  For example there were 100 plates not sold at the 2002 National Specialty in Carlisle.  If the plates are to be sold individually then additional committee members will be needed to handle the additional work.


One member suggested selling the plates on E-Bay or on a preorder basis.  Another member asked if that would change our tax status and would we be in trouble with the IRS or would we have to collect sales tax?


Jan Boggio moved and Sandee Lovett seconded that we have the 39 plates made up and marked as second edition 2003 and sold for $45.  Motion passed unanimously.


Aura Dean moved and Jan Boggio seconded that we limit the number of limited edition plates a person could purchase to two in any one given sale in the year,


There was a discussion on the number to be used as a limit and who should set it, the regional club, the national specialty chair or someone else.  The motion was then withdrawn.  It was the consensus of the Board to leave things as they are and let the National Specialty Committee Chair set the limit.


Uniform Trophy Plates


We must soon place an order for the firing of the plates in the new pattern.  There was a discussion of whether the Board should change the type of plate offered for particular classes.  A few members thought we needed some experience with the new pattern and how it looked before we made any decisions.  It was the consensus of the Board not to make any changes in the size and type of the plates awarded but to consider it at the next national.  A short discussion was held on the Lenox China inventory.  No decision was reached on how to dispose of it.


National Specialty Support Committee


One Board member stated that there were concerns regarding the future direction of the National Specialty and the changing purpose of our National Specialty.


What is the function of health issues at the national?  Should one day be set aside for health clearance opportunities or a health speaker?  Should we have days set aside to do certain things, which would make it easier for people to plan their week?


One member remarked that the National Specialty has become like the annual convention.  Families are coming with their kids making it into “their week.”  They want to buy items, socialize and share experiences. And other people are there to attend to the very serious business of showing dogs.  These two groups are going to run into each other eventually if we don’t plan the National Specialty a little better.


One member suggested that perhaps the National Specialty Committee should have a teleconference where people who are interested can join them and discuss ideas?  The focus should be on what we will do in the future.  A “brainstorming session” would be helpful.


Henry is to report back to the Board by October 1st about recommendations concerning a support committee and we will then discuss this at the fall face-to-face.


Beverly had to leave because of a severe storm at 10:04 p.m.


WDC Proposed Aggressive Dog Rules


Cheryl Dondino, Chair of the Working Dog Committee joined the teleconference at 10:17 p.m.


Cheryl had sent to the Board a few weeks prior to the teleconference the WDC’s proposal on dealing with aggressive dogs at a working dog event.  Board members wanted to ask Cheryl some questions on the proposal.


In a dog fight situation, unless the judge saw everything from the very beginning, he could not blame one dog or the other because he does not know which dog started it.  Cheryl said there was an instance where both judges witnessed the fight from the beginning, but did not know how to handle it, although some real danger was involved.


Another Board member brought up that about two years ago Cheryl had witnessed the same dog go after a child at two separate events.  One time the dog did not make contact because the mother whisked the child away.  The next time the dog made contact with the child’s arm but Cheryl was not certain if the skin had been broken.  Cheryl stated she was only an exhibitor and could not file a grievance.


One Board member brought up she thinks part of the problem in the proposed rules are the “waffle words.”  The judge is in charge of the test, not just the test area.


Problems were brought up about dogs at tests that had attacked items and people.  Cheryl responded they were failed for being out of control.


There was a question if the judges could do anything about a dog incident that did not happen in the test area.  Cheryl asked for directions from the Board as to how the WDC should proceed.  There were problems with the enforcement of the WDC rules and the procedure was not clearly spelled out.  Some Board members thought parts of the rules are pretty vague.


The discussion then shifted to the AKC rules on aggressive dogs and the proposed NCA rules.   One member had gone to the AKC website and reviewed their rules on dogs.  The AKC has rules for excusing a dog and disqualifying a dog.  It was suggested that the WDC rules be more closely patterned after the AKC rules.


Cheryl said that judges were afraid to act in these types of situations because a grievance may be filled against them.  One Board member asked how many grievances have ever been sustained, but Cheryl said grievances were very traumatic for the judge.


The Board then added that the AKC rules were more flexible about who could bring a charge and what the results could be.


There was more extensive discussion on the procedure and the proposed definitions.  Who should get the report? Should it be the NCA Board or the WDC? 


The consensus of the Board was that the WDC proposal on aggressive dogs be referred back to the WDC for further work in accordance with the Board’s discussion.


Aura Dean moved and Patti McDowell seconded to go into executive session.  The motion passed unanimously and the Board went into executive session at 11:05 p.m.


The Board came out of executive session at 11:44 p.m.

During the time that the Board was in executive session it approved some applicants and disapproved others.


Motion to adjourn at 11:53 passed unanimously.


Respectfully submitted,


Jack Dean

NCA Recording Secretary