ILR Show Division
JUDGES COMMITTEE Minutes
January 25, 2009
I. Call to Order, Roll Call, Minutes
The meeting was called
to order by John McDougall at 7:00 pm. Absent on the conference
call was Ken Austin. There were no additions or deletions to
the agenda. The minutes of the
January 18, 2009 meeting had previously been approved
by email.
II. Old Business
1.
John gave a brief report on the Governing Board
meeting of January 22, 2009 and informed the committee that he had
forwarded a copy of the minutes of that meeting to each
member of the committee. He encouraged each committee member
to carefully read those minutes. At that meeting, the
Governing Board had given its approval to the Judges
Committee’s list of judges that had been submitted
following our last meeting. Upon motion by Barb Harris and
second by Mark Smith, the motion carried that the list be
approved. It was noted that there are many requests being
made for this list. Terry Duespohl will notify the judges of
their approval and will forward a copy of the finalized list
to the Governing Board members and to the ILR Office. John
McDougall will contact those judges who had requested
approval but were denied at this time.
2.
There had been a request from two shows, the Virginia
Classic and the Camelid Extravaganza, for waivers for
judges who had been selected prior to the publishing of
the official ILR Judges list. The waivers were to allow Bob
Wooldridge to judge performance classes at the Camelid
Extravaganza and to allow Marc and Sandy Page to judge
performance classes at the Virginia Classic. These waivers
were approved by the Governing Board. Upon motion by Mark
Smith and second by Judy Steffel, the motion carried that
the waivers be granted with the following stipulations:
a. that it be a one-show waiver.
b. the show be held before
March 31, 2009
c. that a letter of reference for the above
referenced performance judges be secured from an approved ILR
judge.
d. that Show Management print this disclaimer in
the show materials: “The judge hired for this ILR Show Division
sanctioned show is hired on a one-show special exemption from
the ILR Show Division and is not an ILR Show Division approved
judge. The ILR Show Division, its governing board or committees
cannot be held liable or responsible for the service provided by
this judge.”
3. A draft Judging Contract had been
circulated to the committee for comment. After brief discussion,
it was decided that the draft was to be reworked to include a
check-list to indicate for which sections of the show the judge
was being contracted. The revised draft was to be circulated
again for approval by the committee. Once approved, Terry
Duespohl was instructed to send a copy of the contract to Justin
Timm and to Paige McGrath—two show superintendents whose shows
are in the very near future. The contract was also to be sent to
the ILR office for posting on the website.
III. New Business
1.
The next agenda item considered was a
FAQ list for the Judges Committee to be posted on the ILR
website. The FAQ list would provide a convenient way for people
to get information about judges and the judges committee.
Discussion ensued with several suggestions for questions to be
posted:
•
Where do I find an approved judges
list?
•
Where do I find a copy of a Judging
Contract?
•
How do you become an ILR approved
judge?
•
Do ILR judges need to be periodically
certified? (This question sparked discussion among the
committee, with no definitive direction taken except to concur
that re-certifications, if required, would need to be on a
rotating basis to avoid a “mass re-certification.”
It was decided that John McDougall will compile the
list of FAQs as they are submitted by either members of the Show
Division or by committee members.
2.
Mark Smith reported that the Halter
Committee had made a suggestion that a Judging Video be
prepared. After discussion, there was consensus among the
committee that this would be a desirable thing and asked Mark to
communicate the committee’s willingness to pursue this goal in
conjunction with the halter committee and any other appropriate
committee. It was discussed that this was somewhat premature
until the show format has been finalized. Mark also reported
that the halter committee was recommending that at multiple
judged shows, a set of oral reasons should be given for
each class. The judges could alternate giving reasons according
to a jointly agreed upon rotation. This was very positively
received by the judges committee.
3.
The rules committee has observed that
it is probably inevitable that there will be controversies at
shows that will result in protests. The judges committee by
assent agreed to cooperate with the rules committee to develop a
protest procedure. There was considerable discussion
about the frivolous nature of many of the protests that had been
filed in other llama show associations. While it is necessary to
have a procedure to handle legitimate controversy, the committee
consensus was that some way of discouraging frivolous protests
was desirable. Discussion included: a higher filing fee for
protests ($200.00 was mentioned); and the use of a
grievance/mediation procedure prior to the formal protest. It
was mentioned that such a procedure had been suggested to
another show association, but no action had been taken. Mark
Smith volunteered to secure a copy of the procedure from the
author as a starting point for further discussion.
4.
Mark reported that there had been
discussion in the Governing Board about a face-to-face
meeting to include Governing Board members as well as
committee members. Fr. Ryan had offered facilities at his
monastery as a venue. The consensus of the committee was that
with the current good level of progress toward formulating the
Show Division, little could be gained with a face-to-face
meeting at this time. It was felt that such a meeting would be
advantageous in the future, but felt that such a meeting would
benefit from a professional facilitator.
5.
There was discussion about the Youth
Judging Program. The discussion revolved around problems
with the program as formulated in another show association. The
judges committee would like to have input when this program is
being considered within the ILR Show Division.
6.
Kay Sharpnack
had volunteered to host a judge’s clinic/workshop May
22-24, 2009. While the committee is appreciative
of the offer, it feels that it is premature to undertake such an
endeavor at this time. Mark will communicate with Kay.
7.
The following is a list of other
issues that the committee needs to be working on in the near
future:
a. A statement of judges’ committee
responsibilities / purpose / mission. Terry Duespohl volunteered
to prepare a draft as a starting point for discussion.
b. Standing rules for judges.
c. Ethical guidelines for judges.
d. Judges training.
IV. For the Good of the Order
Based upon his years
working in the non-profit sector, John McDougall shared his
thoughts about fund raising. His philosophy is that
“everyone is a fundraiser.” Each member needs to support this
new endeavor at whatever level is possible and call upon friends
and acquaintances to also provide financial support. There was
discussion suggesting that shows could perhaps include an
opportunity on each entry form to donate to the Show Division.
John also called upon
the committee to “rise above the crap”—a sentiment shared
by all on the committee. Negativism is counterproductive. We
have an exciting opportunity to positively influence the
industry, and must not allow the effort to be derailed by
getting embroiled in diatribe.
V. Next Meeting and Adjournment
By consensus the next
meeting date was established as
February 15, 2009. Upon motion by Mark Smith, and second
by Barb Harris a unanimous vote adjourned the meeting.
Respectfully
submitted,
Terry Duespohl
Secretary, Judges Committee