Question of the Week

Kevin Rogan

Upland, California

I think term limits would be a good way to get more people involved in the work of delegates. 

I imagine that the expertise and networking obtained from long-term participation can benefit the delegate's club. However, it may also be true that for some, the long term can foster a sense of entitlement and a false belief that the position is deserved.

Opening the opportunity to more members could spread the knowledge about what delegates do. Fresh ideas are also, in my experience, a wonderful source of growth and improvement.

Brian Clegg

Cincinnati, Ohio

I believe term limits are unnecessary. I have enough faith in the board that if someone needs to step down or be replaced, the board will make that happen.

Sylvia Arrowwood

Charleston, South Carolina

Term limits are warranted. New Directors, New Ideas! The delegate body has many qualified candidates who are willing to step up and serve. Those who have served eight years have contributed greatly, and all are grateful for their service.

Doug Matson

Wichita, Kansas

Politicians and AKC directors should be changed regularly, and for the same reason.

Clarence Gelwicks

Chambersburg, Pennsylvania

Term limits invite true competition, opening up the playing field for the advancement of others. Without term limits, you invite stagnancy, cronyism and corruption. Government is a prime example of the need for term limits.

Dr. Nancy Greenbarg 

Dania, Florida

I for one had wished for term limits with my position. As a chair of a defunct committee, I had to be very creative to grow and make a committee that flourished and gained notoriety throughout the dog world. After eight years, my creativity began to wane. Recognizing this, I resigned in hopes to have this committee continue on the path I created. 

Patti Marks

Willow Grove, Pennsylvania

I think there should be time limits on everything; fresh new ideas are needed from time to time. Without term limits, things could end up like the Supreme Court of the United States — in for life, not a good thing.

Leslie Earl

Davis, California

Delegates got it right. Keep term limits. 

Bill Stebbins

Port St Lucie, Florida

This is a topic that has been debated ad nauseam at the AKC, as well as federal, state and local governments. There are good arguments for either side. First, we have a certain number of directors who have an ongoing exemplary reputation for protecting our breeds as well as the sport of dogs. There are others for whom the opinion of the world of dogs is not the same. How does one differentiate between the assets and debits of the directors in a manner where a general consensus can be derived from a majority of the people that the directors are supposed to serve? A written evaluation form to the entire delegate body would sound like a possible road to take, but we cannot avoid the stuffing of the ballot box through tactics of collusion. I am interested to read the replies to this question. Perhaps the AKC can be the conduit for a procedure that our various governing bodies can utilize. 

Karen Mull

New Holland, Pennsylvania

I feel any position, be it political or in business, should have term limits. These positions should be treated as an honor and not a lifetime job. It would keep people more honest if they know that they will be gone in a few years, even if they can come back after being gone a term or two.

Terry Hundt

Sandy Hook, Connecticut

I firmly believe there should be term limits. New thoughts, new blood, new issues. I believe this to be especially true in this organization, because there are lot of issues that develop, and new ideas and opinions are helpful.