Question of the Week
J. Randall Tincher
Warner Robins, Georgia
AKC should keep in place term limits for all officers and board members. This helps the organization move forward with fresh ideas. Also reduces possibilities for corruption. Just think if we had term limits in Congress?!
Clarence Gelwicks
Chambersburg, Pennsylvania
AKC delegates once again did the right thing by voting against removing term limits.
We see the results in our government of officials overstaying their time and usefulness in office.
They get too comfortable and become stagnant and often compromised.
Fresh blood is necessary to grow.
I hope it never changes and the delegates continue to vote against removing them.
Joe Purkhiser
San Antonio, Texas
Hooray for the delegate body. Term limits should definitely be continued. The rut is there, and they all fall or are coerced into it sooner rather than later, no matter how well intentioned they were when elected initially.
Doug Johnson
Bloomington, Indiana
Grateful to the delegate body. Surely we have learned that term limits are a good thing by now. I'm sad the motion even came up! They seem to have functioned for a long time with the same faces anyway. Change is GOOD!
Sue Bauman
Bethlehem, Pennsylvania
Term limits are essential to keeping fresh ideas coming in. They should also include the AKC delegates with term limits, as having the same people year after year doesn’t allow for new ideas to come forth. We need new people, younger people involved in this sport to keep it going.
Edy Dykstra-Blum
Ocala, Florida
I am in favor of term limits, as term limits will hold every organization healthy and reduce favoritism, which is practically a human trait (not pointing fingers at anyone).
Susan Kwiatkowski
Lebanon, New Jersey
They should remain. Otherwise, a dynasty can occur, which limits choices and ideas.
Diane Landstrom
Litchfield Park, Arizona
Yes, definitely put limits on the delegates’ time on board and committee member positions. Very political positions they hold.
Sylvia Arrowwood
Charleston, South Carolina
Been a delegate for 20 years. This refusal to end term limits has happened repeatedly. Some members of the board are reluctant to pass the torch and have been there more than 30 years. Oldies but goodies for certain, but way past their expiration date.
Our delegate body contains many individuals who would make excellent board members. While this one year off is not sufficient to bring many new members to the board, it does allow opportunity for a few new faces and ideas to surface. Perhaps a moratorium on terms served — say two or three, eight to 12 years — would be more conducive to enabling new members, thoughts and ideas to surface on the AKC Board of Directors.
Neville Ward
Great Falls, Virginia
I believe there should be term limits. AKC needs new blood.
Barbara Burns
Freeport, Illinois
This is the third time this bylaw change has been submitted since I have been a delegate. Each time it was endorsed by the board of directors. Each vote increased the number of delegates who do not want to eliminate term limits. At the last meeting Dr. Garvin made a very reasonable argument for eliminating term limits. There are no term limits for committees, for the Canine Health Foundation board nor for any other board that is under the AKC's umbrella. The vote stilled failed to eliminate term limits.
I am an advocate of term limits for all elected or appointed positions of leadership. I am an elected official and after three terms I will not run for this position again because I believe in term limits no matter the position. Therefore, I am advocating that all committees of the delegate body be under the same rule and be subject to term limits. It will be interesting to see how many delegates will agree. Stay tuned!