I just got off the phone with one of my board reps and have a little news from the AFA’s mid-year board meeting.

Tom, I have good news for you. The requirement that a certification candidate be an AFA member has been dropped. Congratulations, it seems they heard you.

In other news, the requirement that you be a CJF to run for Vice-President is also being dropped. However the board has asked that other non-certification related qualifying language be developed and submitted for final consideration at the annual meeting.

The motion to eliminate the Equine Research Fund and distribute the money in the fund to other committees was withdrawn.

Unfortunately, in my opinion, not all of the news is good. Two men I have deep respect for have resigned from the Board. Mr. Farley has resigned from the Board with immediate effect. Mr. Bloom has also resigned from the board and his position as the team captain. Knowing both of these dedicated and knowledgeable men personally it is a big hit for their region to not have their strong and principled voices advocating for their regional members needs. My rep did not have any reasons for the resignations as they were apparently not included in their letters of resignation.

Ronald E. Kramedjian wrote:
Knowing both they must have had good reason -- will the members ever really know???

Thanks for the update, sounds like your reps are doing a good job of information sharing.

Guy Buck

Ronald E. Kramedjian wrote:Ron , do you think that those Men, that you have respect for , may have dropped out for those same reasons?? Why do you Respect them??

A misnomer from the get go.

Dropped, but hoops to jump through.

Finally somebody has a grant from the AFA. I know first hand. Can't drop the fund if it makes 'em look good.

Distinguished in their own appeal; will be missed.

Jake Whitman wrote:Jake,

I do. I have talk to both and have a since of why they chose to leave. I recommend that anyone wanting to know more about their reasons should talk to them. They are good guys to talk to and can articulate their thoughts well.

Jake Whitman wrote:
First and foremost I’d say that their way with people sets them apart from others. I’ve never heard of them treating anyone badly and I’ve never been treated badly by them. This is something I try to learn from. Oh, I’ve heard some politically motivated smear campaign stuff, but that doesn’t affect me to much because I’ve seen a whole lot of it directed at people other than them, myself included.

I’ve had several conversations with both and even when we disagreed we were not disagreeable. They both take their positions on issues based upon verifiable facts and logic. They are not manipulated by emotion or political rhetoric that has no foundation in reality. With men like them it is easy to have a serious discussion and reach a conclusion that everyone can respect.

Their individual accomplishments and contributions speak for themselves.

RK: Their individual accomplishments and contributions speak for themselves.

I have interviewed both and Ron is spot on. Any organization is better with Roy & Dave than without.

Ron and Susan, are you complimenting Roy and Dave or criticizing the AFA? LOL.

Phil;

Why would you ask such a question ?

Even if past situations might come to mind, they both made simple direct statements about two exceptional persons.

Can't it just be left at that without bringing alternative motives ?

Come on Phil,

Some times it good to good to accept things on face value, and in this situation I know both are sincere in their statements.

my 2 cents worth :

vthorseshoe wrote:
Well, I don't want to assume, after all it is in the political section. So I asked. I do not take too much for face value when it comes to politics.

Ronald E. Kramedjian wrote:
This is good news and thanks for sharing the information!

It will be interesting to see what new qualifying language is accepted.

Certainly a loss to the AFA but both of these gentlemen are well regarded and, I'm sure, incredibly busy running their respective businesses. I'm sure they'll continue to give back to the industry in their own way as they always have.

Thanks again for sharing Ron.

Cheers,
Mark

Phil;

I understand and I can even agree,
but sometimes just sometimes I want to see and appreciate the good in everyone.
AND it is there. I know it is there.

my 2 cents worth

Ronald E. Kramedjian wrote:In my thinking and maybe the AFA's as well,

Maybe more will test,
and in the future see the value in membership,
Joining at that time.

I am grateful for their decision.

Thanks for the information.

i plan on testing after i get some more fire time in. working on getting my shop up before winter tho.

Since no membership is required to test for Certification -- what now does the AFA charge candidates to test for Certification? In previous meetings it was discussed that the fee should increase. Is this a recurring fee each time a non-member candidate tests is it any different for a member? Any details forthcoming with regard to that? And really -- what's the benefit either way??? The continual drum is beat across these BBs that "certification" doesn't mean anything to the horse-owning public coupled with the unanswered question as to what an AFA member really gets for his/her dues:confused: enlighten me please.....