Recap From Recent ApHC Board of Directors Meeting

The board met March 28‐30 in Moscow, Idaho. The first day was spent in a facilitated planning session to discuss “larger” issues of industry trends, operational values and core programs. A summary of the workshop can be found on the ApHC website (click on the “about us” menu button; then to “Board of Directors”). Much of the discussion focused on ways to reinvigorate and/or modify programming related to membership, registration, competitions, recreational riding, youth and member services. Teams of board and staff were assigned to develop recommendations prior to the next meeting.

The regular business meeting included several action items that represented significant work by various committees. An updated Board of Directors Manual was approved, along with a Committee Procedure Guide, revised board policies and Code of Conduct. A variety of show‐related rules was given a first vote and will be reconsidered at the next meeting.

A new mission statement was adopted to provide a simpler response to the question: “What is the purpose of the Appaloosa Horse Club?” The answer: To honor the heritage and promote the future of the Appaloosa horse.

Of special interest to regional clubs, the timeline for what is known as the “regional relief program” was extended to December 21, 2014. This is the option for regional clubs to have a double‐pointed judge as a way to reduce the cost of conducting a show.

Beginning at the 2014 National Show, a select group of classes will include the added feature of an optional incentive. Details are being worked out, but the basic premise is that exhibitors can choose to participate by paying an incentive fee in addition to regular entry fees and become eligible for payouts on a sliding scale depending on the number of jackpot entries.

A recommendation was accepted that would place a proposed bylaw change on the 2014 election ballot to reduce the number of directors serving on the ApHC Board. In general terms, the rationale includes cost savings associated with travel and meetings, general efficiencies in doing the work of the board, declining membership numbers which translate to a members‐per‐director ratio that will actually be less than years past, and cost savings if board terms are changed to four years, thus requiring elections to be held every other year. Territories would not change and zones would be eliminated.