It is, apparently, any ARI member's right to petition for a change in the bylaws or policies of the group. However, it appears highly inappropriate that a member of the board itself would attempt change through petition without first discussing and clearing the issue through the entire board. In most corporations a dissident board member who cannot or will not bring a controversial issue before the full board resigns from that board before going to the membership or shareholders. The question of trying to reduce importation by restricting access to the registry is certainly a subject of importance to the ARI membership and worthy of debate. What is not constructive to the registry or the alpaca industry as a whole is a public spectacle of dissension among the industry's elected officials.
Nothing is more likely to turn away prospective investors.
Again, the issues being raised should be discussed and analyzed by the full board and then brought to the membership for a vote. If individual board members do not wish to operate in this orderly fashion, they should resign in favor of others who do. Your memo to the members of ARI arrived in the mail yesterday. After having read through it, I was left with the impression that the information contained in the memo had not been well thought out before being sent out to all of the ARI members. You are not in your positions to dictate to the members what to think, how to think, and how to vote on whatever the current issues happen to be.