Attached is our summer newsletter. A lot of you were concerned that the SCJA was not invited to the July 25th, 2010 meeting in Houston between the other two judges groups and the AKC Judges Department to discuss the annual judges fee. Your Board was of the opinion that little would be gained if the proposed meeting was limited to one subject, i.e. the annual judges fee. The newsletter primarily discusses the SCJA’s alternative course of action - - our proposal to AKC’s Chairman, Board and President. As you read the details of our comments and proposals, bear in mind we are happy to report that AKC Chairman Menaker took positive action after receiving SCJA’s letter discussed in the newsletter and placed the SCJA letter on the agenda for discussion at AKC’s August Board meeting. Rest assured, Chairman Menaker’s positive action concerning our letter clearly indicates he is open for all suggestions that might affect savings in any area where our judges are involved. We will keep our members informed. Once again, a thank you to AKC Chairman Menaker for his timely action.

After reviewing the minutes from the meeting in Houston last month, and talking to some of the individuals involved, the general consensus was that the meeting was not quite as productive as hoped for. We believe the SCJA’s course of action was appropriate and so far effective. We were bombarded with complaints, emails and telephone calls when AKC’s proposal for an annual judges fee first came out. No one was for a fee of any sort. We did not query our membership since we couldn’t imagine any of our members thinking it was a good idea. Recall our very strong mid-May letter opposing the proposed annual judges fee to all judges, Delegates and others within the sport which included our success in not having the judges annual fee implemented back in 2005 when the subject first came up.