It is with great pleasure that I send this letter on behalf the Board of Directors. I will start by apologizing for how long it is but there is a lot of important information we want to share with you.
The arbitrator has finally made a decision and has ruled in our favor. It has been a long 2+ years and everyone has suffered the burden of this problem. The membership was placed in the position of deciding which side was right without knowing exactly what happened. You heard from this Board but never really received an explanation from the other side as to why the takeover happened. This was so unfair and should never have happened. The entire November 2006 takeover was not handled professionally and, as we said all along, was in complete violation of our bylaws. We would like to thank each and every one of you for your continued support through a long difficult process. Now it’s time to put this behind us, move forward, and make this a great association we can all be proud of.
On March 31, 2009, a teleconference meeting was held where the arbitrator received testimony from Ty Sutherlin, Jody Workman, and myself as to what we felt happened. We were also questioned by our attorney and their attorney. It was then the responsibility of the arbitrator to review all the evidence and make a determination as to which side was the rightful Board of Directors.
The written decision is way to long to email to this group but I will try to share the highlights with you. Below are several excerpts from the arbitrator’s ruling. In order to assist in writing the decision the arbitrator referred to this Board of Directors as IFGA-1 and the other Board as IFGA-2. In reviewing item #1 you notice we are referred to as the “secret six”. This was the name given to us by Ty and his attorney.
1. As far as the alleged “secret” communications between Pat Miller and the five other board members who agreed with her are concerned, it seems it’s only prudent for board members to be discussing issues in advance of an official meeting so problems can be considered and possible solutions can be well thought out prior to any official meeting. Neither Ty Sutherlin or anyone else except for the persons for whom the communications were intended had any right to them. At this point it makes no difference how Ty mysteriously received the “secret” emails. His reaction to them is the paramount issue. It is unfortunate that the figures of speech used by the “secret six” were interpreted by Ty, and apparently Ruth, to be threatening. On the other hand Ty’s immediate overreaction, shown by all the actions he took, including blatantly ignoring the bylaws of IFGA-1 while at the same time touting perceived technical violations of the bylaws by the IFGA-1 board and filing a multi-page complaint with the Emmet County Sheriff’s Department, smack of a power struggle. Ty wasn’t just one of the original founders, he was “THE” founder of the IFGA. He and Ruth controlled the IFGA from its origin. They were, in his own words, as close as “mother and son”, and the IFGA was their “baby”. Even though they let the IFGA fall to the sad state of condition it was in, as of July of 2005, they weren’t about to loose control of it to a new, strong board of directors who were making changes.
2. The letters sent by Ty to the board members of IFGA-1 removing them and to the board members (and one other individual) suspending them for life, under Ty’s own admission, do not follow the bylaws of IFGA-1 or IFGA-2 for that matter. Thus, those suspensions unilaterally instituted by Ty have no validity.
3. IFGA-1 is the true IFGA. IFGA-2 established by Ty Sutherlin, Ruth Prentice and others with the same corporate articles and the same corporate bylaws, etc. is not a valid corporation or organization on its own. It is like a false leader growing off the trunk of a tree which already has a perfectly good leader. The trunk is still the IFGA-1 but one the the branches, IFGA-2, attempts to take over as growth leader. With trees those false leaders need to be pruned to maintain the integrity of the tree. Likewise, to restore the integrity of the IFGA-1, IFGA-2 needs to be pruned from IFGA-1, the real IFGA, and relief needs to be granted to effectuate the same.
4. Defendants, Ruth Prentice, Ty Sutherlin, Daryl Klumpe, Shelly Mitchell, Noma Wilkens and Allen Hartman, operating as the IFGA-2, shall immediately and not later than seven days from the date of this ruling return the IFGA’s record books, herd books, computer records, registration records, whether handwritten or computerized, all lists, whether referring to registered animals, herds or members, bank funds in the amount of $6,879.23 as originally taken, membership dues collected from IFGA-2 members so as to allow them to be eligible to transfer to IFGA-1, and any and all other documents or information that originally belonged to IFGA-1 together with IFGA-2’s membership lists, registration lists, animal lists, animal registrations, etc.
The arbitrator has also instructed the Defendants to cease representing themselves as the board of directors of the IFGA, collecting any membership dues or registration fees on behalf the IFGA, using in any way, shape or form the IFGA logo, and immediately close the IFGA-2 web site.