The Diamond Dealers Club -- Without Limits?

Lets understand term limits at the DDC A little history of the ddc, until the late 70’s ddc belonged to a person named Charles Korngold he ran it like his own fiefdom. You wanted to become a member a hand shake with the president did not hurt. You were having problems with someone not paying you, a hand shake with the president did not hurt. A smile and a good handshake with the president you don’t have to your pay dues. A FIEFDOM! In 1978 came along Bill Gold berg came along a person with a vision who relised what the ddc could really be. He ran against the old man it was not easy to tear the furniture out the old man had a lot of his friends in his pocket The members were more involved and understood that change was needed. Bill won he turned ddc around from a fiefdom in to an organization. He then encouraged to create new leadership at the ddc and made ddc into a highly respected business organization. Bill relizing time and effert he put in to get elected and cleaning up the mess wanted to make sure that this does not happen again that someone will be president for so long that he would turn it back to a fiefdom and you would need to tear the furniture to get him out. He instituted Term Limits on himself and embedded it in the by-laws. His suceesor Ralph Bar added good ideas and kept the organization going. Then came along the start of the break down of our organization. when Jack roth one of the most upstanding individuals in the ddc at the time lost the election for president to a person who is untrustworthy. He won the election base on lies. The new president Mr. Isaacoff was only interested in get more power for himself he looted the ddc curers . there was not much he could have done to the power structure at the ddc because people were still interested in the organization. When he left office and his protégé Eli Haas was elected. He could not take the transfer of power and did everything to undermine his friend Eli. He needed power! After 2 terms he kicked him out of office with 3 votes again based on a campaign of lies . In came Mr. Banda. As you all know Mr. Isaacoff is president with Mr. Banda they eat together lunch on te ddc’s dollar. Lets see if mr. isaacoff pays dues Through the years of high prestige of the organization ddc became very powerful. What was a hand shake 3 decades ago today the president gets commission on deals that he made with ddc paid travels. The president will be your collection agency and if successful will ask for a cut and he was not successful in collecting the president is the nicest guy he tried. If you are a friend of the president you do not pay dues as long as you vote for the president. A SUFISICATED FIEFDOM! THE RULES OF THE OLD DICTATORS and UNION BOSSES MANIPULATIONS HAVE TAKEN HOLD The control committee does not meet and the one time they do nothing gets answered The nominating committee in Bill Goldberg’s times the most prestigious committee has been packed with banda’s stooges . That produces the type of board members that will vote down term limits. Lets understand what happened here. 2 years ago term limits were brought to the membership for a vote. When a very big crowd shows up that were in opposition of the proposal the president says the proposal is off and then brings it again a couple month later and calls a meeting again but this time only for one more term. People are here to do business not to come to meetings he gets what he wants typical DICTATORS and UNION BOSSES MANIPULATIONS . A lot of decent people are resigning they did not mind to participate in an industry organization that kept up Bill Goldberg’s idles but now…..the revenues at the ddc are almost gone we won’t be able to keep the place open. Show up on Tuesday at the meeting and give ddc its last chance.

Prior to term limits the DDC President for many years won every election. It was for the same reason that is mentioned now “no one was interested to run against an established President that has a close relationship with its members”. That is why term limits was initiated and many distinguished members of the industry ran for the Presidency and won the election. Without term limits the current President will have a full time job until he retires.

I think the real issue isn't whether or not Mr. Banda should be able to serve as "president for life," but the fact that virtually nobody else seems to want the job. But that said, removing term limits certainly won't encourage anyone else to step up to the plate. I'm sure Mr. Banda is a fine leader, but even the best leaders and organizations need to be challenged and injected with new ideas and blood.

Tough call. Certainly company CEO's don't have term limits--if they're doing a good job, they keep their job; if not, they're ousted. So there's an argument to keep someone who's doing a good job. But a corporate CEO isn't an elected official, and usually people who don't like what he or she stands for end up leaving the company. It's a lot harder to leave a place where you live or an organization necessary to your economic well-being if you don't like the person running it, so there is an argument for change. Obviously the United States government felt it was necessary to limit a presidential term, so by that token it's probably a sound model to follow for a political entity.