All agree that a 36-member board is unwieldy and too large. The plan to reduce it to 12 members at the June 10 annual meeting will change nothing.

As it stands now, half the board members come from "affiliates" -- that is, independent community humane societies that pay an annual fee for which the OSPCA helps in cruelty inspections, etc. The other half come from "branches" that are part of the OSPCA organization, and depend on the OSPCA for funding. So the full board is heavily aligned to vote for whatever management wants.

It's a bit like employees on the board of a firm that pays their salaries. "Branch" members who have sided with affiliates have even been reprimanded for their opposition. "Twelve board members or 36, makes no difference if the proportions stay the same," says Lasby.

In their letter to McGuinty and Kwinter, the eight board members noted that the government is well aware of the problems and urged that their resignation be regarded "as a request for intervention ... to suspend the bylaws of the OSPCA, suspend the board of the OSPCA, and appoint a representative of your government to work with the CEO of the Society pending the promised update of the OSPCA Act."

Again, a wall of silence. Why? Minister Kwinter's response to complaints is usually that the government "operates at arm's length" from independent charitable organizations, and as long as there's no criminal misuse of money, "tough bananas dogs and cats, don't bother us."

The resigning OSPCA directors insist they aren't protesting fraud or theft, just incompetence and donors' funds being spent on the wrong things.