Masters News and Muse

I was present at the election and I could not believe how rude some of the folks there were towards Deb and others.

They kept saying that it was all about money. They obviously had not read the grievence.

Here are my biggest complaints with USATF Colorado:

1. If "youth" really does make all the money, where does the money from all the road race sanctions go? What would happen if Creigh decided to get all of his sanctioning through RRCA? They would lose income from 50 road races.

2. It was stated that at the election that there are nearly 3,200 members of USATF Colorado. Why then did only about 50 people vote? That is becasue the voting system is a joke! Only 100 votes can be cast? Please! They spent how much money on sending out those notice cards and then sending another one after they changed the location? Wouldn't it have been better to just send out a ballot and let the members mail their votes back in? This is USATF Colorado for Christ's sake. Not USATF Denver. How in the world was someone from Durango, Grand Junction, Breckenridge, Steamboat, Alamosa, etc supposed to get to this election on a Tuesday night in Denver? If they want a real vote, they need to do a mail ballot so all members can vote.

3. What exactly is the benefit of an adult joining USATF who only does road racing? I have always wondered that in the past and I would like to know what the benefit is. At least with USAT you have to be memebrs to compete in a USAT sanctioned event.

Great post Ken, and good follow up points Derek - I have to be honest that I get zero value from my USATF membership other than to run my insurance needs through them for coaching my distance running program. If it weren't for that then I most likely wouldn't be a member.

Derek,

I typically do not respond to posts on the various website message boards but I thought your observations and opinions warranted a response and a different perspective.

I have heard that the behavior of a few of the attendees on Tuesday was rude and obnoxious. This is unfortunate and I wish that individuals would have been more professional and respectful. As I told several people leading up to the elections the time for questioning the decision of the NABR decision was during the 30 day appeal timeframe that began on March 17. The purpose of the elections was to fulfill the NABR decision not to engage in discussion about any other Association business.

One of the major issues the association has faced has been a lack of a uniformed and consistent yearly budgeting process so to specifically identify where the sanction money generated is spent is a bit difficult to put one’s finger on. I do know that until things fell apart in the past 18 months that a few LDR representatives were funded to attend the USATF Annual Meeting and the Association was paying to have Colorado Runner mailed to the adult members. I believe the Association had also approved a budget for some other LDR programs/services that never materialized due to the LDR leaders resigning out of frustrations with a lack of communication from the Association leadership.

For in-person elections, Associations are allowed to setup their method of casting votes in one of two ways; Open Meeting or Balance Meeting. With a Open Meeting elections all eligible voters (over age 18, current USATF members) are afforded a vote. The Balance Meeting allocates a specific number of votes to 5 constituent groups (athletes, coaches, officials, clubs, other). The reality is that the balance meeting setup of voting that the Colorado Association choose to use actually makes a lot of sense in that it prevents specific groups (LDR, Youth, Coaches, Officials, etc.) or even clubs from stacking a room with dozens or hundreds of people in an effort to take over an Association. For instance if a particular club, committee or group decided they wanted to take over the control of a particular Association they could simple put up a slate of candidates and then make sure they bring all of their members in to vote and in one fell swoop that group could “take over” as the Association leadership (and the bank account).

The USATF Colorado bylaws to not allow for mail in ballots. While it is not a bad idea to have it as an option, the bylaws simply do not allow it and you can not make up the rules as you go. As part of the NABR decision, the date and location of the election meeting was determined by the group that had filed the grievance. They choose Tuesday, May 20 in Denver. Denver would seem the logical choose as it is the state capital and central to the state’s population base.

The benefits of being a member of USATF are available at http://www.usatf.org/membership/benefits/. You will see that among the benefits available to members are discounts on Runner’s World, Running Times, Track and Field News, National Masters News, Trail Runner, The Ultimate Guide to Trail Running (book by Nancy Hobbs and Adam Chase), Marathon Challenge (video), Showdown (video), USATF merchandise, over 20 hotel chains, 5 car rental companies. Those who use the hotel and car rental discounts have realized discounts that more than pay for their yearly memberships. The savings on those who subscribe to Runner’s World and Running Times is $20.

I am confused by your comparison to USA Triathlon; as many do not feel being required or forced to join an organization as a benefit.

All in all, none of us are proud of what is going on in Colorado. To me this is not a matter of youth vs. LDR; rather a set of officers (minus the former Membership Chair) who refused to institute sound communication and business practices. The sad thing is that in 2004 no one stepped in to receive the baton that the leadership was trying to pass along. It is my understanding that at last week’s elections that 3 of the 5 positions were filled by individuals that are considered to have promise and a sense of fair play. Apparently the individual who was elected as the Membership Chair has already resigned so the Board will need to fill that vacancy. All of that said, this election was only a temporary stop-gap as the quadrennial Association elections will take place at the fall Annual Meeting of the association. Hopefully, more than only 48 people will turn out for that vote and a solid group of officers are selected that will focus on developing a firm and fair budgeting policy and will facilitate communications to and amongst the entire membership.

Andy Martin
USA Track & Field
Director of Grass Roots Program

Mr. Martin, You stated, "The reality is that the balance meeting setup of voting that the Colorado Association choose to use actually makes a lot of sense in that it prevents specific groups (LDR, Youth, Coaches, Officials, etc.) or even clubs from stacking a room with dozens or hundreds of people in an effort to take over an Association." From what I have read from what you wrote, " I have heard that the behavior of a few of the attendees on Tuesday was rude and obnoxious."and from Ken," Ben Whisenton shouted comments as I approached the microphone: "What's she doing here? We've heard enough of her,"(speaking of Deb Conley), "The hatred and hostility from the comments made me visibly shake while speaking. I had to stand behind the podium for balance."(Deb Conley's comment) You had exactly that...A hostile group, possibly intimidating others from speaking openly. All this happening with the president of the USATF in attendance. Since I was not in attendance , I can only use the information that was reported , but I tell you, just because something is a bylaw and clearly isn't working as intended, doesn't mean it should be used if that scenario occurred. In my opinion, if there is such a rift in an organization that the parts of the whole can not see eye to eye on a major issue, one knowledgable and informed representative of each group (Open, Masters, LDR, Youth, etc.)should have sat down with Mr. Roe and posible others from Headquarters in a closed meeting, stating their case and arguements without the banter of others trying to over take the meeting. The USATF, in my eyes, has set a poor example of leadership in this situatuion. If it were up to me and this situation continues to fester, I'd disband the Colorado Association and let everyone go on their own merry way to organize their own organiztions or clubs to fund their cause. I hope it doesn't happen but sometimes as in everyday life, a divorce is the most civil thing to do.

I would like to clarify these two issues that may not be known to the general public:

1. The Grievance Process
2. The Voting Location

1. First the Grievance Process:

The NABR panel received the following documents prior to the hearing: Notice of Grievance, a response document from the USATF CO executive board signed by Chris Turner, and a Reply Brief from me, the representative of the grievance party.

In the Reply Brief, stated in the Summary:

” The association’s response demonstrates their inability to grasp the reality or the severity of the allegations. The association’s response attempts to vindicate their wrongdoings by implying that the Colorado association is doing well by the fact that Colorado continues to host National Championship events and major road races. No State Championship events have been held since the demise of the Long Distance Running committee. Colorado athletes compete at National Championship and World Championship events because none exist in our state. This is detrimental to the development of Colorado athletes. The association fails to understand that running events and clubs continue to basically operate effectively in spite of USATF-CO.

The association failed to respond to any and all allegations.“

In the Reply Brief, stated in the Conclusion: “Based on the association’s failure to respond to any and all allegations, the grievant side requests the proposed remedies be immediately granted.

The grievant side would like the grievant panel to consider suspension sentences for executive board members that coincide with the degree of misconduct.”

The hearing was conducted with the NABR panel having the above documents plus all exhibits from both parties.

The hearing was thorough and consisted of several hours.

Before the NABR panel made their final decision, a draft was sent out to both parties.

Both parties had the opportunity to review the draft and make suggestions to edits.

On 03/10/08, I suggested to the NABR panel that they needed to include in their final decision the following:

“Hi Scott,

Besides the misspelling of Deborah Conley and not including Dan Pierce as attending the hearing, following are additional items needed to be included in the ruling.

In the Grievants' case, please include...not just LDR, but all sport committees besides YOUTH, did not receive significant or sufficient funds from the Association to operate and manage their programs. This is significant to the Grievant's case.

The current bylaws state: No person shall serve in an officer position for more than two (2) terms without a period away from that position. This may disqualify some or all of the current officers from running for office.

Also important and missed, the USATF-CO website, lack of updating, the only communication used if and when used pre the judgment of the executive board and website master. Annual meeting minutes not posted, thereby not communicated to members. Bylaws and Meeting Minutes must be posted for all members to read in a timely manner. If that needs to be specifically indicated in the bylaws, so be it.

Also, reinstatement of the Colorado Runner as the official publication and mailed paid for by the Colorado Association.

Until the changes have been enacted, the Colorado Association's accreditation should be changed to "Suspension of Voting Rights" or some other penalty which states that the standards of accreditation have not been met.

Revamping of the bylaws is mandatory, as current bylaws clearly are missing articles referencing purposes and duties and definitions of important terms as they relate to election of officers, quorums, diversity among sport committees within the executive board.

Thank you for considering these edits to be included.”

On 3/13/08,

“Hi Scott,

A few more items that needs to be addressed in the decision.... How is National USATF going ensure and enforce proper and effective cooperation from the existing executive board until a new one is elected?“…In the same email,…”I would like the panel to give an opinion on releasing information to the press.

Thank you,”

On 03/14/08, the final decision was sent by the NABR panel chair.

The NABR panel chair said:

“All:

Here is the final, edited decision. I apologize for the previous misspellings of names.

The time frame for the relief provided for in this decision should start today. We have not added substance since the first draft but have clarified a couple of small matters which were brought to my attention. Some of the emails to me following the initial decision submission, from both sides, requested changes which were not appropriate or were not part of the evidence given to us at the hearing.

Thank you for your participation.”

In other words, the NABR panel chair decided that penalties should not be included in the decision.

The NABR panel was aware by testimony that the USATF-CO had a history of not complying with directives from National.

2. Second, The Voting Location

National Organizational Services was asked to hold elections. National Organizational Services did not choose the voting location. National USATF told the grievants to choose a voting location other than Boulder, but rather, to choose Denver. The purpose of this advice was because Boulder has a high amount of long distance runners, master athletes, coaches, and officials. It was implied that if this city was chosen for the location that it could be perceived as the grievants trying to influence the vote.

Supposedly, the precedent for elections in Colorado, is to have the locations move around the major cities within Colorado.

Andy Martin placed the burden of finding a voting location on the greivants, who had no budget to pay for this.

One last item to note.

As members of USATF-CO, we do not know who are individual members are, only club names. To rely on personal contacts to get the information out to vote, is unreasonable. Under the table word of mouth is indirect and obviously going to be slightly slanted in favor of my argument. And, I will obviously miss members, because I only know, who are members from personal contacts.

I asked for all information to be posted on the website from the beginning of the filing of the grievance. I wanted all USATF-CO members to have a clear understanding of what was happening within their association, from the greivants' position and from the USATF-CO position. My requests from USATF-CO executive board were ignored.

I then asked National (Andy Martin) to provide a communication process whereby all the Colorado members could know what's happening in their association.

Andy Martin said he does not have the authority to "force" an association to communicate with its members.

Does this circle of rules make sense?

Countries without free communications are called dictatorships. USATF associations that tightly control the news are no different.

Any governing board of a tax-exempt organization has a legal obligation to publish board minutes (and I assume election noices). These days, "publish" includes Internet posting.

Of course, when boards have something to hide, they find a way of neglecting to post such minutes and election notices.

A well-articulated certified letter from a lawyer on behalf of members might do the trick.

BTW, the last time minutes from Colorado USATF were posted was October 2006:
http://www.usatf-co.org/staff/minutes.html

No sign that members have been informed of a September meeting and election.

For the September election:
1. Will it be a mail in election?
2. If not, will it be on a weekend so that more members can actually come?

I feel that if it isn't done either of these ways, then the association is ignoring everyone that is a member that doesn't live in the Denver Metro area.

If the bylaws need changed, then the new group needs to get them changed ASAP (though I suspect they don't really care...)