The only person on the list I've met is Mike Greer, and I can't say enough good things about him. He and his wife put on first class events and they have been around the sport a long time. I know that Mike would have the athlete's best interest in mind, because he makes us feel that way whenever we do one of his events. This is not a vote against the other folks on the list, I've never met them and I will read their bios, this is just my personal and positive experience with Mike.

I haven't met two of the candidates. Mike Greer is a super nice guy. He has done tons of great things for triathlon in the southwest. He not only RD's some high quality races, he gets out and races the local series races. I trust Mike to do good things in USAT. He has my vote.

---

1*

i love mike greer. add my thumbs-up to the others who're posting. as for the other two candidates, here it is in their own words from their 1991 campaings (long):

QUESTION: "What does the USAT sanctioning emblem mean? If you compete in a USAT-sanctioned race is the experience demonstrably different than competing in a non-sanctioned race? If so, what, specifically, are your expectations for a USAT race versus a non-sanctioned race? Which of those expectations are currently met? Which are not? How do you intend to meet those which are not met?"

KAREN BUXTON: The USAT sanctioning label on a race registration form means that the race director has successfully completed USAT’s application process, set up to ensure "that each event that gets (USAT’s) stamp of approval, is safe, fair, legal and well-organized." Beyond that it means that the event has been reviewed in terms of risk-management and compliance with the USAT competitive rules, is insured ($1 million of event liability insurance), has access to free USAT sponsorship products, has access to the planning support of USAT’s Events Services Director, and will have its results tabulated in the national-ranking system. That said, the quality of any race, sanctioned or non-sanctioned, ultimately rests on the ability of the race director and his staff and volunteers. I find that non-sanctioned races do not have draft-marshals, which can often result in an unfair and, more importantly, unsafe race. They also have no avenue for appeal by athletes, because there are no set guidelines (USAT Rule Book) to follow. The vast majority of USAT-sanctioned races in which I compete are well run, safe, fair and competitive. Sometimes there are fewer officials and marshals than needed; and that is a crucial issue that needs to be addressed throughout multi-sport racing. To remedy this, I would establish more training clinics for officials (funded by USAT) and provide better incentives for people to become officials (uniforms, larger stipends, ongoing support and training).

VALERIE GATTIS: My experience with races that are USAT sanctioned is that they stand out from those that are not by providing a racing opportunity that promises to be organized, safe, marshaled and offer rankings/results in a timely manner. USAT, with the direction of it RDC (Race Director’s Commission) strives to design and implement guidelines for Race Directors that offer a standardized benchmark for race management. Non-sanctioned races do not, as a whole. A point of interest here is that sanctioned races’ responsibilities are multi leveled if they are to succeed. The race director needs to comply with the standards set forth in the sanctioning package; the athlete needs to advise the race director and, more importantly, USAT, of races that do not live up to the sanctioning requirements so these races can bee attended to; USAT needs to review each sanctioning renewal request annually to ensure proper compliance. A safe, fun environment will be remembered and revisited by athletes over and over again.

QUESTION: "What brand-new––never before attempted––initiative do you intend to implement, or try to have implemented, once you're on USAT's board?"

KAREN BUXTON: The new initiative I would pursue, if elected to USAT’s Board, is the establishment of an "Age-Group Fund" which would be large enough to endow training camps and clinics for all USAT members; broad-based support for national team members; and grant money that would be available for the development of individuals and groups within multi-sport. This initiative translates into aggressive fundraising that is specifically linked to the age-group athlete and the multi-sport lifestyle.

VALERIE GATTIS: An Educational Resources Program offered through clinics nationwide that will target the novice age group athlete. This will offer a standardization program of "How To Do Your First Triathlon/Duathlon" to the masses. Optimally, this will attract more athletes to the sport, thus increasing membership; this will provide and opportunity for the USAT coach provide education in his/her locality and receive an additional income stream; this could be used in the school systems to make multisport part of the curriculum.

QUESTION: "What is the single most important volunteer project you can see yourself taking on as a USAT board member?"

KAREN BUXTON: In terms of my ingle most important volunteer project, it is being an effective and respected board member who can contribute to the mission statement of USAT, while aggressively promoting my passionate cause. I want to be open minded, collaborative and generous with my time to the board and bring a fresh, and exciting voice to represent the age-group athlete. Having said that, if I can achieve the above initiative (endowing the Age Group Fund), it will be a crowning moment for multi-sport.

VALERIE GATTIS: Since 1999, I have been involved in USAT as Chair of various Commissions. I have spearheaded the creation of the following Commissions: Youth, Clubs, and Duathlon. I have been tasked with helping design new guidelines for TEAM USA Travel and Race Uniforms. I plan to continue my efforts on behalf of the age group athlete if I am voted on the Board.

---

Dan Empfield
aka Slowman

Based solely upon the brief responses of these two ladies, Valerie Gattis gets my vote. Karen Buxton seems to already assume that simply because a race has USAT sanctioning it is safe. How does that follow? Also, she misses a very big point. The USAT marshalls' fine work is significantly diminished if REPEAT RULES VIOLATORS are not tracked and given heavier penalties. And, how is a race made safer if the same guy keeps passing on the right, cutting people off, blocking, etc. race after race? Sure, the marshalls will catch him once in a while, but we need more marshalls and stiffer penalties for the repeat offenders if the imprimatur of USAT is to mean anything. Valerie's "Newbie Camp" is a great idea. I'd like to think that a small proportion of the truly stupid things I see on the bike course are a consequence of the excitement of new racers. It's an excellent chance to teach them the rules. She must have been listening....

My views might change if I had an opportunity to see and hear more of any of the candidates.

Given the small number of "VIEWS" of these election threads, I think all of this is merely academic. Most racers are as likely to vote as they are to put a flower basket on their P3. :),

-Robert

---

"How wonderful it is that nobody need wait a single moment before starting to improve the world." ~Anne Frank

Robert or Slowman, if you get a chance to question either of the ladies, ask them their thoughts on the subjects brought by Larry Seidman of the Rocky Mountain Region in one of last years meeting. He brought up that the RD's in his region were concerned about the $7 one day license fee and the cost of bringing officials to their events. USAT states that officials shall receive $75 for short and $125 for long events and 34 cents a mile round trip. They also pay for lodging.
From reading the minutes of the june 2002 meeting, maybe we should look elsewhere, like to a Mike Greer, for leadership.

Bob Sigerson

"USAT states that officials shall receive $75 for short and $125 for long events and 34 cents a mile round trip."

when i put on USTS oceanside in 1997 i didn't even consider the stated rate. i flew in charlie crawford, put him up, and paid him his asking price.

three things on which i hate to see corners cut: aid stations, officials and port-a-johns. for some reason RDs are good about aid stations, but they scrimp on the other two. why is that? i don't know.

---

Dan Empfield
aka Slowman

"Given the small number of "VIEWS" of these election threads, I think all of this is merely academic. Most racers are as likely to vote as they are to put a flower basket on their P3. :), "

I think you may be right, but the persistence of Dan and others has finally gotten my attention. Which brings me to the matter at hand.

I read the platform statements for the Eastern Region candidates and the At-Large candidates, and I don't think that it helped me much. I would summarize them as follows, without referring to any specific person:

1. I have been on the board for a wicked long time. so I should continue to be on the board.

2. I like triathlons a lot, and have done a lot of them, so I should be on the board.

3. I have been an RD for a long time, so I should be on the board.

Not to trivialize these arguments, but my gut instinct would be to go with the RD, simply because their main interest is putting on races, and I want to do races, so we have a match. Beyond that, however, our interests may diverge, in that the RD candidate might not care about putting on inexpensive races, or raising safety standards at races not run by him/her, or putting on more long distance events that will cater to MY desire, but not necessarily draw the participation, hence revenues, that the plethora of short events can draw.

So I'm left in a place where I want to vote to make my sport better, but all the candidates say they want to improve triathlon, and as Dan pointed out in his platform article, none, or few of them have stated how exactly they will do this beyond the usual vague platitudes that will hopefully get them elected.

You're right however about one thing: Given how few people turn out for 'real' elections, expecting there to be much interest in the USAT elections is probably not reasonable.

---

------------------------------------------------------------