Dan,



Any chance you will be a member of the "Blue Ribbon" Committee?

Peace,

"Any chance you will be a member of the "Blue Ribbon" Committee?"

i don't know, but i suspect that you have to be a person of high character, imbued with moral fiber and things like that. so if they do any background checks on me all that *stuff* will pop up that, though never proved, will serve to give them pause when selecting the panel :-)

---

Dan Empfield
aka Slowman

Kind of ironic (and sad) that it takes an USOC ethics official to right our wayward ship. Sort of like Enron offering corporate governance advise. In any event, I hope the USAT BOD takes this advise. Must be a tough spot for them since if there is a reelection I would venture to guess much of this bad publicity will adversely impact their reelection plans. I hope they can see beyond their own personal views/desires and do what is best for the members. After all triathletes are the reason we have this organization right?

Interesting wording...

"[the BOD] may be incapable of rendering a decision on this issue that is free from the perception of a conflict of interest."

Not that they can't render a conflict-of-interest free decision, but that any decision could be perceived that way.

The big question: would both the plaintiffs and the defendants be willing to submit to binding arbitration by the independent panel? I hope that they both agree to it, and keep it out of the courts. I want to see the rules changed for the next election, but for this year, I can live with an independent decision coming down on either side of the issue.

"Can't we all just get along?"

I really like this quote from the USOC letter: "There is no issue more fundamental to the managerial and financial competency of an organization than its ability to demonstrate to the world that its directors are elected fairly and in accordance with appropriate standards."

They talk about standards, not shamy by-laws!.....This should be interesting!

---

---

KEEP ON TRI-NG

I thinks its even more interesting to witness the filters some use to post Slowtwitch headlines ("comes down hard") or read opinions. The USOC merely responded to a complaint by election losers who claimed that they lost by some vague violation (as oppossed to recoginizing the free will and validity of the USAT membership who actually voted against them). The USOC just said that the complaints should be examined by a (yet another) disinterested party to confirm that the losers actually lost through valid votes. Hmmm - 3rd time. I wonder what will happen when, once again, they are told that they lost.

Alan

Alan

With all due respect - you gotta be kidding me. This is way more than... "The USOC merely responding to a complaint..." This type of trite spin only makes the matter worse.

---

http://www.clevetriclub.com

rob reddy

Alan, to be honest, we don't know how many "valid" votes did or didn't make it to USAT, now do we?

Also, I hope the "Blue Ribbon" does find that the elections need to be held again and that Mr. Girand needs to disclose all the data he has accumulated and compiled on the voters whose ballots he collected......That whole deal is not graceful or honorable, whether the other candidates could do it or not....Maybe the ohter candidates have higher moral standards and chose not to use, what most would deem as unethical, at best.

---

---

KEEP ON TRI-NG

"That whole deal is not graceful or honorable, whether the other candidates could do it or not....Maybe the ohter candidates have higher moral standards and chose not to use, what most would deem as unethical, at best."

Without having to go back and read all the prior posts, do we know if any of the election losers actually collected ballots?

Gatordawg, In one of your prior post you asked that board members respond to questions you had. My computer was not working at the time and I could not respond but wanted to ask if you have tried e-mailing any of them with your questions? Their e-mail addresses are on the USAT web site. Many of them may not want to respond to this forum but may respond back to you individually. May be worth a try.

Willy in Pacifica

---

.
Willy in Pacifica

Don't we in a democratic society normally post election vote totals?

There is a lot of discussion about the process but it would interesting to know the vote totals, especially when you have candidates handling ballots.

"...let the sunshine,

let the sunshine in,

the sunshine in...."

- Mike

Willy, I e-mailed Valerie Ellsworth-Gattis with my concerns and received a reply stating it was a valid election upheald by the vote held on the conference call. Eric Bean entered the debate on duathlon.com, Mandy Pagon, here and Ray Plotecia gave to off the subject answers on rec.sport.triathlon. I think that's all we'll get until this thing goes to court.

Mike, go to the USAT site and look under news/ archives and you will find the election results by candidate.

Bob Sigerson

I hate to agree with Alan but I have to here. The USOC is not coming down hard on USAT at all. They are trying to protect the USAT board from its own stupidity. I read the USOC letter to say "you guys have an image problem that could get out of control and cause problems for everyone. We don't really care if your elections are unfair to the point of being corrupt; we're no strangers to corruption ourselves but take some advice from someone who's been there and at least make it look like you're doing something to pacify your members. A blue ribbon panel is a great way to do this because it: 1. Makes it look like you are doing something while you are really just waiting for this to blow over and 2. Removes the obvious conflict of interest of having a board vote on the fairness of its own elections."

The only thing the USOC cares about is avoiding a scandal, particularly in an olympic year and the "blue ribbon panel" is an attempt to do that by sweeping everything under the rug. Mark my words, no matter what else the blue ribbon panel decides or says, it will allow the election to stand.

I hope that the prospective plaintiffs have the good sense not to agree to anything the USOC is selling. Their letter to the board had it right: hold another election or explain yourselves in court. There is no option "c."

---

________________________________________________

Anyone who tells you they're as fast now as they were when they were 18...
sure wasn't very fast when they were 18.

I hope the plaintiffs choose option c, which is: accept that the election was valid, but that the system has MAJOR problems, and work within the organization to fix those problems so that this doesn't happen again.

As I have said many time, litigation will help no one but the lawyers.

Steve, sounds like a California jury of old. Look, OJ, we'll let you go this time just don't don't do it again. In Gatordawg territory, they would be saying, how do you like your squeezed OJ, pulp or no pulp.

Bob Sigerson

Bob, was that a hanging chad?!?!? ;)

---

---

KEEP ON TRI-NG