Pacific NW "region" and USAT

Triathlon Forum
1

I have only been following this USAT “issue” for the last two days and I am slowly catching on to a few of the more potent issues on the table, however, if it is at all possible, could someone please sum up the more specific regional issues associated with the Pacific Northwest or even better, Washington State ?

What’s on the table for the NW or what issues should be on the table?

What’s the pulse of USAT in the PNW?

Where does this TriNorthwest and AA-Sports fit into the picture, because I see no clear connections to anything USAT except the one day fees from time to time… Is USAT even represented in this region beyond the simple advertised sanctioning and one day fee thing?

Thanks to anyone with some insight.

Oreo

2

Sanctioned events.

Disclaimer: I do not reside in the PNW, but am slightly familiar with the goings on in your region.

The story goes that a large producer of races in your area, AA-Sports seems to ring a bell for me, had a major fall out with an individual representing USAT. As a result, the RD decided not to sanction and encouraged other RDs to do the very same. Almost instantly the region was void of a network of races it once had.

From what I’ve seen, rebuilding the relationship with that Race Director would be on the top of the priority list. Due to the severity of the fallout, this is an issue for the national election, not just your region.

I’m guessing ironotter (if he is who I think he is) is very well aware of the situation, and I’d also be willing to bet Dan has his finger on the pulse as well.

3

“The story goes that a large producer of races in your area, AA-Sports seems to ring a bell for me, had a major fall out with an individual representing USAT.”

i do not know for sure who you are talking about, but i suspect it might be tim becker, a USAT board member who was essentially elected by jim girand thru california votes (becker beat sharon ackles in the 2002 election) and i believe becker is heavily active in the PNW regional federation. he’s also sales manager at computrainer. he and i therefore have a mixed relationship. we deal with each other at CT, a product i love and depend upon (becker is a great sales mgr), while at the same time i abhor much of what the girand election machine stands for. oh well…

anyway, i believe this is the person you are writing about, why not let’s just say what we’re saying instead of vagueries? to wit, the largest single race in the area, or the world, depending on your definition (danskin) is in seattle, and its RD just sent a note to all her mailing list endorsing steve locke (she’s apparently anti the girand machine).

but, who knows? becker’s got a side to this, maybe he’s right and the RDs are wrong. i don’t know.

if you’re not talking about becker, just write in and correct me and we can set the record straight as to whom it is you refer. btw, thanks for contributing, JstTriN, i believe you’re a relatively new member to the board, no?

4

Some days I am not sure who I am Jeff :slight_smile: The current board leadership is working hard to build new relationships with AA sports. We are also working hard to bring real value to the members of USAT and race directors who sanction. We are rebuilding a consistent newsletter, improving the marketing of regional championships, increasing fiscal accountability, and excited about a number of other new developments. Gina Miller, president is extremely capable and working closely with national to bring regional issues forward. I believe the AA Sports issue is a paramount reflection of the challenge to USAT. We must make sanctioning races mean something to the membership. I believe at the minimum, sanctioned races should set a quality standard. a ‘brand’ if you will. Buy USAT :slight_smile: I think aggresive risk management and well trained officials are part of that equation. Promoting ranking systems and high profile events like the olympic trials. At the same time we need to be more to the race directors than insurance and big pain on race day. This will have start top down and I hope the new board will take this seriously.

Jonathan Hoskins, PNW-USAT Vice President, Past President

AKA Iron Otter

5

Yes, Tim Becker is who I was referring to, but as I mentioned, I know very little about the details, but do know there was a falling out between the parties involved.

You are correct Dan, I am a new member to the forum, and a looooooong time lurker. Years ago I visited RST on occassion and more recently I’ve just been hanging out in cyberspace but not really contributing.

Not that you would remember, but I joined you on a ride up Palomar a few years back in the spring with Ves, Jeff and another fellow, I slipped into the ride on the coattails of Kyle Handley, our local bike stud who summited in 57:00 or sum such time on his new (at the time) Yaqui. If I recall you were quite impressed with his performance and to date, as far as I know, Ves hasn’t invited Kyle back out to ride… lol. ;o)

In any case, I figure I’ve been watching silently for long enough and after I saw some more familiar faces, as well as a few topics I knew something about, I decided it was a bit safer for me to come out of hiding.

Thank you for the welcome.

6

“I think aggresive risk management and well trained officials are part of that equation.”

are you saying that AA Sports, and perhaps other RDs, in the pacific northwest are not sanctioning because tim becker, or USAT’s risk management team, asked this and/or other RDs to undergo legitimate changes to their procedures to make their races safer. did they decide to non-sanction before they were denied sanctions?

i don’t know the issues, but if so, and if the risk management issues were righteous, then kudos to becker and/or USAT. perhaps you can enlighten us.

7

“I believe the AA Sports issue is a paramount reflection of the challenge to USAT. We must make sanctioning races mean something to the membership.”

I think Jonathan hit the nail right on the head. I live in the PNW and race a vast majority of my races here in Washington and Oregon, and AA Sports is the #1 race organizer as a majority of the races (especially the bigger races entry-wise) are organized by them. In my opinion, their races are safe and well-organized - but not USAT-sanctioned.

As an athlete the only realy impact it has on me is with rankings - it makes it harder for me to get ranked with USAT regionally and nationally because I have to seek out the races here that are sanctioned, and for me those races are infrequent and not as convenient. So for me that part of it sucks, because to me the rankings are a solid value-added part of USAT, and it makes me feel out of touch with the rest of the country becuase everyone else is racing USAT-sanctioned events.

I would like to see this schism between AA and USAT mended - but right now I can’t really blame AA for going it alone: their races are safe, they do attract top athletes, and fill near to capacity for every event so for them what is not to like? And what is in it for them to come back under the USAT umbrella?

8

My name is Gina Miller and I’m the USAT Pacific Northwest Regional President. You are asking a lot of questions that require fairly detailed explanations. Therefore, this post will be long and I’m sure will generate more questions, but feel free to email me directly at gina@freshairsports if you want to talk in more depth.

We have a board in the Pacific Northwest that has been in place since December. If you are a USAT annual member, you should have received the 1st quarter newsletter in March and will also receive the 2nd quarter newsletter at the end of June (or you can visit the regions’ website (www.usat-pnw.com) to see the last newsletter. These newsletters provide a synopsis of what activities we have done or are planning to do.

The regional board is an entirely volunteer organization that dedicates time to helping promote the sport in our region through various activities. Some activities include working with regional race directors to help manage USAT membership and license issues that come up at races, developing programs for youth triathletes, developing a new “Tri Guide” for 2005, providing the annual members with a quarterly newsletter, maintaining a regional website and providing a forum for you as an athlete to let us know what you need and want from USAT. There was a board meeting last weekend at the Baker’s Breakfast Cookie race in Bellingham. This was posted on the regional website to give those in the area an opportunity to meet the board, hear what is going on in the region, and be provided with an opportunity to participate and comment. We will have an annual meeting sometime in December, the date and location are still to be determined.

Most importantly, the regional board is here for the athletes in the region. We are your local representatives and are here to help you understand issues as well as listen to ideas and help resolve grievances. The list of board members’ names and contact information are on the regional website, I encourage you and other USAT members to contact us if you have any questions or concerns. Remember, a portion of the annual fee you pay to USA Triathlon goes to fund grass-roots projects in our region – let us know what you want.

You asked about issues that are or should be on the table in the Northwest. The two most pressing issues are of course obvious: the national board election and the petition. Speaking as an athlete myself, the most important thing for me is to get this board situation resolved so that they can start focusing on what’s important – us! Having said that, I took a close look at the slate of candidates and voted for the western representative that I believe will help keep the board grounded and focused on the needs of the 53,000 of us that pay a membership fee. The other thing that will affect the Northwest is district restructuring as outlined in the petition. Our region is comparatively very small to others – we have about 1500 members in the entire Pacific Northwest compared with significantly more just in California alone (I don’t have the exact number, so I don’t want to quote inaccurately). However, the other important issue with the petition is that it’s all or nothing – it all passes or it all fails. You have to decide if the things you like are more important than the things you do not like and vote accordingly. I agree with Jeff Larson’s post (USAT Midwest Regional President) that there are some very good ideas in the petition, but I would rather have the new board address each of the issues individually (redistricting, term limits, etc.) rather than accept the whole lot at once. Other issues in the Pacific Northwest that are on my mind are things like: 1) finding race directors to host more races in our region; 2) what we can do to streamline the activities between National and the regions and 3) finding ways to provide more education to triathletes in our region - why should you become an USAT member? what do you get out of it? These are a few things I am personally thinking about, I invite you to let your board know what your issues are.

Regarding AA Sports/Tri Northwest, I have been working with AA Sports for the last few months and will be at Pacific Crest to help manage the USAT licensing questions that come up and also promote USAT membership. They are sanctioning a few of their events this year with USAT – the long course triathlon and endurance duathon at Pacific Crest and the long course and endurance duathlon at Black Diamond. TriNorthwest is a separate membership organization and ranking system created by AA Sports to serve the northwest. They are doing a lot of great things for the region in terms of providing discounts and a great competitive race series that culminates with an invitational race in September. It’s important to recognize that USAT and TriNorthwest are separate and distinct – if you have an interest in being ranked as part of the USAT regional and/or national rankings, you have to race in USAT sanctioned races that may or may not also be TriNorthwest races.

Thanks,

Gina

9

Thanks, Jeff. You are right.

Just to reiterate the last post - we are working with AA Sports to help rebuild the relationship. I have been working with the two owners, Jon Atherton and Carol Anderson for a few months and they are really nice people whose main priority is putting on a quality race for the athletes.

Thanks gain,

Gina

10

Gina,

Thanks for the nice post.  I reside in Washington and appreciated hearing from you.  One quick question:  USAT is also involved in duathlons, correct?  Any chance of "beefing up" the amount of du's in the NW?

Regards,

Brett

11

Considering the current state of affairs, and recent behavior. Do you really TRUST the BOD to look at the issues individually? If the petition passes, we have a good start, and the new BOD AND the membership can work on any changes. If it doesn’t pass the new BOD could rewrite the by-laws to completely eliminate the membership’s ability to effect change.

12

I did not mean to imply that risk management issue and AA sports are linked. I don’t know entirely why AA chose to forego sanctioning or create a competing race series. I’ve heard that some part of it was the cost and burden of handling one-day fees. Apparently they also have an alternative insurance source they are confident in. A pure speculation on why they sanctioned the two (of 20+) events they did for 2004 for is because they are included in the US National Half Series which requires races to be sanctioned. AA sports races have hiccups like any other but in general are competently run and give good value. They were in no risk of losing sanctioning status that I am aware of. They are especially popular in Oregon. My reference to risk management and quality control was actually across the board in the region. Currently USAT sanctioning does not ensure a quality event. The most badly run and/or dangerous events I have witnessed were USAT sanctioned. If we want to strengthen USAT membership and the federation, the athletic consumer needs to have some confidence in the sanctioning “brand”. somehow the head official and RD’s need to work together to establish quality races – supported by good officiating.

13

Hi there,

I understand your thoughts, however that’s why it’s incredibly important to have a competent board in place that is athlete-focused and we have that opportunity to elect them now.

Also keep in mind that there are ten regional presidents that are very, very interested in making sure that our needs are met and to provide a check-and-balance with the national board.

I have learned a lot in the last few months and while no means consider myself an expert at how things work, I do know that the regions have a liaison on the national board (Brad Davison) whose primary job is to make sure that our issues are heard by the national board.

I’d rather take the glass half full approach with the new board and assume that they are going to do what’s best for the members. Isn’t that why we have a board?

Thanks,

Gina

14

Hi there,

Thanks. Sure! I’d love to see more duathlons in the region. Please let me and/or the rest of the board know if you have suggested venues, dates, etc. We have a lot of race directors in the Pac NW and the best thing we can do is let them know what athletes want.

Thanks,

Gina

15

“They were in no risk of losing sanctioning status that I am aware of. They are especially popular in Oregon.”

okay, so, let’s see if we can get closer to the goal here, and this is addressed both to you and gina. if AA Sports puts on good races, and if there is no risk managment issue, then why don’t they sanction? is it because tim becker flubbed it? if i speak to the people i know at AA Sports, what are they going to say to me? ought i just to have them post their reasons to this board?

second, if tim becker is to blame – and perhaps we can determine that – then let us talk about the petition a bit. tim is going to be on the next board. tim is up there in the PNW acting as a USAT representative because californians (actually, san franciscans mostly) elected him. are you both comfortable that a new board, with tim becker, and perhaps jim girand and valerie gattis, and the 3 elites, and fred sommer, is going to fix problems now that it didn’t fix last time? what makes you think that? why is the PNW going to have any more of a chance at representation now than it did before? and why do you want to risk having the membership lose its ability to remedy things by petition?

these are lots of questions, and perhaps i can number them to make them easier to answer:

  1. is tim becker to blame or AA sports not sanctioning, or if we were to ask AA sports would they say the issue has nothing to do with tim?

  2. are you comfortable with your current state of PNW representation, the way the west/east/central/at-large regionality is executed? in other words, is the current system better for PNW representation than the new system put forward in the petition?

  3. are you for gattis/girand, yes or no? and if not, why are you confident that the new board will set things right, considering that incumbents not up for election already hold a girand majority?

  4. do you understand that if you vote YES on the petition, washingtonians and oregonians can gather 100 signatures and put a petition on the annual ballot to change whatever you don’t like in these new bylaws, however, if you vote NO you may very well lose that right forever for your NW constituency?

welcome to the board, gina, and i wish it were not under such pointed circumstances. however, you represent a lot of members. you don’t represent board members, but annual members. they’re looking for your unequivocal stand, so that they can know how to vote.

16

I hope that a competent BOD gets elected, and the passage of the petition certainly would not prevent them from doing what is best for all of USAT’s members. BUT… if the petition doesn’t pass, there would be nothing to prevent them from assuming absolute power, and cutting the membership out completely.

Do the regional presidents have any REAL say in the NGB? While a liaison can bring up issues, they certainly cannot guaranty any action.

17

Hi Dan,
Thanks for the questions…there’s nothing like getting to the heart of the issues, is there :slight_smile: Here are your questions and my answers:

  1. is tim becker to blame or AA sports not sanctioning, or if we were to ask AA sports would they say the issue has nothing to do with tim?
    This is so incredibly complicated - there’s a bunch of water under the bridge between Tim and AA Sports. It’s become almost an urban legend here in the Pacific Northwest as to the causes of the rift. My job is to work with Jon and Carol and to take the personal issues out of it and figure out how to work with such a major player in my region. I’m not going to answer for AA Sports on the personal issue, but I will say that they have some valid reasons for choosing not to sanction all of their races. Besides inexpensive insurance, what are the benefits of sanctioning races? I think this is a big question and we as regional federations and the national board have to carve out a clear answer to. After many conversations with Jon and Carol, their biggest concern is the $9 one-day fee - they don’t think it’s fair to ask athletes to absorb that cost.

  2. are you comfortable with your current state of PNW representation, the way the west/east/central/at-large regionality is executed? in other words, is the current system better for PNW representation than the new system put forward in the petition?
    No - I am not comfortable at all with our current current western representative on the national board (Tim Becker).
    Regarding the petition, I agree with a large part of the petition, Dan and one piece I definitely like is the district restructuring. We are a small fish here in the Pacific Northwest and I’d like to help it grow and be heard more in the national “pond.”

  3. are you for gattis/girand, yes or no? and if not, why are you confident that the new board will set things right, considering that incumbents not up for election already hold a girand majority?
    I did not vote for the “at large” candidate mentioned above and I voted for you for the western region - does that answer your question?

  4. do you understand that if you vote YES on the petition, washingtonians and oregonians can gather 100 signatures and put a petition on the annual ballot to change whatever you don’t like in these new bylaws, however, if you vote NO you may very well lose that right forever for your NW constituency?
    Yes, I understand this. However, I have to go back to the absolute basics: we PAY to belong to USAT, it’s not free. If the board becomes power-obsessed and wants to take “all of our rights away” as members why would I pay to renew my membership? I think that’s a grossly overstated concern. We vote with our checkbooks and credit cards on that one.

18

I appreciate all the up front, straight forward information and have managed to connect a few dots. Thank you to everyone who responded and or who may continue the dialogue. As it seems obvious to me the first and most important order of business is to see how the election/petition plays out. Following that, it’s a matter of letting the dust settle, then getting to work on addressing the specific PNW regional issues.

I see the major issues as:

1] Addressing and rebuilding a win/win/win relationship between AA sports, USAT, and the athletes

2] Providing a “real” incentive program for new RD’s to adopt USAT as a partner instead of an overwhelming-corporate-greed-machiene-that-just-happens-to-sell-insurance. Incentive programs for new RD’s obviously means more USAT races.

My immediate interest is centered around focus number two, because I’m itching to put on a new race , and I would love to partner with a strong and nationally respected organization for a number of reasons. However, to be honest, I don’t see this with USAT in the PNW region. On the other hand, I was heavy into the sport when AA sports came into power and was seriously turned off to their handling of the transition into a monopoly. Almost overnight the race fees doubled and the quality of event tanked compaired to the previous years events . Despite the fact that things may or may not have changed at AA-Sports , I don’t feel inclined to partner with their system either.

So essentially, when I read that USAT and AA-Sports are at least in communication and hopefully working to form a serious partnership, I take this as a positive in my perspective and hope that it means I’ll have a strong base of resources and options for when I take the plunge into the RD role…

19

“If the board becomes power-obsessed and wants to take “all of our rights away” as members why would I pay to renew my membership?”

Follow that thought a little further, and see where it takes your regional board.

Ken

20

Dan (et al.),

I’ve spoken extensively with Carol and many others in Oregon about these issues and would answer:

  1. Carol would DEFINITELY blame Tim Becker as the primary reason they chose not to sanction with USAT last year (and for MANY races this year). Just get her and John going sometime on this subject and you know immediately that there is BAD blood between them.

  2. Tim does an O.K. job representing the PNW…If SEATTLE counts as the PNW. There is a marked difference between his involvement in Seattle and his involvement in the rest of the region. I think regional positions should be elected solely by regional participants and we should have more/smaller regions (it’s the grassroots, small government traditional Republican in me;-)

  3. I’m looking for Board Members who don’t have ulterior motives. It would be nice to know that my board members exist solely for the good of the members, but I’m not convinced yet.

Cheers,

Puskas