Board members come and go, often not fast enough for my liking, but for
the most part, the current flock, now disgraced for their past elections
shenanigans, have done their best to turn the Federation into their own
little fiefdom, to the detriment of both event producers and triathletes.
You have received or will soon receive a ballot in the mail from USAT for
the election to replace the current Board. Hundreds of thousands of
dollars have already been spent to overturn the last USAT election, and
yet those same Board Members that corrupted the process, are seeking
re-election. To cut to the quick, I am asking you to support a slate of
folks that I believe will turn the Federation back on course for our
collective best interest.
More often than not, these elections are decided by a small number of
ballots so your vote counts!!! Please support the following candidates:
At Large…Steve Locke
In the East Region…Dave Ragsdale
In the Central Region…Jack Weiss
In the West Region…Dan Enfield
For more background on the Current State of the Board, visit www.slowtwitch.com and click on “May the flames begin” in “OPED” (see red
bar at top of home page).
Exactly what we need-another race director on the Board.
I cannot understand why anyone would vote for a race director for the Board. They have an inherent conflict of interest and should be disqualified from running in my view.
I can’t say I agree 100% with that. I think there should be a limit, say 1 or 2 rds on the board. But also have 1 or 2 seats reserved just for age groupers. That can give a balanced board.
The “person” sending the e-mail is Jan Caille, race director of the Chicago Triathlon . . . and though not one of the plaintiffs in the suit to overturn the election, was one of the people who provided funding for the plaintiffs in that litigation. Jack Weiss was of course one of the named plaintiffs.
Oops. I misread the email. My bad. I read the first part and thought it was another RD soliciting for our vote. My sentiment is the same, however.
I’d vote for Dan Enfield. Dan Empfield is awfully pro race director, though. (If I were out West I’d vote for you Dan, because you have a lot of valuable experience.)
Who is going to see that our races stop having 3000 participants at a venue meant for 500? Who is going to actively support safety issues?
“Who is going to see that our races stop having 3000 participants at a venue meant for 500? Who is going to actively support safety issues?”
your board members. if you feel that the USAT emblem on a race application ought to mean something (like safety) that it now doesn’t mean, consider the board you’ve elected. if you keep electing the same people you’ll keep getting the same from USAT.
I would expect a balanced and common sense approach from you. That’s your way. You have a long history here and elsewhere and spoke appropriately about, for instance, IM Utah. I feel confident you aren’t indifferent to safety issues.
However, the other candidates have not explicated their views to the voters. This is a major failing in the system. All we get is “It’s their fault, so vote for me.” Kudos to Lew Kidder and Jack Weiss for participating here. Why hasn’t Valerie participated, or have I missed her posts? I’d like to have a woman board member, but not if she’s going to ignore safety issues.
“Why hasn’t Valerie participated, or have I missed her posts? I’d like to have a woman board member, but not if she’s going to ignore safety issues.”
i valerie’s defense i think she, and jim girand, feel like slowtwitch’s forum would be hostile territory. likewise, i don’t participate on the forum at duathlon.com, a magazine owned by a former board member who tended to vote with the girand/gattis bloc. i wouldn’t be welcomed over there and, frankly, eric schwartz can say what he wants over there. it’s his magazine and i don’t want to spoil his party. the only difference between my candidacy and that of others is that i don’t have anonymous snipers spreading half-truths and outright lies on various forum boards.
regarding safety, there is one issue that you’ve brought up several times, and your issue works both for you and against you. it’s the question of whether RDs ought to serve on the board. you and i disagree about this. when you consider the issues most important to most triathletes – fair races, safe races, cheap races, more races – they all involve races, that is, they all involve the triathlon experience as expressed at races. this means that in order to satisfy the needs and demands of its most important customer (the member) it must act as if its most urgent duty is toward its nominal customer (the RD).
what i’m saying is, the best way to take care of you is for USAT to better take care of the RD. now, taking care of the RD might mean in some cases better equipping him. in fact, this is what it means 90% of the time. however, it also sometimes means occasionally spanking him. whether you’re going to equip or spank the RD, you’ve got got know more than he does. you can’t help him if he’s already more able or sophisticated than you. you can’t scold him about safety if he knows more about safety than you. therefore, it takes one to know one. only the best RDs know how to both tutor and police the rest of the RDs, and this is why RDs make good board members.
the trick is, when you’re electing RDs to the board, you’ve got to elect the right ones.
Dan Empfield is awfully pro race director, though.