USFA accepts Election

[KD5MDK]

Disappointed candidates might have mentioned it themselves...

[keith]

hence the probably and the smiley.

[gorgie101]

Here is a shocking thought;
The people best suited to running the USFA may not necessarily be those who have devoted the most time to the organisation.

I am sorry but I just don't see the logic in this statement.

I do, however, see the logic behind this one....(emphasis is mine)

Experience matters, but as important is the fact that the Nominated candidates have repeatedly shown THROUGH THEIR ACTIONS that they have the interests of the organization at heart. They have consistently been voices of reform and change on the board and have donated countless hours of their lives to the effort of reforming the organization.

The Hurley slate has simply not. They have only been involved in the sport from the perspective of fencers and coaches. They have never prior to this shown any interest in helping the organization as a whole.


-m

I would really like to know why the Hurley slate have choosen NOW to suddenly become so involved. If they have wanted all of these changes for so long why are they just now trying to fix it?

[keith]

I am sorry but I just don't see the logic in this statement.

which is why I felt it was a point worth making

[oso97]

Really? Unless someone on the NC breached confidentiality you probably shouldn't know that

Actually, it was never confidential information who the NC was interviewing for the various positions.

[keith]

Actually, it was never confidential information who the NC was interviewing for the various positions.

In which case the trouble maker in me would ask you to post the list, but I'll resist. That is not information that would get anyone anywhere.

[KShan5[PrFC]]

In which case the trouble maker in me would ask you to post the list, but I'll resist. That is not information that would get anyone anywhere.

But this is fencing.net...since when has that every mattered?

[Mr Epee]

But this is fencing.net...since when has that ever mattered?

Probably immediately after the "Old Guard" began its program of systematic retaliation against the members of the Nominating Committee.

It gives me the willies.

[KShan5[PrFC]]

Probably immediately after the "Old Guard" began its program of systematic retaliation against the members of the Nominating Committee.

It gives me the willies.

Now if only they had done that before the NC was nominated....then they could have gotten who they wanted.

[hello?]

I have not slung any mud

Really? Define 'mud'.

[keith]

Now if only they had done that before the NC was nominated....then they could have gotten who they wanted.

Another example of improperly executed preemptive retaliation?

Maybe this can be solved by having the election victors serve for a hundred years.

[mtarascio]

I've been involved with the old AFLA and the USFA since 1961. During this time I have seen some good and bad leadership.

I believe the USFA is in need of strong leadership at this time. I am glad we are having an election. I believe both groups are interested in the well being of the USFA.

I hope those who are elected and those not elected may be able to work together in the future for the welfare of the organization.

After careful consideration, I believe the NCcame up with an outstanding group of individuals to lead us in the future.

I am advising fencers from my previous club in SC and my fencers in MA to vote for all of the individuals the NC nominated.

[ysbadadden]

It's going to take us a couple of years to get back to even. To do so we need to have budgets in 2008/2009 and 2009/2010 that anticipate a significant surplus. That will allow us to catch up with our old bills. (And yes, I'm essentially saying that if you help at a NAC for the next couple of years that it's going to take some time to get paid. Hopefully less time at each event, but some time.) By the 2010/2011 season I'd like to think we'll be current with our bills and will be able to pay people right after we get the reimbursement forms. Then in 2011/2012 we can move to a system in which people get paid as they walk out the door at the end of the tournament.

The above may be a little pessimistic, but, at the same time, I would prefer to give everyone realistic expectations about our situation. If we can do better than we will.

Greg

Wasn't there formerly a fencing endowment fund created out of the LA Olympics and previous years' surpluses? Is that all gone?

And isn't it unethical to ask the refs, armorers, and coaches of next year to pay for the sins of this year?

[ysbadadden]

We need a President who is willing to knock heads together. The USFA has been dysfunctional under administrations both competent and incompetent. Something is badly wrong with our structure. A President has to have the ability to make things happen, to correct badly functioning committees and officials, and to initiate changes without excessive static. Whoever I vote for needs to convince me that she will take on this strong leadership role.

It's no longer a question of who has the best ideas; it's a question of who can put workable ideas into practice!

[Greg_D]

Wasn't there formerly a fencing endowment fund created out of the LA Olympics and previous years' surpluses? Is that all gone?

And isn't it unethical to ask the refs, armorers, and coaches of next year to pay for the sins of this year?

To answere these questions in order... Yes there is. No it isn't. That depends on your perespective...

The US Fencing Foundation still exists. It currently has assets significantly in excess of $1 Million. However, if we tap into these funds to fix the current problems we lose the stream of income upon which we can count in future years. In addition, since the assets in the fund originally came from the 1984 Olympics, and were specifically designated upon receipt as being for elite athlete development, it seems inappropriate to ask that they help the USFA out of the hole, particularly until it shows that it can manage budgets effecitively. The USFF gives money every year to the USFA. I hope that it continues to do so for a long time to come.

Greg

[dekko]

To answere these questions in order... Yes there is. No it isn't. That depends on your perespective...

The US Fencing Foundation still exists. It currently has assets significantly in excess of $1 Million. However, if we tap into these funds to fix the current problems we lose the stream of income upon which we can count in future years. In addition, since the assets in the fund originally came from the 1984 Olympics, and were specifically designated upon receipt as being for elite athlete development, it seems inappropriate to ask that they help the USFA out of the hole, particularly until it shows that it can manage budgets effecitively. The USFF gives money every year to the USFA. I hope that it continues to do so for a long time to come.

Greg

Who(person or group) is in charge of the USF Foundation and disbursement?

[Mr Epee]

Who(person or group) is in charge of the USF Foundation and disbursement?

Steve Sobel
Robert Prifrel
Sherry Postumus
Derek Cotton
Robert Dow
Stephen Trevor
Ed Wright

Net Value as of 2006 = 1.8 million

[DJ Apostrophe]

Steve Sobel
Robert Prifrel
Sherry Postumus
Derek Cotton
Robert Dow
Stephen Trevor
Ed Wright

Net Value as of 2006 = 1.8 million

Mr Epee, is this information posted somewhere (just out of curiosity). I assume this is a 'board of directors' for the foundation? Have they replaced Sherry since she passed away? Or are there currently 5 members on the board?

-w

[TBean]

To answere these questions in order... Yes there is. No it isn't. That depends on your perespective...

The US Fencing Foundation still exists. It currently has assets significantly in excess of $1 Million. However, if we tap into these funds to fix the current problems we lose the stream of income upon which we can count in future years. In addition, since the assets in the fund originally came from the 1984 Olympics, and were specifically designated upon receipt as being for elite athlete development, it seems inappropriate to ask that they help the USFA out of the hole, particularly until it shows that it can manage budgets effecitively. The USFF gives money every year to the USFA. I hope that it continues to do so for a long time to come.

Greg

It is not merely inappropriate to use the funds for another purpose, its not legal. Without authorization from the donor or Orphans Court you cannot use the funds for anything but what the donor orginally specified - elite athlete development. Of course the USFA could use the money to dig the elite programs out of the hole - although long-term I agree with you that it is a poor idea.

Does the audit list these as a permanently restricted asset or a temporarily restricted asset and the USFA has opted to only use the income generated from the funds. Just curious.

[Mr Epee]

It's from the last available IRS filing. 2007 should be out later this year.

To my knowledge it isn't posted on any fencing related sites, and I have no knowledge of how officers are either selected or replaced. Derek is probably the most readily accessible person on that list, so if you're curious that's probably the best place to start.