"Conditions for Reintegration" with USAC meeting Nov 18th

Is Colorado getting closer to having a combined USAC/ACA association? This Friday your ACA club is encouraged to attend a special meeting with the CEO of USAC, Steve Johnson. Attached is the Full Agenda for the Meeting and below is a snippet of it

6:00 Welcome, Introductions, and Roll Call of Club Presidents

6:30 Presentation Steve Johnson, President & CEO of USACycling

6:45 Presentation Bill Barr, President, ACA Board of Directors
Clint Bickmore, Vice President, ACA Board of Directors
Chris McGee, Executive Director, ACA

7:00 Statement of Conditions for Reintegration

1- For the first three years in which the ACA serves as a Local Association of USAC, the USA Cycling
Development Foundation’s Center of Excellence of Award will provide $20,000 per year to the ACA for the
ACA’s Junior Development Program.

2- As per the LA Agreement, USAC will rebate the ACA $10 for each full price license sold in the ACA’s LA
area (Section 2.2) during the Term of this agreement. As all ACA license members who join USAC as a result
of the ACA becoming the Local Association are in excess to the 2011 licenses sold, the ACA is due an
additional $5 for each license sold during the 2012 Term of this agreement (Section 2.3).

3- The Local Association can set local policy regarding race points points series, upgrades, various LA fees,
including but not limited to: calendar fees, surcharges, race kit fees, officials’ fees and race day duties,
calendar date request fees, required EMT on site for all races, and the continuation of existing programs and
continuation of existing staff.

4- The ACA will work with USAC personnel on providing transaction process flow from the USAC license web
application to include ACA local association process flow. Additionally, the ACA will provide USAC web
personnel local association information to include with license purchase confirmation.

News Item: 

200 Comments

Power's in promoters hands

Because they, not the clubs, control our fate. Mt Evans could have sanctioned with USAC. Superior, Koppenberg, Roubaix could have as well. So why did they choose the ACA? For them there's real money at stake. If they're not happy what's to stop them from banning together and privately insuring. Chaos would ensue, but the top events hold the real power in this power play between governing bodies.

This is about money

I have read all the comments and have written a blog about this
http://blog.fritesenmayo.com/2011/11/money-money-moneymon-ey.html

This is about money plain and simple. If your team has a junior program, you would look at this policy and vote no straight away.
But we will see on Friday. Stand up, tell us your name and club and be proud of your vote

Let the fun begin

Rich
Frites en Mayo Velo Club

ACA intergration with USAC

There are a lot of really good points that everyone has put out there. I just want to state something unrelated to the money issue. Having been involved with cycling for 25+ years and many of those years dealing with USCF/USAC, I want to point out something. With the USAC, juniors and development is elitist. It's all about who has the talent to go to nationals etc. So much in fact, that during a seminar for USAC coaches in which I attended years ago, they were intested in a new direction. They were planning on aggressively seeking out talent to get into cycling. Such as going after the talented swimmer or runner and getting them into cycling. Some may not have a problem with that, but I think a child that is interested in cycling should have the same kind of support. The same attitude is shown in the "average" categories. It's not until you're a real successful rider that you get attention and benefit to a degree. I was pleasently surprised years ago at an ACA camp for juniors that all riders were treated equally. They all benefited. I think that's the way cycling ought to be and the organization that oversees a sport I respect.

What is Wrong with Grassroots

Amatuer racing as it has evolved in Colorado? Who is being disingenuous here? Why were we led to believe that ACA board of directors and senior staff were opposed to reintegration since the topic emerged as a hot button? I continue to hammer home the question and beg. How do the vast majority of ACA license holders stand to benefit from this proposed action, assimilation or rather, hostile takeover. Has there been sufficient coverage and information disseminated to individual license holders within our clubs? Are we going to get the type of voter turnout to make this a fair and legitimate vote or is this more aptly characterized as a role of the dice? Perhaps a rollover? Play dead? See Spot run. What happened to free enterprise? A free market system? Why can't we use OBRA as our model of defiance and unity and strength? Let an LA form within the state for those who so desperately need the USAC. Why do we have to dissolve ACA?
Thank you for the forum.

How Many?

How many of the "occasional" racers out there will choose NOT to pay double to get licensed? The week-in-week-out racers will remain, and pay the costs of this "re-integration". The few times a year riders, the ones I would think are the best "target audience" for racing, expansion, and introducing more new people to the sport are the very ones who would be pushed out of "the system" as it no longer makes financial sense for them to to join. I believe that a good percentage of the ACA members fall into this category. How much of a overall membership decline would you expect? Is this the best way to grow the sport? Still seems to me like a choice between local, grassroots focus and National/elite development focus.

Pages