DIR Return Create A Forum - Home
---------------------------------------------------------
Simply TKD (Taekwondo)
HTML https://simplytkd.createaforum.com
---------------------------------------------------------
*****************************************************
DIR Return to: Taekwondo in General
*****************************************************
#Post#: 555--------------------------------------------------
States Oversight
By: Ladytkd Date: April 9, 2015, 9:22 am
---------------------------------------------------------
In 2004 when the USOC took over the USTU as part of the
remediation agreement, the USOC eliminated the states from the
governance of the organization. This caused a bit of an uproar
when they had to back off and allow the states via NASTO a seat
on the BOD. The USOC viewed the states as corrupt and the
source of a lot of USTU's problems, so just toss it. NASTO
didn't work so well. Mark Williams decided he wanted to be
President and somehow, the one other candidate for the office
decided to drop out rather than run. He later became Vice
President. From Day One, Mr. Williams and NASTO members did not
click. I believe there was only 1 meeting and Mr, Williams
decided to run for the BOD as the NASTO representative even
though the NASTO bylaws did not allow the President and the BOD
Director to be the same person. I won't go into all the hassles
with NASTO but the situation proved that the USAT could not
effectively run without the support of the states.
What to do? USOC thinks the states are corrupt and there was a
lot of run for funny business that went unchecked. Many states
ran efficiently and actually spent their funds on programs for
their athletes, as intended.
In 2007 USAT BOD voted to return states as USAT members. States
cannot run as an outside entity like NASTO. Didn't work. Would
it have worked if Mark Williams had not been president? Well,
it at least would have finished its 501c3, had meetings and
financial reports. On the other hand, states, seeing that they
were not considered USAT members didn't require their members to
be USAT members, ran joint USAT/AAU qualifiers and USAT could
not oversee their activities - period.
As part of the agreement to return the states, I and others,
developed a program of oversight for the states. Having been in
the middle of the USOC fracas over states and a state president
of Oklahoma for six years, I knew how money disappeared and
officers appointed and other non-transparent actions happened.
Even the USTU bylaws called for the states to submit their tax
return yearly as well as their financials. The program required
that states submit their yearly dues, just as NCTA and Military
are required to do and I hear don't/ They also had to submit
their bylaws, minutes and financials. In December 2008, the BOD
unanimously voted Paul Scott as an overseer of the program, a
State Auditor so to speak. He was to review these items and
report back to the CEO and the BOD so that they could deal with
the states out of compliance. Sounds simple huh?
Well, Askinas didn't like Paul Scott so he never audited a
single state. Askinas owed others, and so when BOD Member Mark
Williams stomped his feet over the other already approved New
Jersey State Association with more than 100 members, Williams
swore he would not bring his handful of members to USAT. So even
though Williams had few members and the other group had many,
Askinas approved both. Even though Williams was a BOD member
who voted on contracts and compensation for the CEO, Askinas
approved both. He also never reviewed either.
Fast forward to today. Recently I have received a number of
messages and calls about ..... STATES! Seems there are states
where no one knows where the money goes. I'm told there is a
major state that just had a private meeting and appointed its
own president without an election. I would not be surprised of
the old trick of contracting out the management of the state
qualifier to an outside related group for thousands of dollars
and calling it an expense instead of using talented local
volunteers to save money - bet this is still happening too. I
know one state officer owed USTU a fine over a complaint he
lost. So since this was never paid, how is USAT not monitoring
this situation? I know of at least one state president that is
running both the USAT and the AAU programs and trying to get the
USAT referees to take over his AAU qualifier. Now maybe that is
not bad, but there is something in the code of ethics about
different organizations and being leaders of both. (I have no
issue with people being members of both AAU and USAT and any
other organization. I just think it is a demanding job if done
correctly and dividing between the two shortchanges both.)
How can this be? Askinas is gone. There was a process in place.
It is pretty simple. In fact, Mr. Scott has never been voted
out by the BOD. Don't know that after how he was treated he
would still want to do it, but I bet he would. After all, his
crime in Askinas' eyes was that Mr. Scott was a friend of Larry
Cain's. Serious. Friends with one of the most dedicated and
honest members of USAT - oh never mind, that explains why
Askinas hated Mr. Scott.
Bottom line - states and clubs control memberships. The
numerous states functioning in a transparent manner that
supports the athletes are a boon for the USAT. However, without
oversight, visible and effective oversight, they are also an
open invitation to abuse. If I am hearing about all these
incidents across the country that are not in alignment with the
simple oversight established in 2007, then there is something
wrong here. I am sure the answer will be that there is
oversight, but with the large number of complaints out there
publicly, it might be time to go back to basics and do it more
vigorously.
The problem with states that are not transparent and hold secret
appointments and all that is that the honest members just drop
out and USAT membership numbers go down and participation goes
down. The board has mandated membership increases - how about
this as an idea? Make the states transparent and oversee their
progress. Build a better foundation so that members who left
because of the problems in their states might feel comfortable
enough to return.
#Post#: 556--------------------------------------------------
Re: States Oversight
By: Ladytkd Date: April 9, 2015, 9:24 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Within the last year the USAT approved a new state association
who still had not finished their bylaws. Not saying this is a
bad group, it is simply a very bad policy and idea. The group
replaced had no idea it was coming until the day it happened -
election day.
#Post#: 569--------------------------------------------------
Re: States Oversight
By: Vessecosi Date: May 20, 2015, 5:30 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Searching for a subject for a long time.
*****************************************************