|
Post by schlager7 on Dec 14, 2005 10:38:09 GMT -6
The following is the text of a document which may be found at Save US Fencing. It is submitted here without comment, endorsement or arguement by myself, except that this is obviously to get a feel for our members' various sentiments. In point of fact, this writer has no clear idea what the controversey is over. Any thoughts?:Save US Fencing
Many Olympians, Athletes, National Coaches, Cadre members and parents feel it is time for a change. The USFA has stagnated and many areas of the organization are inept and non-functional, especially the service part of the organization which does not exist. The USFA has failed our athletes and sport miserably since the exceptional performances in Athens. An opportunity to capitalize on this success has been totally squandered. There has been dearth of leadership and the only way to start making a change is from the top down. This is not a vendetta, personality conflict, nor nefarious plot, it is simply concern for the well-being of the USFA and the members it serves. There have been serious failures across a number of areas of the the organization and the oversight to the national office has been non-existent. Our elite cadet, junior, and senior athletes and coaches have floundered and left with nothing but excuses. No one likes controversy, but the dramatic failure of leadership exhibited since the Athens Games necessitates this call to action being proposed. Nothing personal, just a belief based on performance that the current president is not up to the task and a change is needed; thus, the democratic procedures of our organization being utilized through the recall process.
By petitioning a recall of the president of the USFA, we are making our request for her, Nancy Anderson, to step down. Whether by a recall petition approach we are taking or should the president resign, the Executive Committee of the USFA Board of Directors will appoint one of our 4 Vice Presidents (Don Alperstein, Sam Cheris. Rob Sobalvarro, Ed Wright) as interim president for 90 days. Then the 2004 Nominating Committee will reconvene and do a search process for candidates for president. Our membership base and reach has never been so great and we believe there are many talented persons capable and willing to serve the USFA who are not afraid to make significant changes in our committees and organization to propel it in the right direction again. Our USFA Bylaws allow the membership to recall a president (or any other officer) by petition signing (Article VII, Section 9).
The objective is to have a new president that is willing to make the office accountable for their job descriptions and responsibilities and to appoint committees that have the right people on them to make decisions and keep the organization moving forward. We look forward to a president that can have a business plan for the organization with timelines for project completion. We need a strong business-minded president willing to stay on top of the plans and timelines of each committee and office department.
Additionally, we want to have a president who is a professional and can further the position of US Fencing in the realm of the FIE and our position with other countries world-wide. We have never before been in a better position with our successes and results to place our country in a strong international position.
We need to have an organization actively pursuing marketing, public relations and sponsorship. We need a dynamic office staff and simple things modernized such as on -line registrations and membership applications.
There is much potential in the US to be a dominate force in international fencing for many, many years if our fencers, parents, coaches and staff have the appropriate leadership, role models and support to pursue their dreams.
To sign the petition for recall one must be at least 18 and a current member (either a Competitive or Associate) of the USFA. Click here for a membership form. Form must be sent to the USFA, not to Save US Fencing.
Thank you for signing the attached petition. Please print it and have any members of your club who are interested, sign then mail it to the address on the petition. Any and all efforts to help will be greatly appreciated.
For further information email us at: save_usfencing@yahoo.com
Download Petition Form, Click Here
Save US Fencing PO Box 401-WOB West Orange, NJ 07052-0401
The word document, if saved and its "properties" checked, gives the author as Paul Soter.
|
|
|
Post by DavidSierra on Dec 14, 2005 11:47:26 GMT -6
Yes, there was much discussion this past weekend in Pittsburg concerning this subject. I caution anyone about discussing this issue on a public discussion board. If you would like to talk about it and hear the stuff behind it, feel free to contact me privately.
|
|
|
Post by Dan Gorman on Dec 14, 2005 15:14:03 GMT -6
Seems to me the best place to discuss this is a public message board. Backroom politics shouldn't run our organization.
Also, what's the criteria for being one of "the right people"? How are we supposed to get all these business minded, stay on top of the situation people to step up to what are essentially volunteer positions?
Dan
|
|
|
Post by DavidSierra on Dec 15, 2005 10:06:45 GMT -6
Dan,
Backroom politics are exactly what the online petition is exactly about. I strongly hesitate to say any more than that in a public forum, and caution anyone else from doing the same. There are some cutthroat personalities involved.
That being said, I did not sign the petition.
David
|
|
|
Post by schlager7 on Dec 18, 2005 13:02:52 GMT -6
It would appear they are now stating more specifics here: www.geocities.com/save_usfencing/Recall-reasons.htmSave US Fencing
Why recall the president?
First, let it be clear that the Committee to Save US Fencing took every reasonable effort to keep the process quiet, giving the president every opportunity to resign with dignity and to let the organization move on. However, the president chose to make this information public and denies her inability to be in the role as president/CEO of this fast growing multi faceted not for profit organization. This failure to accept and recognize her lack of experience in leadership skills and business management continues to significantly impact the membership at all levels and further stagnates the growth and future of the organization.
The USFA Bylaws really vest all power in the President: the other officers' powers are only derivative of what the President assigns to each officer. When a President won't make decisions or delegate authority, everything comes crashing to a halt. When the President won't oversee committees or the Office, things fly off in every direction.
The president is in a volunteer position. There is no compensation. The USFA has grown exponentially and has reaped results beyond any previous goals even dreamed of.
Here is a brief list of areas where the poor management skills have had some effects:
National Office
• The president has failed to make timely decisions and provide a leadership role for the National Office (NO). The NO is currently in a total failure to provide a reasonable level of member support and customer service.
• It is impossible to reach a live person at the NO. Voice mails left with the NO are not returned.
• The Director of International Programs, hired shortly before the Olympics, was fired within a year and has still not been replaced, leaving his functions unfulfilled.
• E-newsletters from the office continue to publish inaccurate information. Most recent newsletter of November 18 (which many, many members did not even receive due to??? who knows why) published Senior Team selection criteria that is incorrect and yet we still wait for a correction to be sent. Elite athletes cannot plan their competitions and training schedules without the correct information.
• Worst of all, the NO has failed to implement a system for online entries for NAC’s and other national tournaments, despite specific representations to the Board of Directors that an online entry system would be in place for the start of the 2005-2006 season.
Post-Olympic Marketing and Promotion
• Nothing was done to strike while the iron was hot after Athens. No marketing or promotion was initiated for nearly a year.
• What is the marketing plan for solicitation of sponsorship with a time frame for each step of the process? No one can seem to provide the answers.
General Administration
• The President refused to accept the previous President’s offer to have transitional planning meetings. Instead, she took office without having done any planning or even having committees selected.
• The president habitually comes unprepared for Executive Committee meetings, and conference calls, and does not prepare agendas for EC meetings.
• The president notified USFA members of the USFA’s 2005 FIE Task Force of the conference call to plan USFA strategy three hours before the call prior to the FIE Congress. Several USFA representatives were unable to participate on such short notice, with the result that our effort to represent coordinated strategy at the Congress suffered. This affected issues such as foil machine timing, which fencing events would be in the 2008 Olympics, etc.
• The president did not attend the 2005 World Championships. This venue provides an opportunity to converse with other federation presidents and to discuss upcoming FIE proposals. All major fencing nations have their presidents attend the World Championships. The Worlds preceded the FIE Congress meeting which was held a month later.
• The president actually missed her plane to the FIE Congress, thereby missing the first day and the most important time for political lobbying.
• The president appoints all committee members save a few elected positions on the FOC and in the Athletes Advisory Group. The president is responsible for oversight of the committees and the office. The president is responsible for each committees' plan of action (or in-action) and for monitoring the progress they make with their programs and responsibilities. Each committee is expected to have a chair assigned by the president, provide agendas to its members and provide minutes of their meetings. Many of the committees are not functioning at this level and will not, so long as the oversight and leadership of the president is not there to help these group move along. Should an individual or committee fail to do their work or stay within their timelines on their business plans, then it is the responsibility of the president to correct the situation or to remove such individuals and appoint someone else who is able to get the job done. We have committees working at a snails pace and no changes in the committee or oversight by the president to keep them on track.
• The president habitually becomes unavailable for long periods of time, and refuses to answer phone calls or emails from members of the Executive Committee.
• The president lacks the business background to lead an organization of this scope.
• There is no clear focus or goal of the organization in place. There is no business plan with timelines in place.
International Programs
• The president did not name a chair for the International Committee for 8 months after taking office.
• The National Coaches who will be responsible for getting the teams to Beijing have still not been selected, nearly a year and a half after Athens.
• The president personally promised National Coaches at a meeting held at the 2005 Junior world Championships in April 2005, to contact them with specific answers to questions with 10 days of that meeting. She informed the coaches that the International High Performance Committee would be re-organized and the coaches would have input through an Advisory Group she would set up. Additionally she led the coaches to believe she was about to close a significant sponsorship deal that would take care of all their proposed budgets and support our teams thru 2008. To date, she has not responded back to the coaches.
Disregarding Athletes Rights
• The president unilaterally named the USFA’s athlete representative to the FIE, and ignored the athlete chosen by the Athlete Advisory Group.
• The president then falsely stated that that athlete had been irresponsible for failing to get his paperwork in. The reality was that the athlete was contacted while competing at the Maccabiah Games in Israel and given no time to get it in.
• The president called a meeting to discuss US fencing withdrawal from the World University Games without athlete participation, as required by USFA and USOC rules. When questioned, stated that this was not the kind of decision that required athlete input.
No single one of these acts or omissions would necessarily be reason to remove a USFA president from office. Together, the pattern that emerges is one of a president who is not capable of leading the USFA toward international success or domestic tranquility.
Now, this being said, recall also how damaging internal warfare in groups can become. Sometimes they create situations worse than the one that spawned the conflict. Andrea Lagan, a National epee coach has noted, after a reference to in-fighting within the national governing body for the sport of handball: "The USOC has indeed revoked US Handball's NGB status due to the above conflicts. They will be vacting their office space in Colorado Springs on Monday (Dec 19). FYI, US Handball is located in the same building and floor as US Fencing. The one remaining NBG employee will be relocated to the OTC. The USOC now has direct control over Modern Penthalon, Tae Kwon Do and US Handball due to the revocation of NGB status. This would not be a good thing for US Fencing." Much to ponder on both sides.
|
|
|
Post by fox on Jan 10, 2006 12:59:23 GMT -6
I had all the hoo-ha on Fencing Net over the recall petition for the USFA President in the back of my mind. (I finally read all the posts, there's two hours of my life I'll never get back!). Someone there posted a link to the following from USA Today...
------------------------------------------------------------------ Posted 1/9/2006 12:42 AM
USOC wants handball association decertified
By Vicki Michaelis, USA TODAY
The U.S. Olympic Committee has begun proceedings to decertify the U.S. Team Handball Federation as the sport's governing body "due to a continued pattern of dysfunction" in how the organization is run, USOC spokesman Darryl Seibel said Sunday.
The USA has never won an Olympic medal in team handball. A three-person panel chaired by USOC board member Mary McCagg will hear the case, then make a recommendation to the USOC board, which has the final say.
USA Volleyball's authority also is being challenged. The AVP professional beach volleyball tour and a group of 28 U.S. beach volleyball players filed a complaint Friday with the USOC contending they are underrepresented and underfunded by USA Volleyball.
The USOC will appoint a panel, possibly as early as this week, to hear the case.-----------------------------------------------------------------
I guess my question becomes, if fencing starts to look like a dysfunctional organization, don't we risk the same?
|
|
|
Post by vraptor on Jan 11, 2006 13:40:38 GMT -6
I've stayed out of this one, partly because I'm not clear on the motives and partly because it probably isn't worth my time, but there are a few facts that need to be examined.
Fact 1. The FIE under Roche has gone a good ways down the line of dynfunctionality. The USFA, probably slightly less so, but it's debateable. In either case, one can argue that neither organization is necessarily doing the best thing for fencing, either in the US of A or the Rest of the World.
Fact 2. The IOC (an independent orgaization that neither the FIE or USFA can control) has tried to eliminate fencing from the Olympic games on a couple of occasions. I suspect the basic reason is money. The sport costs more to support than it brings in (TV revenue wise) because the major markets for television is the US and the US is profoundly ignorant of the sport.
Fact 3. The de facto primary goal of the USFA is sending an American teams to international competitions. If Fact 2 becomes a fait accompli, then one major reason for the existence of both the FIE and USFA will cease to exist. Until Mariel Zagunis (who wasn't even a primary team selectee) our showing in international competition has been pretty much bupkis, except for veterans.
Fact 4. The vast majority of us chickens is what funds the USFA through dues. However, the vast majority of us chickens do not derive much benefit from the National organization. I don't know about anybody else, but I know that the only way I'll ever be involved in Olympic fencing is if I buy a ticket. I suspect that the same is true of 95% of us.
Fact 5. Growing the sport, training competitors, and educating the public has fallen on clubs and local organizations. Perhaps that's as it should be, but I think that the USFA could do more at the grassroots level. If you want to send winning teams to international competition, you have to find, develop, and support talent. The USFA does a lot of the third, some of the second and almost none of the first. This strikes me as a bas-ackward set of priorities.
Fact 6. In fairness to the USFA, the resources for fencing are fairly limited so massive support programs to schools and universities aren't in the cards. Fact 5 may be an artifact of this. But even if it is, what that tells me is that a retrenchment is in order. Maybe we shouldn't be supporting athletes who don't win medals in favor of developing future competitors. It won't kill us not to send an Olympic team for a few years if we invest resources in young athletes who can.
Given the above, it's really hard for me to muster much sympathy for USFA managment when they go under fire. I wish that were not the case, but until I see more tangible benefits being passed to the local level, I don't have very much reason to support the organization.
If the IOC eliminates fencing from the Olympics, it'll be a sad day, but I'll still show up to fence on Tuesday and Thursday nights because I love the sport. That won't change.
|
|
|
Post by Dan Gorman on Jan 11, 2006 15:13:44 GMT -6
And all those cadets and juniors. The ones who've earned all those world championships and world cups. The ones who ended the year at the top of the points lists.
I think when I get to fence someone who's good because they are driven to compete at the top levels, I get a benefit from the USFA's drive to get our fencers to the top international level.
They find the talent by hosting NACs where fencers come from across the country and show their talent. This is as it should be -- clubs are better situated to find and develop local talent than a national organization will ever be. The USFA then supports these athletes, but it is the coaches and the fencers who develop the fencers.
Nor should they be. Local clubs and individuals are in a better position to help these programs develop. The national office should supply support in the form of information and certifications through professional organizations to help people get their foot in the door, but grassroots happens at the grassroots, not in an office in Colorado.
Seems to me the current batch is doing pretty well with no real need to cut them loose. We had near misses in several team events at the last Olympics, Several top-8s and a few near misses. Our athletes qualified into more limited tournaments. These are good results. The juniors and cadets need the support to travel to these international tournaments in order to have the experience to have success when they reach the senior level.
Our programs are doing pretty well right now, it is not the time to cut people loose and destroy the athlete's trust in the USFA.
Dan
|
|
|
Post by Dan Gorman on Jan 11, 2006 15:20:32 GMT -6
Another quick note on the benefit of the USFA to local fencers: club insurance and coach's insurance. Those 2 things will do more to get a club into a school at any level than a call from some unknown 2 states over.
Dan
|
|
|
Post by DavidSierra on Jan 12, 2006 9:28:06 GMT -6
And the coach's insurance and club insurance programs have been dramatically upgraded and enhanced during this adminstration!
|
|
|
Post by Dan Gorman on Jan 12, 2006 11:00:08 GMT -6
Thought of something else the rank and file gets from their membership: American Fencer. It has tips on training, armoring, coaching, refereeing, running clubs, tournament prep, the mental game, and athlete profiles to offer young fencers role-models in the sport. While some mock it, I think it's a great resource.
I suppose while I'm here I should mention the portion of the dues that gets kicked back to the division to support local needs. In the past we've bought division equipment and helped get some local camps off the ground with this money. Again, this is money that is best spent at the local level where those who understand the situation can apply it best. The national office will never do this as well.
Dan
|
|
|
Post by schlager7 on Jan 12, 2006 11:14:00 GMT -6
While I don't move anywhere near to the elite levels where many of the complaints of those starting up the petition focus, I also gave several hours of my life to read the back-and-forth on Fencing Net.
It just seemed that at least half of the complaints were the same as I have heard about the main office every year since I first joined the USFA (1995): inadequate or slow response to phone calls/faxes/emails; no on-line registration; etc. We didn't remove the prior two presidents by recall (unless I missed it).
It sounds more like entrenched, foot-dragging, still in the 1980s generic beauraucracy.
Certainly I can see the point of some of the issues.
Perhaps more can be done by eliminating a few lower-level paid functionaries (In my experience, the ones who are there every year, regardless of who is the unpaid volunteer president, are generally the real source of entrenched beauraucratic foot-dragging).
Then, too, I am the first to admit I am way too far from the center of the American Fencing Multiverse to have clue one where the fault lies. Often there are many good places to lay blame.
Oh, and let me add my voice to Dan's as far as feeling there is very little Colorado Springs can do to help the grass roots (other than the divisional/sectional rebates and the insurance). It just is not structured for that.
[One exception, I really did enjoy Alex Beguinet's weekend seminar for folks who coach beginners. I just think the American fencing community is way to large and spread out for this to be directed at the national level, though.]
In fact, the shift from a ground-up philosophy to a top-down outlook is, from the organization's own writings of the time, one of the key changes made in the metamophosis from AFLA to USFA.
|
|
|
Post by vraptor on Jan 12, 2006 14:12:46 GMT -6
Whoa Horsies!
Let's be clear. The main points I was making are: 1. If bad stuff happens to elite international fencing it will be done by organizations and people outside the USFA's control. But if it DOES happen, a major reason for the existence of the USFA will no longer exist. 2. The problems faced by the USFA are, in a general way, self-inflicted. 3. If the USFA vanished overnight, the impact, as far as most of us are concerned, would be minimal.
I did not advocate recall. The suspicious curmudgeon in me says that radical steps like recall are generally based in dirty politics and hidden agendas. Having seen what goes on in division politics, I can only imagine the politics at the national level are an order of magnitude worse. But even if the recall did occur, it would probably not affect athlete support. ANY organization should have the structure in place to assure continuity. A shake-up the the GM boardroom does not immediately affect the guy on the line who makes engine blocks.
I do think the top-down philosophy has limitations, especially when organizational performance becomes an issue. To continue the automotive analogy, if your company makes carburetors and your market share is slipping, you need to be better at making carburetors. The top-down model suggests that the CEO cuts orders on productivity and product improvement that the company must follow. The bottom-up philosophy dictates that the CEO goes out to the line and asks the guy who's made carburetors for twenty years how to do it better. The latter approach has always made more sense to me.
And Dan, sure, the NACs provide a showcase for talent. No argument. But, I maintain that the talent that shows up at the NACs was found and trained on the local level (note the bottom-up philosophy in action) and NAC winners, like all great athletes, are driven from within and not by some national organization.
National athletic organizations (and I include the USFA) can and do provide the necessary organization to efficiently develop talent. They can and do provide a consistent rule set so that the playing field is level for all participants. Again, the USFA has done a fine job here. In that sense, they are doing exactly what they should be doing.
But in the one area where the USFA itself places a high level of importance, Americans winning international competitions (notably, the Olympic Games) American fencers have not done as well as would be expected or desired. I don't believe for a minute that this is the fault of the current USFA administration. This is a clear organizational problem that spans multiple administrations. The real fix will have to be a change in mental models at the national level and a long term development program. In that sense, the recall is a pointless exercise.
Given the meager resources available to the USFA, and that also might be a symptom of weak organizational effectiveness, I do not hold high hopes for future American dominance in international fencing. But that won't affect me in any way. Ditto for the recall, should it occur. Like it or not, that's just a fact.
|
|
|
Post by LongBlade on Jan 12, 2006 23:12:20 GMT -6
I do NOT advocate recall! Not yet.
However, I do expect a return phone call when I call the organization to whom I send my dues every year! I do expect a fax that works! I do expect to have my renewal card in the next couple of weeks (with the correct information)! I do expect to know where I am supposed to be and when ...before... I have to give my credit card info to anyone, and before I reserve a hotel room, and before I have to reschedule my business so I can go fence at a NAC! And I do expect when somebody from my country wins the Olympic Gold and Bronze, that the representative national group I pay my dues to would scream and howl, and jump for joy, and get it into the media!!! No Letterman? No Conan? No morning news spots? No free 30-minute instructional videos for ESPN and PBS and the schools and the local clubs? Our national organization has failed our sport! This was the best free shot we had in a hundred years to promote our sport, and we just blew it!
This is not right! This is dysfunctional! No doubt about it! I don't care if I get a magazine 4 times a year. I can pay the difference in the insurance with my dues. This needs to be fixed! And it needs to be fixed NOW!
|
|
|
Post by Aldo N on Jan 12, 2006 23:20:12 GMT -6
I notice the Save US Fencing group have posted what they state is the email they sent Ms. Anderson onto their website:
Dear Nancy,
We thank you for your good intentions, but assert that since assuming office as President, the organization has not been run in a business-like manner, and the best interests of US Fencing have not been served. Your administration has been detrimental to the advance of the organization, especially following two milestones: two Olympic medals, and a 2005 World Championship Gold Medal. The time has come for a change in USFA leadership, and we respectfully ask that you do the right thing and resign gracefully.
This will allow both you and the USFA to avoid the embarrassment and negativity of a public recall. The recall process is proceeding, and as of today over half of the required number of signatures has been received through only a word of mouth process.
The undersigned want you to know they are committed to actively pursuing the petition drive. Reviewing the names, you will note this is an influential group, and most have begun aggressively reaching out to members of their fencing communities to solicit support for your recall. This movement has not been instigated by a small group of individuals with an "ax to grind," but by diverse contingencies of USFA membership who feel the progress and business management of the organization has been greatly hampered by your lack of leadership.
In addition to the signatories of this letter, there are many more Division and Sectional Officers, USFA Committee members and those whom you number among your closest friends and advisors who have already endorsed the petition. The recall process is moving forward at a significant pace. We believe that it is in the best interests of US Fencing that you tender your resignation, rather than be forced from office by a recall
Respectfully,
Carl Borack Jeff Bukantz Paul Soter Cathy Zagunis Yury Gelman, National Coach Mens Sabre Ed Korfanty, National Coach Womens Sabre Simon Gershon, National Coach Men's Foil Michael Pederson, National Coach Women's Foil Mikhail Petin National Coach Junior Men's and Women's Foil Gago Demerchian National Coach Men's Epee Arkady Burdan, National Coach Women's Sabre Keeth Smart, Olympian and Many time National Team member Ivan Lee, Olympian and Many time National Team member Erinn Smart, Olympian and Many time National Team member Seth Kelsey, Olympian and Many time National Team member Dan Kellner, Olympian and Many time National Team member Kamara James, Olympian and Many time National Team member Mariel Zagunis, Olympic Champion and Multiple World Champion Phil Reilly, Olympian Steve Mormondo, Olympian , Head Coach NYU Zoran Tulum, Olympic Coach Peter Brand, Head Coach Harvard George Pogosov, Olympic Gold Medalist, Head Coach Stanford Mike Morgan, Chair, USFA Fundraising Committee Eric Rosenberg, Past President of Fencers Club; Member of Youth Committee Chaba Pallaghy, Former Vice President of FIE & Chair of FIE Arbitrage Commission Midi Cox, , Secretary, Pacific Coast Division Francisco Martin, Chair, FOC International Assignment Committee William Reith, Chair, Northern Ohio Division Jamey Odom, Chair, Rocky Mountain Section Frank Van Dyke, Chair, Pacific Coast Section Maureen Griffin; PCS Vice Chair for Youth Fencing; Member Youth Devel. Ctt. Mitch Berliner, Chair North Atlantic Section Jamey Odom, Chair, Rocky Mountain Section Peter Burchard, Member Fencing Officials Commission Scott Stevens, Chair Southwest Section
|
|
|
Post by kd5mdk on Jan 13, 2006 22:10:51 GMT -6
I'm a little concerned that people described as our representatives are putting their names and apparently offices behind this position, before the views of the people they represent has been ascertained.
|
|
|
Post by schlager7 on Jan 13, 2006 22:16:37 GMT -6
...and I was amused to see a couple names listed twice. I know it's just a transcription error, but given the fervor of the issue, it gave me a small pause to smile.
|
|
|
Post by fox on Jan 16, 2006 10:26:39 GMT -6
|
|
|
Post by schlager7 on Jan 24, 2006 12:13:44 GMT -6
Craig at Fencing Net has published and printed a discussion with USFA President Nancy Anderson. The url is here: www.fencing.net/content/view/470/1/A DISCUSSION WITH NANCY ANDERSONby Craig Harkins 24 January 2006 I promised on the Discussion Forums that I would be talking to people on both sides of the Recall Movement and report back on my conversations. In late December, I had a few minutes to speak with USFA president Nancy Anderson about the USFA, where things are headed and the recall movement. It has taken me too long (in my opinion) to get my notes online and because of the delay and the fact that the call was not recorded, I won't be attributing any direct quotes but am instead putting down the subjects we covered and the main points discussed.
When our conversation started, Nancy Anderson wanted to go over the main points outlined in the Recall Letter (referenced in the discussion thread), and counter the different points. I'll go through here and detail out the points of our conversation. One of the criticisms laid out against Ms. Anderson is her failure to get to the FIE Congress in Doha. She stated that there was extensive traffic on the NJ Turnpike that was not anticipated and that caused her to miss her flight to Doha and she took a later flight and got their later in the Congress.
She admits that she did not go to the 2005 World Championships, mainly because she had started a new teaching job and had already used vacation time to attend the Pan American Congress. "I am a volunteer," Nancy Anderson stated, "I couldn't ask for another 10 days off from the school. It would not be fair to my employer."
The position of USFA president is a non-paid position, which often places the officer at the mercy of demands of their real life job.
Nancy pointed out that she had taken the time to go to the Pan American congress and was able to put together a coalition to support US Fencing interests going into the FIE Congress.
On the situation with the National Coaches (where it is alleged that she did not provide promised responses to the national coaches), she states that her style is to take a more conciliatory approach to dealing with them than previous presidents and she had committed at the Jr. World Championships to get them information on budgets and funding. The USOC (United States Olympic Committee), however, had not provided an allocation for budgets and that caused her to have no information to share. Rather than go back to the coaches with nothing, she chose to hold off on any communication until she had the budget news to report from the USOC.
Charges have also been laid out that Nancy Anderson has provided no strategic plan for the USFA in this quadrennial. Ms. Anderson counters that at the February board meeting she had provided a preliminary strategic plan to the board based on Stacy Johnson's plan and received no comments. At the July board meeting the plan was reworded with input from the board and at the September meeting there was an attempt to finish the plan. The board will meet in February and we will receive an update then on the status of the strategic plan.
Looking back at the situations called out by the recall, Nancy Anderson stated that there has been a lack of communication and that if communication were better, the progress made thus far would be more apparent.
Olympic Bounce?
What of the "Olympic Bounce"? Ms. Anderson points out that the USFA web site was down for 3 weeks right after Mariel Zagunis and Sada Jacobson won the gold and bronze medals. Ms. Anderson attributes this as a consequence of the executive committee and executive director (Michael Massik) choosing to go with a smaller development firm that would provide some opportunities to one of the United States' top fencers rather than going with a larger firm with more dedicated staff. (The fact that the webmaster / maintenence is a volunteer/nonpaid position was not brought up.)
There also was not a marketing plan put in place by the prior administration for follow-up after winning a medal. That being said, Nancy Anderson went on to say that "I'm not so sure that we didn't capitalize on it. Mariel and Sada did a lot of press work - interviews and TV apprearances." She also points out that membership has grown and hte YDC/YRC (Youth Development and Youth Regional Circuits) have seen tournaments with as many as 300 children.
Nancy is quick to point that the USFA has gained a lot of momentum and she wants to work to increase the expansion of fencing. Taking the success of high school programs in New Jersey, she points to a plan for a new school program. Nancy expanded on vision of putting a plan into place where clubs will offer to teach the teachers of PE programs about fencing and help get fencing into the general PE curricula.
|
|
|
Post by kd5mdk on Jan 24, 2006 14:25:32 GMT -6
I would be interested to hear more about this plan for promoting high school fencing. Given the success fencers have seen in Texas, especially in women's fencing, (well, epee), I could believe that fencing has a chance of getting somewhere.
|
|
|
Post by phincer on Jan 25, 2006 8:22:15 GMT -6
I would be interested to hear more about this plan for promoting high school fencing. Given the success fencers have seen in Texas, especially in women's fencing, (well, epee), I could believe that fencing has a chance of getting somewhere. Well, in some of the more enlightened places in Texas perhaps-but here's how it was explained to me- Fencing will have to become a UIL sport. That means that every school district in the state will have to vote to include fencing. Larger school districts have one vote, teeny tiny school districts get one vote. And superintendent Bubba Joe won't want "blades" being carried in on his campus. Heck no, by gawd we're a football school! F stands for Football, not for Fencing. As a suburban principal told me a year ago-he would fully support a club, but the administration of the school district has a zero tolerance policy toward 'blades' longer than three inches on any campus. (It was okay to rent a gym for a tournament though ) That's the excuse they are giving, b/c heaven forbid we do something different. That's thinking WAY outside the box! On the other hand, several schools in the west Harris County area have ice hockey clubs, and the principals at those schools even award letter jackets to those students. If Houston ISD has it, Katy won't do it, because Katy ISD thinks that Houston has no idea of what its doing in the education world. Oh, the places we can go with this conversation! So we'll just have to arm the kids with cocktail sabers and let them go at it.
|
|
|
Post by saberbobcat on Jan 25, 2006 22:54:02 GMT -6
The only way I see fencing entering the public schools would be via club status. However, even this has its pit falls. A rigid set of rules must be created by certified personel, be approved by the principal, and adopted by the local school board. Then you have the financial can of worms dealing with expensive equipment, insurance, and someone willing to take on the responsibility of sponsoring the club for free, not to mention the idea of * weapons* entering a school. OMG!!!!. Since schools are financed via public taxes, it is my understanding that no one can make money in them giving lessons that are not a part of the curriculum. So it takes a genius to figure out what to charge kids or how to hold fund raisers for something no one is even doing yet. Additionally, schools rarely allow people from the outside to work with their kids (especially if they are not TEA certified in PE) because of the liability issues and most teachers know squat about fencing. Thus the club idea is basically a dead end street UNLESS your administrators and community are already interested in it, which would be highly unlikely in Texas. However, I have heard of schools being awarded grants to start fencing in their schools as a form of after school physical education programs. It would be interesting to hear more about how some folks are doing this. It is quite unfortunate that more public schools do not support the noble sport of fencing since it has so much to offer our children, especially the ones that do not readily fit into traditinal sports. I prayed that our success at the last Olympics would stir up an interest in fencing and open up avenues that have never been available before in public schools. But, alas, it appears the same ole same ole is still standard.
|
|
|
Post by DavidSierra on Jan 26, 2006 9:13:52 GMT -6
There are other approaches, and that is to partner with schools as recruiting grounds, and take advantage of existing programs. For example, the Rec Center that I am associated with does a LOT of stuff with the area schools. By taking advantage of this, I'm able to get fliers into school publications, do demonstrations, etc. A lot of the people in the area already view the Rec Center as sort of a "one stop shop" for the non-standard extra-curricular activites (beyond football, basketball, etc), so they come here when their kids want to do something "different." The advantage to this approach is that they come to my ground, instead of me having to go to them.
|
|
|
Post by kd5mdk on Jan 26, 2006 9:57:09 GMT -6
My high school had a fencing club, but it was foil only and I'd had bad experiences with foil before, so I never looked into it. Granted, we were a rather special school, but I don't see any reason other schools couldn't support it. Among other things, I think I could convince most people that a "blade" without any sharp edges (forbidden by the rules, no less) isn't that dangerous.
Finding instructors could be more difficult, but could be worked on through collegiate clubs and teacher certification programs (ok, so I'm a little better positioned to do something with that than anyone else here).
When you say every school would have to vote for it to become a UIL event, you mean 100%, with every high school in Texas? That seems hard to believe...
|
|
|
Post by phincer on Jan 26, 2006 14:38:07 GMT -6
No, the UIL vote has to pass by majority of districts voting for fencing to be included. But the fly in the ointment is getting East Bejeeezus ISD home of the 1A Fightin' Rattlers to vote for it, when they barely have enough players to field a football team. There are more small districts in Texas than large ones that would have the interest or could handle the expense of fencing. I did talk this over with a guidance counselor who had a son in the standard UIL sports-football, baseball, etc. She told me that if we were smart, we would just continue with fencing and not try to make it a UIL sport b/c of the politics (Ha! I'll see her politics and raise her the USFA... ) and bureaucracy involved. And we've tried the 'blade' argument. No go. It's a sword and it could hurt someone. Besides growing the sport, as the parent of a public school student, I'd like to get my fencer's athleticism recognized. With 12+ hours per week of practice and all those weekend tournaments, fencers deserve the same recognition that the football players do. I will climb down from my soap box now.
|
|