Thanks, Pam, for sharing all that documentation on the board nomination
process.
It sounds like the process worked pretty well. The fact that the slate
includes two people Pam includes in her slate tells me that the
nomination process seeks diverse independent views and the best
qualified applicants.
The first reason that I would not like to see Pam on the board at this
time is that she opposes receiving restricted grants from bicycle
corporations. That means no bike to work week, because bicycle industry
corporations such as Budget Bicycle expect that their sponsorship will
go toward promoting this worthwhile effort. It would have meant no Safe
Routes to School because Trek put the seed money behind it. It means no
legislative lobbying because Saris raises the first $10,000 per year for
lobbying efforts on behalf of cyclists. Last year, their fundraiser
raised another $15,000 of unrestricted funds.
For the first time in a century, big bike companies are actually support
the exact cause you and I support. Jeff Frehner of Pacific Cycles
commutes to work on a fixie. Saris President Chris Fortune has been on
the Governor's Bicycle Council supporting the development and execution
of a comprehensive state wide bicycle plan. Trek has seeded a number of
initiatives through the years. All the major companies converge on
Washington DC, including BFW representatives, to lobby Congress for the
betterment of cyclists - better funding and better control of the funds.
I grew up in an era when no bicycle excutive rode more miles per year
than the number of strokes they made in a single round of golf. Their
idea of lobbying was to fight the Consumer Product Safety Commission and
to protect US manufacturers from imports. The situation we have with
bicycle companies today is a dream we cannot take for granted - if we
want to put the cause of cyclists first.
The second reason is Pam's open criticism of the board and close
relationship with Dar. That combination is surely bound to hurt the
ability of the board to function properly. Nobody cannot realistically
expect, if elected, that the board will suddenly decide to reverse
course, fire Jack Hirt and rehire Dar. There is no point to try to
rehash the past. We can all expect that Pam to be a disruptive force in
board meetings and in other ways. How are cyclists across the state of
Wisconsin served by this?
I can tell you who's served by this. Roadbuilders are served by this
conflict. The time and effort wasted by the board and staff, and
particularly the publicity surrounding both this campaign significantly
decrease the Bike Fed's influence. Real estate developers won't have to
take so seriously the Bike Fed's efforts to integrate cyclist
considerations in new developments. The town leaders in western Dane
County will be delighted to hear about attacks on the very attorney who
sat in on their meetings and prevented them from totally trampling on
the rights of cyclists. There are lots more people who are happy to
want to see Pam succeed with her campaign. Most of them are not friends
of cycling.
That isn't to say that Pam doesn't have positive things to bring to the
table. She's an intelligent person, passionate about cycling, with
knowledge and, hopefully, connections to the health care industry that
could help us influence their activities for the benefit of cyclists.
In my view, the wounds surrounding Dar's termination have to heal before
she can become an effective board member for the Bike Fed and the cause
we all support. As a health care professional, you appreciate the
importance of rest in the healing process.
Bikies, your vote should be a vote for the benefit of cyclists first.
That means the Board's slate. You won't regret it.
Thanks,
Richard
_______________________________________________
Bikies mailing list
[email protected]
http://www.danenet.org/mailman/listinfo/bikies
