Messages

1

Building Sale Discussion Area / So, now what?

« on: January 31, 2026, 05:25:40 pm »

So where does this leave us? From SaveACA, I heard some reasonable points about the organization’s history, a strong emotional appeal, and substantial criticism of staff and board members—but no concrete plan and no credible alternative for the organization’s long-term viability. SaveACA and others have claimed that the board and leadership offered no plan, but that is simply not accurate. The plans have been publicly posted on the ACA website. Disagreeing with a plan does not mean one does not exist.

Renting out unused space has been suggested, yet reports indicate the building requires roughly $150,000 in repairs and is 75% vacant. Turning ACA into a landlord, while diverting focus from its mission, is a terrible idea.

Many members withdrew legacy gifts in response to the proposed building sale, pledging to reinstate them if the building were retained. Will those commitments actually be honored?

There is also the question of whether the most vocal opponents of the sale—some of whom have challenged ACA’s diversity initiatives—would seek to reverse those efforts and narrow the organization’s focus to an aging, homogeneous constituency centered on pavement routes. That approach feels like a fast track to irrelevance.

I also question how many board members and staff would choose to remain after being vilified by a small but loud group of online critics and threatened with frivolous lawsuits. Realistically, who would volunteer to serve on this board under those conditions?

Based on Flavia Chen’s recent email, I am satisfied that the board has acknowledged its missteps and is willing to work toward reconciliation. I would welcome a statement from the SaveACA group encouraging those who have attacked staff and board members, spread misinformation, or threatened legal action to dial back that unproductive rhetoric. Stirring emotion and anger may help win a campaign, but it will not be sufficient to address the serious challenges facing ACA. To date, I have seen little in the way of constructive, actionable alternatives from those opposing the sale.

I am a life member and voted in favor of selling the building. I respect the will of the membership and remain committed to supporting ACA’s mission to advance bicycle travel. I hope those who successfully campaigned against the sale will work as diligently to save the organization, and not just the building. The staff and board offered a plan. It was rejected. So what's the plan?

2

Building Sale Discussion Area / Re: Building Sales Vote

« on: January 30, 2026, 04:12:31 pm »

..."the majority are a DEI nightmare, which is clearly articulated in their Diversity and Social Justice policies."

Your response reads as a broad rejection of diversity, equity, and inclusion. If that’s where you stand, you may be better served by an organization that aligns more closely with those narrower views.

Cycling and cycle touring are evolving. Attracting younger and more diverse participants isn’t optional—it’s necessary for survival. Clinging to a depreciating building while catering to a membership that is steadily aging out is a clear path toward irrelevance.

And by the way, the ACA Building Sale FAQ clearly states that results will be posted by January 31 and outlines the financial and organizational challenges behind the decision. Take a look if you're interested.

Lastly, the fist-shaking anger and personal attacks aimed at the board and staff by a small number of disgruntled forum posters are counterproductive and almost certainly do not represent the majority of members who oppose the sale.

3

Building Sale Discussion Area / Re: I am voting to sell

« on: January 19, 2026, 01:46:55 pm »

MDGColorado I appreciate and completely agree with your concise post. 

4

Building Sale Discussion Area / Re: Life member & lawyer with experience with these disputes says goodbye

« on: January 18, 2026, 09:10:38 pm »

"The analog here is that ACA invented gravel riding but failed to monetize it.  Even on the flagship GDMBR, riders go to Bikepacking.com, which has been growing by leaps and bounds.  That could have been ACA, but the old guard missed the tipping point."

@CDThomas nicely done, and I agree completely.
The momentum is clearly moving away from traditional road touring and toward bikepacking. I was encouraged by the ACA’s Golden Gravel announcement, but I am now worried that litigation threats and hostility toward staff and board members will undermine the organization’s forward progress.

5

Building Sale Discussion Area / Re: Dispute Resolution Not Litigation

« on: January 18, 2026, 01:39:30 pm »

I originally posted this in another section but have relocated it here as it seems more appropriate.

The idea of a lawsuit is absurd and self-serving. The only likely outcome is that it will bleed money away from the organization. How does this serve anyone?

I initially voted 'No,' but after reflecting on the board's position and attending the meeting on January 13, I decided to change my vote to 'Yes.'
Keeping the building is a poor financial decision.

Regarding the comments and dialogue during the meeting, the majority of speakers and commenters presented their views thoughtfully and reasonably. However, I was disappointed by the hostility directed at the staff and board by a few individuals, whose loud and angry delivery seemed to overshadow the broader, more balanced conversation.

As a life member, my commitment to this organization remains strong. However, if it ever shifts in a direction that I can no longer support, I would step away. That's an option for anyone who feels that the ACA's values no longer represent them. But torching the entire organization because a few members didn't get their way is ridiculous.

As it stands, I support the sale and trust the people on the board and staff to do the jobs they have been appointed to do.  I respect the opposing views expressed by the founders and long time members, and understand their passion and commitment.  I hope reason prevails, and the misguided attempt to drag the organization through the courts comes to an end.