Questions for Management

[DW]

While this is a contentious time, our thoughts and prayers are with ACA Executive Director John McDermott, who according to an ACA email, has had to take a leave of absence due to a severe and emergent medical issue. 

Best wishes for a speedy recovery!

Andy Williamson is the executive director.  John McDermott is the immediate past volunteer chair of the board of directors.

[DW]

Additionally, their "plan" is very vague and worse they have cowardly hidden from responding to reasonable questions. 

From what I can tell, they hope to sell the building, use the net proceeds (probably closer to $2.2 million to fund the current lifestyle in the hopes that Association turns around.  If they can, great.  However, if they don't they have wasted all of that money for over-inflated salaries and un-needed items.

It is the lack of almost ANY response that has moved me in to the very firm No camp.  If everything was so great, why not comment on it?  What are they hiding?  To me, the silence is deafening in their skill set to adequately manage ACA.  What few questions were answered were at best, vague and didn't answer the questions and at worse providing outright lying responses with their numbers.  Yet the 3 "executives" with combined salaries over $400k with benefits, can't even answer the questions from its members. 

Remember, it is this board and its immediate predecessors that have taken ACA from almost 50k members to less than 19k in just a few short years, all why blaming it on "aging out" members.  Why support the same type of board that wants to do the same thing.  I think only 3 of the 14 Board Members and Executive Staff were here prior to 2020 when all the rapid decline began.  If you REALLY trust them to turn it around after they have had 4-5 years, vote Yes.  If not, vote No. 

John and Everyone Else,

For those who may have missed, forgotten about or not read the previous postings and links:

1. The following is the board's "plan" for that $2.55M (from Andy's December 16 email).

"In addition to continuing to deliver our core programs and offerings, your support for this building sale enables Adventure Cycling to invest in the future you've told us you want to see:

    Increased advocacy partnerships and event attendance, like the National Bike Summit
    Expanded route offerings in new geographies and closer to where you live
    Regional member meetups and community-building opportunities
    A mentor program connecting experienced and new bicycle travelers
    A modern website where you can easily access routes, member benefits, and inspirational content
    Educational webinars to help more people discover bicycle travel
    New programming, including our Drop-in Rides and the Golden Gravel Trail (3,700 miles!!)
    Continued investment in our 50,000-mile route network

All while maintaining our physical presence in our beloved Missoula building and celebrating our 50th anniversary throughout 2026."

2. By comparison, this link shows a detailed problem, financial and operational analysis together with specific recommendations, historic graphs, a realistic budget and an actual plan the Save ACA Committee produced in opposition to the sale.  This should be all one needs to know to vote against it.

https://saveacahq.org/?page_id=275

To your point about a near total-lack of response and dubious, lame replies to your questions from ACA (lower staff only, not the E.D. or board chair) I also believe they have something to hide.  What exactly that is is speculative. 

However, what else they're hiding is clear and in the open: a properly-formatted, usable full membership list for all members and the Save ACA Committee to use in contacting all other members regarding the sale and upcoming vote.  By Montana law, ACA must provide this list.  That, it's done (twice now) only because it was mandated.

The first list was a 237-page PDF with a font size so small as to make it barely readable.  And it's completely useless, unless one wants to type in 18K email addresses, that is.

A second list was emailed, per another request (in a viable email attachment format), yesterday.  It's only 186 pages this time and, again, a totally useless, improperly formatted PDF.  The font size is so minuscule (and not enlargeable) that it's impossible to discern if what's on it are moon dust particles, ant droppings, hair follicles, microdots or who knows what.  Certainly not any language I know.

Once again, corrupting the process and prohibiting members from being fully informed.

Yes, they're indeed hiding something else too, something far more significant - all while deliberately preventing members and the Save ACA Committee from communicating with other members.  That's called obstruction.     

As to your last point.  This is the board that presided over a precipitous decline in membership, tour sales and revenues the past five years.  And hired and fired two executive directors during that same period.  And it's asking the membership to trust it with $2.55M and the future of ACA.  Absurd. 

The vote, if carried out as currently arranged, will be fraudulent and representative of only one side: the board's. The majority voice of the membership will be will not be heard.  Vote NO.

Send your concerns to executive director Andy Williamson and new board chair Flavia Chen at: questions@adventurecycling.org.  Expect, however, to be ignored.

[John Nettles]

"Andy Williamson is the executive director.  John McDermott is the immediate past volunteer chair of the board of directors."

I stand corrected.  Regardless, my thoughts and prayers are for a complete and speedy recovery.

[bellantoni@mac.com]

John and Everyone,
[snip]
One helpful resource for understanding ACA's finances through the years is the ProPublica website, on which  you'll find ACA's 990 forms (that non-profits are required to file with the IRS) going back many years.  They provide a deep look into the organization's finances (income, expenses, assets, liabilities, etc.) and are quite informative as to when and where things went downhill and all the years ACA was thriving.

What I see on the ProPublica website is that there are 2 "key employees or officers" who are getting paid; that assets minus liabilities hasn't changed that much since 2022, and total salaries are slightly lower since 2022.  What really jumps out is loss of revenue from "Program Services" - which probably means tours, map & other sales.

NONE OF THIS MATTERS.

The question is not "Is our board useless?"  If we have a useless board and we sell the building, we still have a useless board.  If we have a useless board and we keep the building, we still have a useless board.  If we have a brilliant board and we sell the building, we have a brilliant board.  If have a brilliant board and we keep the building, we still have a brilliant board.

The question likewise is not "Is our ED a potato head?"
Nor is it "Are we reaching out well to younger people?"
Nor is it "Are we firing a lot of good people to pay for an overpriced executive?"
Nor is it "Are we offering quality product in the tours category?"
Nor is it "Have we pivoted to the gravel bike community very well?"

Those are of course important questions.  But whatever answer you have to them, you will have the exact same answer with or without the building.

The question is: what will we do with the building and is it worth 2.5M$ to us?

Looks like what we can do with the building is:  1) Have staff working together in office   2) Probably rent some of the space out, I guess  3) maintain that museum I've heard about.  4) Hope that real estate in the area goes up and maybe get more in the future, supposing we'd ever want to sell.

Is that worth 2.55 million bucks to you?

[jmlysne]

Anyone can scroll to the very bottom of Adventure Cycling's homepage and there is a link Annual Report that has Impact Reports, Audits, and 990 forms.

[bellantoni@mac.com]

Anyone can scroll to the very bottom of Adventure Cycling's homepage and there is a link Annual Report that has Impact Reports, Audits, and 990 forms.

An excellent point.  But I'd argue, still tangential to the issue at hand!

[John Nettles]

To ACA Board & Leadership,

While I understand some of the questions I and others originally posed are no longer applicable, many still are.  Would you please review them and answer them in specific, non-vague non-political, ways.  We are all adults and can handle answers that are not pleasant to hear but would like honest and complete answers.
Respectfully, John Nettles