July 30, 2002

To: RRCA Board

From: Gar Williams (1973-1976)
Jeff Darman (1976-1979)
Jerry Kokesh (1979-1983)
Harold Tinsley (1983-1986)
Henley Gabeau (1986-1990)
Jane Dolley (1990-1992)
Carl Sniffen (1992-1996)
Don Kardong (1996-2000)

Re: Executive Director

Collectively, we represent 27 years of RRCA presidential leadership. While at one time or another we may have disagreed with each other on an important policy item or another today we are united. It is doubtful you will find a group of individuals more committed to the RRCA than us. We have witnessed first hand the evolution of the RRCA from a small ardent group of hard core distance runners with a dream of promoting the sport for competition, health and fun.

Our athletic ability ranges from Olympian and National Champion to those who ran predominantly for health and fitness. We collectively have expended tens of thousands of volunteer hours. While we all gladly relinquished our reigns to another, we will not and cannot sit idly by as our efforts are frittered away. We built the RRCA from a small dream to an organization respected nationally and internationally, took an organization with little funding and all volunteers to one with staff and 7 figures in income.

No one person is bigger than the organization. All of us at one time or another have entered a race and decided we were unable or it was unwise to finish the course. It is time for David Dobrzynski's race to conclude. This letter is strong and blunt, but not a personal diatribe, and rather represents the collective wisdom garnered from talking to hundreds of your constituents, elite athletes, media and from our own experience as leaders inside the RRCA and out. One can choose to debate endlessly the tenure of the RRCA Executive Director, or the Board and the Executive Director can face the fact that the perception in the country is that the RRCA is mired in disarray and stagnant and has been for ten months. Excuses about the financial distress while real are not valid defenses. The finances were stark in 2001 and they are far worse as we near 2003.

Over the last ten months, examples of this disarray include and are not limited to:

· Continued lack of staff responsiveness to inquiries to the National office by chapter leaders, state reps, committee members, media and individual members. There are several examples of rudeness by the Executive Director and continuing lack of knowledge of current programs by staff.

· A convention with lower than expected turnout, ill planned by RRCA staff, inadequate liaison with host club before, during and after, poorly promoted nationally, and poor follow-up.

· An Executive Director who spends more time out of the office than in the office and who has not moved to Virginia while the organization desperately needs hands on attention.

· Loss of longtime sponsors and poor communication with former and current sponsors.

· Inordinate delay in providing awards for annual winners resulting in continuing phone/mail inquiries.

· Lack of responsiveness and respect to CEO/President requests.

· Declining ad revenue from Footnotes due to inadequate advertising sales staff effort or planning (previous Ad Director dropped with no plan in place).

· Inept, insensitive and unprofessional dismissal of two longtime RRCA staffers resulting in challenge by the state unemployment agency and unnecessary ill will. Even if one assumes dismissal appropriate, the method was inexcusable for honest, hard-working employees.

· Delay in Roads Scholar checks being sent to 2002 recipients, although the program has been "over funded" in 2002 ($29,000 plus raised).

· Lack of timely Roads Scholar financial reporting as requested by committee and as promised months ago.

· Run to Work Day canceled with no adequate explanation to chapters, even though substantial funding ($7,000) was allocated from FUSA marketing budget over and above royalty fees (marketing allowance must be allocated to promotional efforts unlike $70,000 royalty).

· Diminished Women's Distance Festival and inadequate communication and coordination with chapters.

· Lack of new, innovative proposals for RRCA to market to potential sponsors of foundations, such as a children's anti-obesity effort, national women's beginning training program or other innovative ideas or efforts.

· Termination of women's safety efforts.

· Lack of distribution of minutes at Board meetings.

· Coaching Program has developed problems beyond the loss of its leader.

· Lack of outreach to Washington area associations, government and grant agencies.

· Minimal consultation with available RRCA veterans to elicit "historic intelligence" that might be valuable.

The RRCA hired the new Executive Director at twice the salary of his predecessor with the idea that he would take the RRCA to a new level, which has occurred, but unfortunately in the wrong direction.

Did the RRCA have some serious financial issues? Yes. Were they a surprise? No. The books are open for examination (required by law) and any executive of the caliber recruited by the Board could have and should have done the "due diligence" and have been aware of his challenges. There should have been few surprises and a better timely "plan of attack" at addressing short-term financial woes and building communications and relations with his constituency.

Rather than proposing solutions and ideas, he instead allowed himself to get bogged down in a long divisive bylaws dispute and proxy fight. The priority should have been fundraising, communicating personally with his constituency, aggressively promoting his first convention and briefing past and future sponsors instead of alienating them. Large or small, they all provided positives to the RRCA.

It is clear in hindsight that the Executive Director, even with his ability and experience, did not, in general, understand the culture of non-profit organizations and specifically the one he was chosen to lead. The RRCA was a non-profit when he was hired and nowhere in the hiring process did he express the view that he desired to change that or its culture nor to our knowledge was it represented this was an RRCA goal. On the contrary, on many occasions he paid lip service to the value of RRCA, its leaders, and heritage. The hiring of a new Executive Director presented many new opportunities. Instead of seizing those opportunities, instead of articulating the RRCA mission, his strategy he has said was to remain silent and lower his and the RRCA profile.

We now find a divisive atmosphere present in the organization making many chapters and members feel like the Board and staff are not on their side and serving them. What has David Dobrzynski's legacy been the past eleven months?

While grandiose plans are formulated, routine day-to-day operations are not attended to. Coaching tests go ungraded, Roads Scholars go unpaid, corporate members go unbilled for several months during a financial crisis, convention information is mailed late, sponsor contracts go unrenewed, phone calls and letters unanswered, image enhancement of RRCA not tended to and outreach to chapter leaders is almost nonexistent. Meanwhile the Executive Director toils away in Massachusetts the staff and the chapters look for guidance in Virginia.

The RRCA is a complex organization. Its structure is its strength (as well as its weakness). It is comprised of small and large chapters, chapters that conduct fun runs and chapters that own Peachtree, Bloomsday and the New York Marathon. Understanding and mobilizing that blend is difficult. Our programs range from ones that are utilized by most all the chapters, like insurance and the non-profit group exemption, to programs that attract scores (coaching), hundreds (conventions, personal fitness), thousands (Women's Distance Festival, Run to Work Day), etc., but small or large they all serve a purpose. The selection of offerings is what in part makes the RRCA what it is. Can we improve? Of course. But you do not improve or motivate volunteers by deriding or not building on the past. It is not only unnecessary, but counterintuitive and counterproductive for a better future.

It is time for the Board and the Executive Director to face the facts that this is not working. This is not the ramblings of eight old-timers. This is a call from leadership who built an organization of value.

As Board Members you will be remembered as the Board that either re-energized the RRCA and reunited its chapters and refocused it on its missions, or as the Board that stood idly by as the structure, history, roots and reputation of the RRCA were destroyed. The RRCA and your legacy are at stake.

We understand that the future of RRCA is now in your hands, but we also hope that you respect the tradition, experience and deep concern represented by those of us signing this letter. We would appreciate a response from each Board member individually so we know where each of you stand on this issue, and what action you plan to take.

Cc: David Dobrzynski

Note: Responses to - Gar Williams garpw2@mindspring.com
Jeff Darman jdarman@kennett.net
Jerry Kokesh usbadevelopmnt@aol.com
Harold Tinsley Harold.tinsley@gte.net
Henley Gabeau henleygabeau@aol.com
Jane Dolley kjdolley@inteliport.com
Carl Sniffen runmtnrun@aol.com
Don Kardong donkardong@hotmail.com