Is this stakeholder model the same model used in other countries? Do they mix amateurs and elites like this? When I think of successful national elite programs ( besides the gifted athlete transcending other circumstances), the UK and Australia come up and both are funded by their respective national government in some way ( which of course means all the lottery players in the UK and all the taxplayers in Australia.).

Here is a link to a VeloNews interview with the new acting CEO http://www.velonews.com/news/fea/9736.0.html

JoeRacer wrote:Any guesses who the new "leader" will be or direction that USAC will go in?
Steve Johnson named as replacement on cyclingnews.com

Direction:

http://www.sfweekly.com/issues/2005-09-07/news/smith_full.html

Comments on this article from velonews:

http://www.velonews.com/news/fea/9326.0.html

A copy of what I sent out to the NCNCA email list

Some of you may have already read the news on the Velonews website. The wonderful USAC Board of Directors has fired Gerard Bisceglia the CEO. Gerard is the person who worked with NCNCA to help set up the whole Local Associations program, This program is one of the main reasons why the NCNCA board felt it was preferable to drop our independent racing program and go back with USCF. Right now I have no real faith in USAC and what the future may hold for the Local Associations program. It will be interesting to see what reason the USAC board will give for firing Gerard. USCF/USAC membership has been growing by leaps and bounds the past couple of years. USAC finances are in much better shape than they were 4 years ago. By most reasonable measures USAC is in much better shape now than it was 4 years ago when Gerard was hired. It is the USAC Board that is most likely the ones who need replacing in order to keep USAC going in the positive direction it has been going in lately.