1. Why are you running for masters T&F chair?

Our predecessors have brought our program to an important crossroads.  Over the last quarter-century, masters track has progressed from a curiosity to its current status, providing a fitness, competition and camaraderie source for thousands of athletes. We have reached a level of success that demands a more open and participatory style.  Our membership is a huge, largely untapped resource of expertise and energy that could be called upon by effective leadership to make this program excel.  I have the inclination and, I believe, the background of experience with other organizations to make a difference in the effectiveness and responsiveness of our administration.

I have competed in a wide array of masters meets around the country, and I travel regularly to do so.  My meet experience includes every one of the past 11 national outdoor championships, two national indoor championships, two NCCWAVA championships, two Canadian national championships, one World Masters Games, one national indoor pentathlon, and regional championships in four of our regions.  I believe that I can bring a broad view of our program to the position.

2. What is your background in track and field -- your accomplishments as an athlete or official or both. What do you do in your nontrack life? Where do you live?

I am an M40 hurdler and occasional indoor pentathlete.  I have been active in masters track for eleven seasons.  My accomplishments in track are mostly related to persistence.  I competed in track & field through college (both hurdles as the men’s team captain at James Madison University).  I competed in road and off-road races up to 50 miles from 1982 until 1988, when I returned to the track.  Over the past 11 seasons, I have competed in every event contested in masters track & field except triple jump, pole vault and hammer.  While I was a committed collegiate athlete, my personal best in the 400H was set in 1997 at age 37 (56.91), and I ran the 110HH twice in 2000 within 0.2 of my college best.

I live and practice law in Albuquerque.  I have been with New Mexico’s largest law firm, Modrall, Sperling, Roehl, Harris & Sisk for almost 15 years.  My practice is primarily commercial litigation and product litigation.  My wife, Jean Bannon, is also a lawyer, and we have three kids, ages 20 (Jean’s), 5 and 4.

I have been a volunteer assistant track coach for two Albuquerque high schools for the past five seasons.

3. Masters track is perpetually underfunded. How would you raise more money for the masters program?

First, I would explore inside funding.  Last year, I sent inquiries to several of our current administrators asking for information on funding.  I did not receive much useful information, and, from the responses I received, it appears that even some of our own administrators do not know much about our funding. 

What I know for sure is that masters is the largest division aside from youth in the ranks of USATF.  I also know that USATF provides many benefits in the form of sanctioning and officials, for example.  Is the masters program receiving adequate bang for its collective membership buck?  Given the information which is available to the general membership, it would be difficult to have an informed opinion.  That will change if I am selected to serve as the chair.

Second, we should work on our own to develop funding from outside sources.  There are lots of folks working on this among our current administrators and membership.  Increased exposure will bring funding, as will properly targeted grant writing.

Since 1995, I have been the president of a non-profit corporation which provides ski instruction to people with disabilities.  In this role, I have had significant experience in grant writing and fund raising.  There are hundreds of charitable foundations with assets bloated by the stock market’s performance over the past five years, and the opportunities for sustaining grant funding have never been better for all types of organizations. 

I would recruit a group of experienced writers who could put together these proposals and follow up on applications. 

4. Masters meets on the local level attract relatively small numbers. How would you promote the program to increase the number of participants?

If local meet directors have the support of a national structure that is gaining recognition, they will benefit from the national exposure.  More cooperation between local Senior Olympics groups and our program will also increase participation.  The Chuck McMahon meet which I attended last month in San Diego is a good example.  Without the joint effort, the McMahon meet would be a high quality but small meet.  The combination is good for both organizations.

5. The national headquarters of USATF in Indianapolis reminds the public that track is a "sport for life," but its TV commercials and Fast Forward magazine ignore the masters element of the organization. How would you change this?

Are we asking for exposure?  Are we submitting high quality materials fit for publication?  If we are and they are being rejected, I would say that we have some educating and lobbying to do (we should have the attention of the rest of USATF given the size of our constituency).  If not, the solution is obvious.

6. Although the recent Eugene national masters outdoor meet was highly praised by participants, the previous year's meet at Disney World's Wide World of Sports Complex in Orlando was almost universally despised. What can the chairman do to insure a wider selection of host city candidates?

This is another communication issue.  We have a grass roots presence in every potential host city in the country, yet I have never heard a call for volunteers to work with their local associations to consider submitting bids.  The rank and file have no idea about the bid process.  The national championships that are not held in Eugene or Boston always seem to be heavily criticized.  Of the thirteen national championships I have attended, the meet organizers were essentially masters first-timers everywhere except Eugene, Boston and Spokane.  This is where the championships manual will come in handy.  I’ll discuss that more in response to question 12.

7. In 2000, USATF regional masters meets in the Southeast and West have run into serious problems. One was canceled and one almost was. How would you make sure all regions are assured of meets?

These problems might be expected to occur in the sparsely-populated “square states” of the Rocky Mountain area, but I was surprised to see these problems pop up near the coasts.  We need to ensure that our volunteer base is vested in the meets, and I think that this requires that we recruit active athletes to be among those accountable for the regional meets in every region.  We might consider incentives for meet directors whose regional meets experience significant growth.  In a year where we cannot be sure of the viability of another site, we might consider combining regional meets with annual meets which have traditionally high attendance (Hayward Classic in Eugene, Southeast Masters in Raleigh, Texas Masters in Dallas as some examples).  These meets are crucial to our program for many reasons.  We have a responsibility to ensure the availability of high level meets around the country every year.  Many talented dedicated athletes in our programs simply cannot afford the expense or time to travel long distances for meets.  Without regular access to reasonably local meets of that caliber, we will lose participation. 

On a related point, I believe that we have a responsibility to demonstrate that our program is willing to support the efforts of athletes who cannot afford to attend a national meet.  I would like to promote a modest scholarship or cost reduction program to help bring some athletes who would not otherwise be able to compete at nationals.  I would like to have this in place to bring some new participants to Baton Rouge for outdoor nationals in 2001.

8. Part of your mandate as masters chair is communicating effectively with the various parts of the masters movement. How would you share your plans with the masters masses?

This is the most glaring shortcoming in current practice, and I some have specific plans here.  First, I believe that the masters program’s Web presence should be mainstreamed under the USATF banner, as I will address in response to question 10.  Second, before that happens, I would use existing communication venues – monthly updates in National Masters News, postings in Masterstrack.com’s news link and the egroups’ masterstf group.  I would also create a base of e-mail addresses of our members for regular communication with people who do not participate in the egroup but still prefer an e-mail over looking at the Web site.  I will also commit to respond to e-mail, phone calls or letters from any individual within 48 hours.

9. Sacramento is hoping to bid for the 2005 world WAVA meet. How can you help this bid?

Plant some trees so that there is some shade at the facility!  I would also talk with the organizers of the U.S. Olympic Trials.  They have undoubtedly amassed valuable information that could be helpful in this process.  If the site and bid are viable, I would begin working on plans for the meetings in Brisbane.  Given the success of prior WAVA meets in our country, there is good cause to believe that the U.S. should have another opportunity to host WAVA soon.

10. Does USATF masters need a Web site for promoting the program? If yes, how would you create/produce and supply content for this site?

Absolutely.  USATF’s Web site is the natural place to look for information on the masters program, and the accumulation of information that is currently available on Masterstrack.com and through the egroup should have a home under USATF sanction.  Anything anyone needs to know about masters track should be available through this site.  Everything from information on obtaining USATF cards to merchandise to our national championships manual should be available online to any of our members.  The volunteers who have created and maintained Masterstrack.com are overworked and underappreciated.  This responsibility needs to be shifted around from time to time to avoid burnout and keep the energy of new ideas in the site.

11. What changes are needed in the anti-doping rules to accommodate the different needs of masters athletes (from elite athletes)? How would you go about putting such changes into effect?

I have no idea; however, it is clear that this issue needs to be a top priority.  Even if we decide what the rules should be, the process of getting the changes implemented will be a long one.  The first step has to be working with appropriate consultants who can review the existing rules and tell us where and why changes should be considered to accommodate the reasonable distinctions between athletes based upon age.  With appropriately supported work product from this process in hand, we will then need to move toward implementation with each of the responsible organizations.  It is imperative that USATF is on board for any proposed changes, and Craig Masback has already told us that he has an open mind to proposals.  The laboring oar, however, will (and should) be taken up by the Masters Committee.