Bill Hoffman resigned in protest from the League of American Bicyclists Board of Directors in a letter sent to the organization late in November. He made its contents public today. Hoffman is the second-longest serving volunteer, a life member since 1971, and has served three terms on the Board.
"The LAB of today, in my opinion, is not acting in the interests of its most loyal members. Instead, it is marching to the drumbeat of the bicycle industry, bicycle facilities planners, urban visionaries, and environmentalists. This is seen in the increasing share of League funds that now comes from these outside sources. LAB is no longer a true membership organization; it is now a political pressure group that happens to have members. And I might add, LAB membership is 27% lower today than it was as recently as 8 years ago—14,836 as of Oct., 2010 vs. 20,257 at 9/30/02. Moreover, the current membership is lower than it was in 1991. While there are undoubtedly numerous reasons for the decline, a drop of this magnitude should cause you to re-examine the populist appeal you are now pursuing."
In his resignation letter, Hoffman states that LAB has ignored members and memberships have declined. Furthermore, LAB has adopted the "lowest common denominator" - insisting that bicycle facilities and bicycling advocacy cater to those cyclists with the least amount of skill. Members were not consulted regarding the ideological shift. Nor were they informed about changes that diminished the membership's voice.
Hoffman says that League Governance Committee chair Tim Young and President Andy Clarke interpreted the election rules as narrowly as possible in order to derail an attempt to put reform minded candidates on the ballot via the petition process. That effort failed when the petitioners garnered only half the required signatures.
"I've come to realize that major reforms will not happen with the current Board and management in place, " Hoffman writes. "And now that you have further stacked the deck to secure like-minded directors, I see no point in continuing. I would rather spend my energy on a new organization, if one is attempted, that will do what LAB has abandoned."
Comments
I first joined the LAW in 1976 and became a life member a few years
later. I too, don't like the way the league have been taken over. The
only reason I am still a member is that it cost them a few dollars
every two months to sent me their magazine. It may not be much
but every penny count.
As noted at the end of Bill Hoffman's piece, there may be an effort underway to initiate a new organization, one dedicated to cyclists and the protection of cyclists rights. If this transpires, I'll report on it.
Thanks for covering this.
I keep hoping that the League will see the light and embrace both dissent and a "big tent" attitude on its Board. My fear is that such a notion is resisted by the bike and urban planning industries, who increasingly write checks to LAB and who have more to gain by having a predictable, pre-screened LAB Board and a LAB that lobbies for big-ticket projects that sell a lot of bikes and keep urban planners employed.
To some degree, LAB does cater to a very real clientele, whether traditional cyclists like it or not. But as Bill Hoffman said in his letter, it would have been nice had membership been consulted on this paradigm shift that LAB leadership has taken. But to an overwhelming degree, the organization really has been changed from the top. As Bill said, many have voted with their feet--walking away.
Do we all fit in one tent or do we need another tent?
Got something to say?
Examiner.com is looking for writers, photographers, and videographers to join the fastest growing group of local insiders. If you are interested in growing your online rep apply to be an Examiner today!