Robinson Seeks USAT Decertification

Archtkd

3rd Black Belt
Joined
Oct 27, 2009
Messages
973
Reaction score
99
Location
St. Louis, MO
This ran in The Colorado Springs Gazette

Grievance calls for decertification of USA Taekwondo
BRIAN GOMEZ
2011-03-01 17:04:04

Financial troubles, administrative chaos and diminished accountability to its membership should cost taekwondos national governing body its certification with the U.S. Olympic Committee, and the boss of the Colorado Springs-based organization that runs the combat sport should resign his six-figure post, according to a complaint by a taekwondo referee.

USA Taekwondo has violated the Ted Stevens Olympic and Amateur Sports Act that sets the code for NGBs, and its also in violation of USOC bylaws, as well as its own bylaws, under the wrongful and heavy-handed actions of chief executive officer David Askinas, alleges Bernard Robinson in a 22-page grievance filed last month with the NGB.

A referee the past 25 years, Robinson, of Chesterfield, Va., wrote to the USA Taekwondo judicial committee that the NGB no longer fulfills its mission and no longer meets the requirements to justify sanctioning from the USOC, accusing the NGB of evolving into the personal fiefdom of Askinas, who operates USA Taekwondo as his private club.

USOC spokesman Patrick Sandusky declined comment on USA Taekwondos standing. Askinas disputed the accusations, saying theyre the product of former USA Taekwondo chair Ronda Sweet, whose membership has been terminated by the NGB because of what Askinas dubbed false accusations repeatedly against good people in this organization. The allegations in Robinsons complaint are completely without substance.

The seven-person USA Taekwondo board, which includes former USOC president Marty Mankamyer of the Springs, contains self-interested members, Robinson writes, and the NGB exists mainly to serve a few insiders whose primary allegiance is to create benefits for themselves, to the exclusion of the membership and athletes it is supposed to serve.

Robinson bemoaned a dip in membership, a lack of athlete development and a disregard for strengthening coach and referee pipelines, and he wrote that competitors are kept in the dark with respect to (USA Taekwondo) decisions and athlete programs. He criticized the NGB for dissolving its nominating and governance committee, the group for which he was removed as chairman, and for bylaw changes without the necessary votes required.

A slew of what Robinson called financial shenanigans have crippled USA Taekwondo, which closed 2009 with $397,282 in net assets, according to its latest audit, in July. The NGB, with $342,599 in USOC funding in 2009, maintains sloppy recordkeeping, doesnt have an established travel policy for staffers and misspends USOC grants, Robinson said, even insisting the situation once was so dire, employees retirement accounts were raided.

For most of his five-plus years at the helm, Askinas, with total compensation of $146,566 in 2009, has ensured CEO-favored candidates are elected to board positions, Robinson wrote, in an attempt to systematically exclude and suppress independent-minded voices critical of his management and dominance of the board. In short, behind Askinas, USA Taekwondo cant move forward and function in any effective way, Robinson said.

Robinson accused Askinas of showing an unwelcoming attitude toward female athletes and volunteer administrators, illustrated by insensitive, crude, demeaning and offensive language, including language derogatory of women. He said the NGB doesnt provide equitable support and encouragement for participation by women, noting that disparities among male and female fighters are defended by the belief taekwondo is a mans sport.

USA Taekwondo board candidate Herb Perez said Robinsons accusations arent backed up by any facts. I would be surprised if Bernards complaint survives a motion to dismiss because its so nonsense. I dont think it gets past that level. It doesnt make the grade.

When you look at our record, Askinas added, our event participation is increasing, our athlete pipeline is getting better, our membership is growing. This is Rondas theories on why she should still be in charge. About the call for his resignation, he said, The board has the authority to hire and fire CEOs and there has been no request. I think they like the progress were making. I have no intention to resign on the basis of false allegations.

For more Olympic coverage, visit www.gazette.com/olympics. Check out our Olympics blog at http://gazetteolympics.freedomblogging.com.
 

RSweet

Blue Belt
Joined
Apr 8, 2010
Messages
220
Reaction score
6
This article is great, what is even better are the quotes from David. A friend of mine asked how this guy could be an attorney and blame it all on me, instead of saying "We do not comment on pending litigation."
Here is my statement:
I am humbled by just how powerful Mr. Askinas believes me to be. I was amazed to discover that I am so all powerful that the top two sports attorneys in the United States, Mr. Ed Williams and Mr. Howard Jacobs, as well as successful businessmen such as Mr. Bernard Robinson and Mr. Brandon Meek, are willing to spend tens of thousands of dollars and hundreds of hours going after David Askinas using "false allegations" and my "theories."
There is so much fodder in that article I really do no know where to begin. As you already know, I am still a USAT member in good standing. While it appears the BOD and the CEO can't read the bylaws or Colorado law, I am a member until the Judicial Committee - you know, the people David sent my appeal to 10 days before they were appointed, rules. Do I need to list Section 5.4 and Colorado law about how my rights have been violated here? Mr. Askinas can't even get it right as to whether or not my membership is terminated. It is not. I am sure he will kick booty now to accomplish it, but when he gave his quote to the Brian Gomez, I was and still am a member.
Assets in July audit. That is pretty funny. Last July's audit was for 2009. This begs again the question as to why the 2009 audit was still going on in July. In accounting circles it means the books are not clean, not clear cut and a pain. OK - the article touts that in 2009 USAT had $397,282 in assets. According to the same audit - there were $397,282 in liabilities ending the year in the red $168,835. Now this does look better than 2008 and 2007 as both those years ended up $403K in the red until you look at the rest of the audit. The reason 2009 appears to have improvement is that there is a large account receivable, which is an asset that has not been collected yet. Additionally, US Open in 2009 made $90K over budget, $120K from KKW testing, as well as the downpayments from LaJust and the first payment from Texas. So if you take the income that was not budgeted or planned, and subtract it from the -$403K at the end of the year, and assume that they just followed that budget - the year should be in the black with reserves and not in the red. Oh yeah, forgot, USOC fronted $40K for U24 that year which was not used when the trip was canceled in early December 2009, so that was just money in the bank that would be spent in 2010.
Again, so much fodder, so little time. More soon.
 

StudentCarl

3rd Black Belt
Joined
Nov 19, 2009
Messages
935
Reaction score
30
Location
Grand Haven, MI
Just at first glance, it's hard to imagine how you could write a 22 page grievance without substantiating something. There were quite a few specifics in the article, and my experience is that where there's a lot of smoke there's always at least some fire. I think a key question is what is enough of a problem for USOC to take action--how bad does it have to get? Does anyone know if any other sport NGBs have been decertified by USOC and, if so, what was the nail in the coffin?
 

RSweet

Blue Belt
Joined
Apr 8, 2010
Messages
220
Reaction score
6
http://www.recoiltkd.com/USAT-Complaint-Page-.html some of the complaints. The actual bernard robinson complaint is on my website.

USTU - now USAT was almost decertified in 2003 but negotiated a remediation plan in Jan 2004. The reasons - pretty much the same as this - no money and mismanagement.
 

puunui

Senior Master
Joined
Dec 7, 2010
Messages
4,378
Reaction score
26
http://www.recoiltkd.com/USAT-Complaint-Page-.htmlUSTU - now USAT was almost decertified in 2003 but negotiated a remediation plan in Jan 2004. The reasons - pretty much the same as this - no money and mismanagement.


Actually, the reasons are different, and you know it. I have all the documents submitted to the USOC on the issue sitting in several bankers boxes in my garage. It is humorous and quite ironic to me that you are/were involved in both situations. Say USAT is decertified or otherwise becomes unworkable. What governance model will we turn to at that point? The USTU model? Have you thought it out that far?
 

granfire

Sr. Grandmaster
Joined
Dec 8, 2007
Messages
15,539
Reaction score
1,246
Location
In Pain
Actually, the reasons are different, and you know it. I have all the documents submitted to the USOC on the issue sitting in several bankers boxes in my garage. It is humorous and quite ironic to me that you are/were involved in both situations. Say USAT is decertified or otherwise becomes unworkable. What governance model will we turn to at that point? The USTU model? Have you thought it out that far?


I was under the impression that the system worked well when not intentionally broken, al the bylaws and safeguards.
 

Master Dan

Master Black Belt
Lifetime Supporting Member
Joined
Aug 27, 2010
Messages
1,207
Reaction score
34
Location
NW Alaska
I would hope the transition goes to the issue of weather USAT actually operated as a true corporation. Based on taxes or personal liability a corporation shields it offiecers from personal liability as long as they operate with in thier bylaws and using proceedures such as resolutions discussed and voted on properly. These are kept up to date in real time in the corporate book.

When a plantif such as IRS or others wish to go after the CEO or officers personally its called punching the corporate vale and this is done becasue the corporate book has not been kept up and in fact the corporation was run by one person so it looses its corporate status and infact is then called a sole proprietorship. Hence Mr. Askinas and others can have personal liability for civil, criminal and other penalties. I wonder if USAT invested in insurance to protect the corporate officeres and if so what the limits of liability are?

The things I have been told by some relate to back dating and even forged signatures of documents to maintain the corporate records if this can be proved or testified to under oath then USOC is not needed USAT will simply cease to be a corporate entity and individuals involved will serious legal problems to deal with.
 

d1jinx

Master Black Belt
Joined
Jun 13, 2009
Messages
1,390
Reaction score
17
Location
all-ova
Question.

Instead of paying 10s of Thousands of $$$$$$ to get lawyers and try to legally change something, why hasn't anyone went directly to the 1 who makes the decisions and the USOC at "PAY HIM OFF" to get rid of D.A.? That or why hasn't someone paid someone to "break a few legs or make him an offer he can't refuse?"

Surely there has been enough money spent that someone could/would take the money and make things change!!!!

I'm just saying, thats how things get done in Joisy!!
icon10.gif


every politician "donates" money for a good cause. Doesn't anyone watch Boardwalk Empire OR Sopranos?

:rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl:
:rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl:
:rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl:
 
Last edited:

Earl Weiss

Senior Master
Joined
Jan 27, 2009
Messages
3,257
Reaction score
640
Based on taxes or personal liability a corporation shields it offiecers from personal liability as long as they operate with in thier bylaws and using proceedures such as resolutions discussed and voted on properly. These are kept up to date in real time in the corporate book.

When a plantif such as IRS or others wish to go after the CEO or officers personally its called punching the corporate vale and this is done becasue the corporate book has not been kept up and in fact the corporation was run by one person so it looses its corporate status and infact is then called a sole proprietorship. .

Suffice it to say that what is set forth above is not properly stated principals of corporate law.
 

taekwondodo

Green Belt
Joined
Jan 26, 2009
Messages
120
Reaction score
2
I was pondering this thought today.

Lets say that USAT is decertified, what would happens to all of the memberships? What will happens to the athletes who trained so hard to be in the Team either sparring or Competitive Poomsae?

We can't compete World event unless we belong to an NGB and WTF regconized that NGB?

Has anyone thought of that?
 

granfire

Sr. Grandmaster
Joined
Dec 8, 2007
Messages
15,539
Reaction score
1,246
Location
In Pain
I was pondering this thought today.

Lets say that USAT is decertified, what would happens to all of the memberships? What will happens to the athletes who trained so hard to be in the Team either sparring or Competitive Poomsae?

We can't compete World event unless we belong to an NGB and WTF regconized that NGB?

Has anyone thought of that?

The handful of people that do get to go?
Oh, with 2012 on the horizon, I am sure the issues will be solved quickly.

I don't think it takes much more than maybe a long afternoon at a cosy hotel to form the successor organization and transfer assets. Maybe a week.
There is nothing like having a hard deadline to get things done.
 

miguksaram

Master of Arts
Joined
Aug 19, 2008
Messages
1,971
Reaction score
32
Location
Aurora, IL
I was pondering this thought today.

Lets say that USAT is decertified, what would happens to all of the memberships? What will happens to the athletes who trained so hard to be in the Team either sparring or Competitive Poomsae?

We can't compete World event unless we belong to an NGB and WTF regconized that NGB?

Has anyone thought of that?
Most likely they will gut the current administration and replace them and most likely place an interim NGB in its place during that time. It would not serve WTF or KKW well to totally oust USA from international and Olympic competition.
 

dowan50

Orange Belt
Joined
Dec 17, 2010
Messages
69
Reaction score
4
I was pondering this thought today.

Lets say that USAT is decertified, what would happens to all of the memberships? What will happens to the athletes who trained so hard to be in the Team either sparring or Competitive Poomsae?

We can't compete World event unless we belong to an NGB and WTF regconized that NGB?

Has anyone thought of that?

Of course every person who had a life time membership in USTU or Coaching and Refereeing certification and all the cost and time involved in getting those went away when USAT was started. We could only hope if a new NGB was started that a good do over using the best of young and old would prevail in restoring a national TKD organization that attract and serve the majority.
 

dowan50

Orange Belt
Joined
Dec 17, 2010
Messages
69
Reaction score
4
Suffice it to say that what is set forth above is not properly stated principals of corporate law.

Yes you could say that but the premise still stands that it is still actionable if it can be proven that the corporation back dated or falsified resolutions or other documents with the intent to operate as a sole proprietorship meaning one man total control over every aspect of operation including the handling of funds.

Yes Glen is correct it is Piercing the Corporate Veil.

The second main premise is that starving USAT out or thinking people will force the USOC to decertify USAT will not be necessary if the corporation ceases to exist because of the above violations are proven and acted upon.
 

puunui

Senior Master
Joined
Dec 7, 2010
Messages
4,378
Reaction score
26
Of course every person who had a life time membership in USTU or Coaching and Refereeing certification and all the cost and time involved in getting those went away when USAT was started.

That is incorrect. I was a USTU life member and when USAT came to be, my life membership continued on as a USAT Life Membership. They still mail me the magazine and membership card every year even though I have never given a dime to USAT. And it's Life Membership, not "Lifetime" membership, or at least that is what the USTU and USAT bylaws stated/state.
 
Top