I am not going to use names in this post because I don't want it to show up in any search engines. If you are aware of the situation, you will know the cast of characters. I am ONLY representing MYSELF in these opinions and this timeline of events. If you have a beef, take it up with me.
The reason I am telling the whole story is that I believe in the philanthropic vision of an organization and I am defensive that the reputation not be tarnished by a few misguided people based on their egos. People are being lied to in the name of charity and I find that reprehensible.
The story for me starts a few years back when there became a more active involvement in what was a financially successful venture. After the first year of "major" involvement, the suggestion was made that the event had gotten large enough that a committee should be formed because, at least behind the scenes, we could see some large cracks that would likely become major issues. Help was offered and avoided the first year by the person in charge.
After the next year, it was insisted upon that help be accepted. Some help was accepted, but there were still some major issues that were not resolved and they were becoming larger and more obvious to those who organize these events. Details were obsessed upon while large issues were ignored, even on race day when the primary contact would go for large chunks of time not responding to calls for answers. As an organization, the primary concern is the safety of the participants and this was becoming a problem - whether it be the route, the congestion, or having water for participants.
Finally, last year there were more defined roles. One person took the registration role. One person took the volunteer role. And the primary role remained the same. Over the few years, people were slowly seeing an issue with a person becoming very flustered, to the point of rude, under pressure. Last year, it crossed a threshold and several bridges were burned. There were threats made that a resource was "incompetent" and that the race was going to be sold to someone who could do it right - per the primary event director.
After last years event, the announcement was made by the primary contact that they were "done with it" and no longer doing the event. Concurrently, enough bridges were burned that many from said group resource also said they would not work with the coordinator. And to finalize the decision, from what I understand, resources were alerted that due to safety and complaint issues, that a permit would not be provided for the same old venue. Personally for me, I had issues that the main charity was told they were not to be on site, I believe it was due to parking concerns but not 100% sure; and once I found out that money was being taken from the charity for personal payment, my final bridge was also burned in regards to the event. But that's a personal ethical decision and I understand that.
Given the primary director being "done" and the verbalization of there being no permit, an organization decided that they would move ahead with a more appropriate venue that could accommodate such large numbers safely - to guarantee that a race would continue on this important date and benefit the same very important charity.
From my understanding, initial person was invited to participate in the new event but refused. Once initial person learned of the permit that was obtained, I can only guess that ego took over and moved ahead, which is why planning was delayed.
I truly find it a huge shame that ego took over working together to create what will ultimately be a larger, more safe event for all involved. For if it was truly in the name of philanthropy, that would have indeed been the best solution.
