03/04/2026
A letter written to the directors of the USTA-
Dear Director:
Back in April 2024, I wrote – critically - of the Standardbred Transition Alliance’s (STA) bloated administrative costs and meager accomplishments. I presented my case as a USTA member, horse owner, and breeder placed in the position of involuntarily supporting, financially, an organization whose mission I wholeheartedly supported.
The Standardbred Transition Alliance (STA, as you are aware), is modeled after the Thoroughbred Aftercare Alliance (TAA). The goal of the STA is to provide predictable funding to groups who have met high standards for both horse care/adoption, financial management and sustainability.
The sole accomplishment of the STA’s 12-member Board in the year 2024 (most recent year of tax filing documents available) remained as it was in 2023 - disbursements of $200,000.00 in grants to the same five organizations. However, there were notable differences in revenues and expenses.
In the latest 990 filing, Revenues decreased by $10,000 from 2023 to 2024. Contributions dropped from $347,849 in 2023 to $328,525.00 in 2024. In both years, the U.S.T.A.'s surcharge of $5.00 (instituted June 1, 2022) for the transfer of a horse’s ownership (approximately $160,000.00) amounted to nearly half of the total contributions to the STA. Expenses rose from $126,878 in 2023 to $162,046 in 2024. Salaries are reported to have jumped to $109,742.00 from $83,454, a staggering 24% increase.
I previously reported that the TAA’s yearly expenses were 18.6% of total contributions in 2023. I looked at their most recent 990 filing (2024) to find the percentage was 18.9%.
In comparison, the STA’s 2023 yearly expenses were 36.5% of total contributions and 49% of total contributions in 2024. Put another way, in 2024 just $2.55 of the involuntary donation of $5.00 (tacked on to the transfer fee) was available to benefit horses.
I presented my concerns to Mike Tanner (USTA Executive Director) of the frankly shameful waste of the membership’s money. I also informed Mike of the STA’s misleading advertising of its accomplishments, virtually no evidence of fundraising, paying outside contractors for work assigned to, and in the job description of the STA Administrator, a web site that routinely goes half a year without a single new press release issued, and my concern that funds were being provided to an aftercare organization that has no Standardbreds in its care. And while I was expressing my concerns – I asked what exactly is the STA Administrator doing to warrant salary and benefits of $110,000.00?
Faced with the concerns that I have, Mike agreed to bring them before the USTA Executive Committee. This in-lieu of Mike’s promise that I would be able to speak at the USTA’s 2025 Annual meeting to address my concerns.
The Executive Committee met furtively with the STA. I was not asked to be at the meeting, nor speak before the committee, nor respond to the STA’s presentation, nor did I even know of the STA and Executive Committee meeting until the time of this writing. Up to this point I had only presented emails of my concerns to Mike. They summarized the facts, figures, and evidence that I would have presented in a more detailed and comprehensive presentation at the annual meeting or even the Executive committee had I been given that courtesy.
Yet, in a memo circulated by Russell Williams (President of the USTA) to the Executive Committee it was concluded that “Following consideration of the information presented, the clear consensus of the Executive Committee is that the STA is effectively fulfilling its stated mission and that Mr. Skolnick’s assertions to the contrary are unsupported.”
Russell’s dismissive and quite honestly arrogant response is not surprising. It is not the USTA’s money being wasted. $160,000.00 is not coming from his budget. So why should he care?
Russell ‘s memos to the Executive Committee goes on to further state “The USTA Board of Directors continues to fully endorse the STA’s mission. Funding determinations are made annually through our established budget process, which provides appropriate oversight and accountability. That process is functioning as intended and does not necessitate an ongoing or multi-year dialogue between USTA staff and Mr. Skolnick regarding the STA.”
There is no “funding determination” as Russell states. The USTA does not fund the STA. And it certainly does not do it through its “established budget process.” Nor is there need for “oversight and accountability.” The monies paid to the STA are simply and nothing more than a “pass through.” The $5.00 transfer assessment (totaling approximately $160,000.00/year) is paid in its entirety directly to the STA. I doubt the USTA has any standing at all to hold the STA responsible for its wasteful spending even if it wanted to. And I remain concerned as to whether the USTA had the right to assess the $5.00 in the first place.
What Russell is truly defending when he writes “STA is effectively fulfilling its stated mission” is the false narrative that the USTA is responsibly supporting a program that provides funding for horses after their race careers are finished. I understand that the STA provides the USTA, and the membership cover from the attacks by Animal Rights advocates. But, as I previously stated, it is not the USTA providing the funding and they have no right to lay claim to it. It is us, the members of the USTA that are funding it. And it is the USTA that is seeing to it that money is being wasted.
Russell can say “that the STA is effectively fulfilling its stated mission,” but it does not make it true, and it changes nothing. The STA is an increasingly indolent organization with bloated and wasteful expenses. Our money is truly being wasted. We - the membership - are funding an organization that expects responsible financial stewardship of the groups they accredit, but not themselves.
I have proffered solutions. Expenses could be reduced by 50-60%. The mission statement could be expanded. The STA does not need a 12-member board. Half that number would be more effective and efficient. The STA Board, which includes Russell, has ignored me.
The numbers speak for themselves. I have asked Mike and Russell to eliminate the $5.00 transfer fee. We (the membership) should not be mandated to donate to an organization that we would – given it was voluntary to do so – not make. If the USTA wishes to fund the STA let them do so with an annual donation or they can continue to give members the option to donate, as they do now with suggested donations to the Harness Racing Museum and the STA as part of the membership renewal process.
Mitchel Skolnick
Bluestone Farms, L.L.C.
