The issue is the UCI. (duh, right?)
If the IOC had any portion of sense, they would terminate the UCI and partner with a new governing body.
There would be 2 level. Professional and Elite
Elite would be National, with a calendar for it. Professional would be similar to ProTour Level, but with more focus on regionalization of the "divisions", not TOO different than what exists. All the same, the problem is not the structure it is the management.
The new governing body would solely act as the administrative body, ruling on the structure and systems.
Anti-Doping would be handled outside, from a WADA/ADA level and would have to include accommodations similar to how Hockey and US NBA interface at the highest level with their ADA, USADA (do you think Kobe Bryant is tested under WADA rules, save a short 60 term during an Olympic year?).
Athletes would unionize and have collective bargaining on the National levels, and further up at the Professional level they would have more control with the race promoters for maximizing the commercial aspects (like TV, Media rights and image rights), giving them a voice and a foothold to empower their voice (clearly lacking now). This also removes the power from the governing body, so that there is no conflict of interest or potential corruption within the governing body, as there is now.
Penalties for doping will include a decrement of riders and possibly teams from the National level, so if a Professional rider tests pos, one of his country-mates at the Elite level, or possibly a team, must be idled for a period in addition to the 3 year suspension and demotion back to the national level of the offender.
Second offense means life ban, with a penalty paid from the national governing body equal to $100k USD, and blocking of the national team from World events.
All entities will be fully public with full quarterly audits and all reporting of testing, names, results, numbers and data open for review.Total transparency.
As a modest proposal, the sooner the IOC removes the UCI from connection with the sport, the faster something along the lines of this free-form, train of thought template could come into fruition.
The human resources for these new bodies would need to come from sport but have ZERO to do with cycling. Perhaps golf or motorsport would be a more frutive level of talent on the administrative side.
As it relates to Lemond, the heart is in the right place, though his message is often disjointed and mangled in the delivery. He was a racer not a politician but if he's going to be this active, he needs to work on his skills.