DiscNW Community Bulletin Boards

Wow…since reading Mike’s initial post a while ago, I am now very impressed with the amount of time and energy that many of you have expended on this forum. It is also amazing to realize that this is just a sample of the overall enthusiasm for youth Ultimate in Seattle. It is easy to see why our city’s youth Ultimate program is so enormous even without its own organization. Just imagine how expansive youth Ultimate in Seattle could become with either its own separate organization or a large new branch of DiscNW.

Perhaps there can be a compromise, but either way, more major action needs to be taken. This city is a Mecca of Ultimate at every level of the sport. Here as well as nationally, the sport is growing at such a pace that each different level – club, college, adult league, and youth - deserves its own organization. This is true for every other major sport…why not Ultimate?

The reasons for this have already been argued and I am not here to continue the argument of each individual point. However, I would like to again point out that two of the four Seattle youth Ultimate veteran organizers have posted on this forum. I have worked and talked with both Mike Mullen and Joe B. extensively about this very issue for the past two to three years. In addition, I have talked with both Mary and Jeff about the need for further growth at the youth level. Somehow, Mike included me in his list of top youth organizers in Seattle, but in reality, I am not even in the same league. Yes, I initially started the youth Ultimate camps here in Seattle, but it was Mike’s enthusiasm and inspirational guidance that has carried the Seattle Youth Ultimate Camps this far.

But…instead of simply recognizing these great contributors, I would like to suggest that everyone involved in this discussion not only also recognize, but also have continued faith in them. The vision of these individuals has carried Seattle youth Ultimate this far…why not continue to trust their vision?

Finally, as our new youth organizer so eloquently stated in her post on this forum, let’s remember for whom we’re doing all this. Whatever gets decided, the strategy that is best for youth and best for the sport should be the one that is chosen.

-Roger Crafts

Seattle Youth Ultimate Camps
Seattle Academy Ultimate Program
Seattle Sockeye

Well, where to start?  I have a lot of opinions* (I'm sure that's a shock to anyone who knows me), but lack the time or the English skills to present them all here.  However, I'll toss out a couple quick hitters.  Who am I kidding?  It won’t be quick.  I ramble, a lot.

1)  Personally, I think youth leaving DiscNW completely could be too large of step to take at this juncture.  However, more separation and the appearance of even more separation would seem to me to be a necessary step.  Nonetheless, I’m concerned about the manpower available for further separation.  I’m not sure anyone has noticed, but we’re not exactly overwhelmed with volunteers as it is, and each level of addition separation may require duplication of some positions/functions (Great for full employment programs, not so great for volunteer driven efforts).  Sure everyone thinks, “Let’s get kids to play ultimate.  That would be sweet.”  But the leap from thought to action is a big one.  Also, there’s the even more difficult leap of getting the kids to play.  That being said separation to at least the level of organizational names and websites could alleviate concerns about the seemingly incompatible adult sports organization/Potlatch activities/goals and a youth sports organization goals.  This separation could really help on the fundraising front for the kids, and the one thing I’ve learned in life is money may not buy happiness, but everything else is for sale. 

As for the details, there are many worth debating, but a couple I want to touch on briefly because my wandering mind seems to be headed that way and one of the joys of the internet is that even if no one is wants to hear your opinions you can still share them. 

1) I love the idea of a Seattle Public Schools league, but I don’t think it can happen in the fall of 2008 (hey, that’s a couple of weeks away).  Yes, every SPS school should have a team, but they don’t.  The middle school league exists because of the parks levy, at least that’s my understanding, I didn’t really investigate my claim.  Without paid coaching positions for the SPS league teams will not just appear at all of the other public high schools.  Though maybe a shiny new youth organization could get a parks levy to support high school ultimate programs.  Perhaps as part of some sort of stop childhood obesity, conflict resolution, or whatever other hogwash program the parks board will buy into.  Then again maybe DiscNW can do that.  What do I know?  Also, why shut out the other local public schools like, Monroe, Bellevue, and Edmonds?  This seems like a terrible proposal to me.  We’re not exactly overwhelmed with school programs currently.  Yeah, maybe in five years when the huge youth push generated after the youth summit has grown school participation to vastly greater numbers we should divide into conference like other sports, but now?  I don’t think so.  A final random note: Britt is so right, the earlier schedules and similar are available the more the parents will like you. 

2) While we are talking about the SPS league, why make it a fall sport?  If it’s in fall that will be the end of pretty much every girls’ team that currently exists and perhaps a few boys teams too.  Girls’ soccer and boys & girls’ cross country are a fall sports.  I don’t have the source on hand, but 62% of high school ultimate players are also either soccer players or runners.**  This is an issue without an easy fix because boys’ soccer is a spring sport.  So leaving a HS league in the spring (where I think it should be) conflicts with boys’ soccer and some would argue prevents college players from coaching.  (The wisdom of 19 year olds coaching 17 year olds is for another discussion)  However, the fall has a similar, if not even larger, conflict with club players and the club season.  November is when fall sports push through playoffs; the last weekend in October is when the club players are going to Natties, kind of a sizeable conflict for some (not so much for me).  I just want to watch college football in the fall.  Another choice, what if you split them, boys in the fall and girls in the spring?  Well that doubles your coaching load, kills Spring Reign, and likely has all sorts of other problems I can‘t think of currently.  So what’s my point?  Oh yeah, ultimate is a spring sport why change that?  Maybe, I just like ultimate as a spring sport because you battle through the early season’s terrible weather and you can finish (at least some years) playing under warm sunny skies.  Furthermore, the UPA college series is in the spring, so it seems appropriate that high school would be too. 

3)  I’m undecided on the whole UPA States and/or whether Westerns/the UPA are worth it in general.  That being said DiscNW or the new youth organization MUST place bids for every UPA youth event the Seattle teams are planning to participate in (though I know of the issues with the unnecessary UPA requirements).  The paperwork and the cost of travel are murder on a volunteer coaching staff with an unfunded ultimate program.  Though it will make you love the parents that make it possible.  However, trying to host Spring Reign, States, local leagues, YCC, and a regional youth tournament (be that Westerns or the “Cascadia Cup”) may present a volunteer/paid manpower issue.  Tournaments don’t host themselves.  Maybe DiscNW could require teams in the team league to provide "community service" as part of their league dues?  Brainstorming here...

Well, that seems like enough rambling for now.  I’m looking forward to the youth summit and hope that we don’t get bogged down in the separation issue or worse yet divided into civil warish factions.  Because remember we (youth ultimate supporters in the NW) have some battles we need to win elsewhere.  Boulder, I’m looking in your direction.  Fight the man or something like that.  I kid, I kid.  But seriously, remember there’s something about baby, bathwater, and blah, blah, blah someone once told me and it seemed like good advice at the time.  Please, won’t anyone think of the children?
.
Dreaming big like Wink, perhaps scared of change, and speaking through sarcasm because that’s how I roll.     

Much love, 
Fozz
-Nathan Hale Coach
-Terrible Typist       

*These are my opinions and are not necessarily the opinions of the Nathan Hale program.
**Statistics can be fabricated.  I should know.

Fozz,

Great post. The league will not be happening this fall. We ran into a roadblock.

I posted a FAQ (http://www.discnw.org/forums/viewtopic.php?id=1570) for why it would only be Seattle Public in the fall. Spring would still be the league that feeds into state and any regional tourneys. Fall would be meant to be kept sustainable and to give kids a chance to interact with students at their schools who they might otherwise not meet. It would also be another opportunity for kids to try the sport or a place for kids who don't play other fall sports.

This would be a bit of an experiment, but it would also be a chance to get a whole league started by a school district with multiple schools which could be a good model for growth.

If we throw the games on Sunday it would still let some kids double dip between sports in the same season. Some schools would be stronger in fall than spring and vice versa, but it is all good.

Thanks - Mike

Thank you everyone for the previous posts on this thread.  I would love to see the sport of ultimate continue to grow.  Right now we have a great organization for the adult folks who want to play recreational to competative ultimate.  The people who play have a great voice in how that organization is run.  Many of us have organized leagues set up cones and drink together.  This makes the league perfect for us and the people we bring in to the sport.

When I coached MS ultimate I had to produce a schedule in advance of the actual time games were to be played.  I needed to expain the game and the organization Discnw to parents on a weekly basis.  I needed to explain what the heck was happening out on the field because there was no scoreboard.  Baseball has a jamboree every year to kick off the season and inform the parents of what the heck is going on.  Soccer inundates famalies with information on field conditions and the next league.

The model that is being followed for youth development does not serve that purpose.   Parents who are not ultimate players have soccer, baseball, hockey and now lacrosse experiences to set their expectations on how leagues work.  Youth ultimate might have a better chance to grow if the organization that was charged with managing youth would pick up on the organization or other youth sports in the area.

Well that is my unedited two cents and I will keep reading the good thoughts you all are putting toward this effort.

Cheers
Marcus

I am frustratingly spending part of this beautiful fall day working but just as frustrating is the reality that another season of these spectacular days is going to pass without a Public School High School league for kids to move into after their public school middle school experience. It seemed to me that there was a well thought out plan last spring that was allowed to die through inaction. Do I have my facts wrong? What, if anything will be in place by next fall? Better yet, what are we going to do to help those kids who go to Sealth or Rainier Beach or even Roosevelt to have coaches and teams to play on this spring? Anyway, just a few thoughts that I hope to move into some form of action once we get these governance issues resolved and move on to the responsibilities in front of us.
Joe Bisignano

A couple of us are working with Bellarmine Prep down in Tacoma, hoping we can make a tourney or league in the Spring.

I think it is reasonable that HS Westerns move around, to attempt to share some of the travel burden.  By my count, there were 7 teams closer to Seattle (the 5 Seattle teams, the Eugene team, and the Bay area), 6 teams closer to Minnesota (the 5 Minnesota teams and the missouri team) and 1 team in the middle (Colorado) on the open side and similar (6/4/1) on the girls side.

Also, long term, youth ultimate will need legitimate operations in Portland/Bay Area/Denver/LA, etc, so I'd be worried about planting the DiscNW/MNHSU flag on either of the UPA tournaments. I think the ideal situation from the DiscNW side would be to continue hosting Spring Reign, while YCC/Westerns travel in the same way the College Nationals does - as soon as there are organizations with the capacity/facility to host.

In an effort to work within the system and to find compromise to keep youth in DiscNW, I submitted these three proposals to be voted on at the next board meeting.

1. Approval of separate financial books for youth.

2. Approval of a separate youth board to run youth and to give guidance to the youth coordinator.

3. Approval to give field priority in Seattle to youth ultimate.

I’ve been on the board for five years and may have some helpful thoughts about board decisions and board process.  My apologies in advance for the lengthy post.  I didn’t have the time to make it shorter.

I think the Mike Mullen’s proposals are very useful discussion topics for the board that I expect will come up, again.  For the most part though, they are not viable for a vote by the board, because they are either not clear, not specific enough or don’t fall within the scope of the board’s decision making responsibilities.  I’m not really sure why a former board member presents them in this way, but let me explain what I think. I should first add that the youth summit on Oct 26th is specifically intended and designed to provide the necessary input to guide such conversations and any related decisions, regardless of whether these happen at the staff level, inside a committee or at the board.  In fact, the subject matter of proposals #1& #2 are specific areas we want to hear about.

Proposal #1 isn’t clear to me.  What exactly does “separate financial books” mean?  DiscNW has approves one budget at the beginning of each calendar year.  Two budgets wouldn’t mean anything different from one budget.  It would be like drinking two glasses of water instead of one larger one.  But maybe Mike means that tournament and league budgets should be reported separately for youth and adult events so that we can all see where money is coming from and going to.  This might be like trying to keep your mashed potatoes and peas apart.  If so, then we’re already doing this.  Every league, every tournament and every other kind of event is presented separately in the budget.  I recommend people look at our financial statements on the website.  If you want to see different information or a different way of organizing it, please make the suggestion.  Chris Burke has made amazing progress in recent years in advancing our accounting methods.  They can really help you understand where the money is flowing.  Unfortunately, they don’t tell you where staff time is being allocated; we currently don’t tract that.  We want to though, because it’s a significant portion of our budget but it’s really hard to do this in a micro business where there isn’t a lot of specialization and folks switch tasks often.

Regarding proposal #2, the idea of a second board (of directors I presume) within the same organization doesn’t make sense.  From reading these posts, I get the sense that many, including the more frequent writers on this thread, don’t get the difference between board and staff.  Until I served on the board for a while, I didn’t understand either.  Actually, I hadn’t even heard of the DNW board of directors until I applied for a seat. 

In general, boards of directors are responsible for the financial health of their organization and for providing long-term strategic vision.  Boards are expected to be impassioned about the organization’s work but not financial benefactors.  No board’s job is to micromanage staff or to decide when tasks should be completed.  Boards of orgs our size are typically involved in staff management.  For us, this includes stuff like reviewing how well staff is meeting objectives, whether pay is appropriate and whether support resources are adequate.  Like many boards, we conduct annual staff reviews. I might add that in spring 2007 Bunny again received excellent reviews of his work with youth programs, his strongest management area.  A board’s strength is in the people who serve on it and the quality of its dialogue.  Some of us have always felt there should be at a minimum one board member with strong youth insight and connections.  When Mike Mullen left the board a couple years ago, we lost much of this capacity until recently Adam Waltzer recently joined us.  I strongly encourage any youth-oriented people reading this post who have an interest in serving on the board to apply.  Serving on the board offers great opportunities to change the organization that you won’t get elsewhere.   

As far as running youth programs (#2), the youth committee has historically been the center and creative engine of this work.  The whole organization used to look to that committee to steer the youth program, while staff and volunteers ran it.  Right now though, youth committee attendance is minimal and its effect has diminished. Now, the direction of the youth program is coming from a disparate constellation of voices rather than a clustered, coherent team at the youth committee.  Several contributors on this thread are youth committee members and some, like Mike Mullen and Joe B, used to participate.

Proposal #3 seems like ripe content for the youth summit, and maybe there would be a board decision to come of it, but I’d be surprised.  It seems to me that how events get scheduled and who gets first or second pick is a job we hired staff to figure out.  I know that middle schoolers have different needs from upper schoolers who can drive themselves.  I know that if we want to run a womens or girls event, we try to give that high priority because we’re trying to grow that dimension of ultimate play.  I think that if there are problems about scheduling, they should be addressed with staff first.  If that proves unsatisfactory, then someone should approach the board for assistance.

Examples of what youth priority on fields would mean and why it is important.

Example #1: Basics of Field Costs
Field costs in Seattle Parks, King County Parks, and Shoreline Parks:
Seattle Parks: Youth Games $5 per hour; Adult Games $40 per hour
Shoreline: Youth Games $4.25 grass/ $20.75 per hour sythetic per hour. Adult $30 grass, $67 sythetic per hour game.
King County (Marymoor) Youth grass: $12 per hour, youth synthetic $45 per hour. Adult grass $20 per hour, synthetic $45 (same as adult)

(By the way youth camps do indeed pay the $25-$55 dollars per hour for our fields)

With just this information it is blatantly obvious to anyone that youth should always be playing in Seattle for $5 per hour on any surface. That should be enough to win the argument. Links to parks cost I used:
http://www.metrokc.gov/parks/fees/
http://www.cityofshoreline.com/parks/in … /index.cfm
http://www.seattle.gov/parks/reservatio … /field.htm

Eample #2: Summer 2007 YCC versus Adult Leagues at Magnuson on Monday Nights
If anyone at DiscNW says there are no occassions when youth didn't get fields because of adult, they are not correct. In the summer of 2007 the DiscNW YCC teams were sent by DiscNW out to Marymoor becasue there were no fields available in Seattle at Magnuson. The reason YCC couldn't be at Magnuson was because DiscNW put Summer Master's Hat, Summer Mens Hat, and Summer Womens Hat. These leagues were somewhat directed by or had the participation of several board members. (Including you Barney). Thanks for supporting youth there by forcing us out to Marymoor at $45 per hour instead of the $5 per hour the kids should have been paying in Seattle. And nice of you to increase the charges to the 2008 YCC kids to pay for the loss in 2007. Luckily the DiscNW adults saved $15 per hour and didn't have to drive out to Redmond. And yes, I have been angry about this since then seeing how I was one of the YCC coaches. (Shout out to Frank Nam who soldiered through a blown out knee to still go to Minnesota with YCC as the GM - very impressive)

Example # 3: Did anyone ask the 2007 HS Coed coaches if they would rather be at Magnuson on Sundays than at Marymoor on Saturdays?
(This one is complicated and frankly my skills at trying to explain it are not that strong. If any of you math people want a shot at this please do so.)
My formula (no playoffs for any league are part of these calculations):
2007 MS Coed League - Magnuson Saturdays
28 teams playing 8 games each = 224 total games. Divide total games by 2 because 2 teams on same field = 112 ultimate fields. 112 ultimate fields time 75 minutes = 140 game hours. Divide the league expenses by that amount and you have an average of about $5.70 per hour of expenses per game field.

2007 HS Coed League - Marymoor Saturdays
19 teams times 8 games = 152 games divided by two = 76 ultiamte fields times 90 minute games = 114 game hours. Divide the league expenses by that amount and you have an average of about $42.50 per hour of expenses per game field.

2007 Adult Spring League - Sundays at Magnuson
43 teams times 12 games = 516 games divided by 2 and multiplied by 2 hour games = 516 games hours. Divide league expenses by 516 = about $38.75 per game hour.

So the question remains did anyone happen to ask the HS coed league coaches if they would rather play in Seattle on Sundays for much less money? That question should have been asked and if enough people were looking out for youth it would have been. This is basically another example of youth paying the price literally and figuratively for being aligned with an adult organization. If youth truly had field priority or its own organization this would not have happend.

Has anyone asked HS coed about this upcoming year? Frankly there probably won't be enough field space at Magnuson on Saturdays for MS let alone HS. (As scheduler of MS last year I had to bump Whitman, Salmon Day and Mercer from the weekend league because there was not enough Saturday field space) And seeing how HS coed is more of a introduction/beginners league, it really shouldn't be so inaccessible to so many kids in Seattle that we are trying to reach.  And for the love of god whoever is organizing ES league this spring put it at Magnuson on Friday nights and bump the adult league. (This would be a great time for any coaches who have players (current or former) that participate in HS coed to pipe up.

That's all I got. The Husky game on TV is almost over and I have better things to do.

-Mike

These look like well thought out ideas and are ideally suited to share with staff and those who organize/run those events.  In fact, staffers are hired to make these kinds of decisions.

If, however, you're regularly not getting what you want out of these decisions, then yes, maybe the board should consider a policy guideline for staff to implement.  Still, this strikes me as deep into the weeds and just not the kind of conversation the board usually has the time or the expertise step into. 

Bottom line:  consult organizers, consult staff; if this doesn’t work, go up one level.  I know I never heard about this until recently.

-barney

weeznation wrote:

Examples of what youth priority on fields would mean and why it is important.

Example #1: Basics of Field Costs
Field costs in Seattle Parks, King County Parks, and Shoreline Parks:
Seattle Parks: Youth Games $5 per hour; Adult Games $40 per hour
Shoreline: Youth Games $4.25 grass/ $20.75 per hour sythetic per hour. Adult $30 grass, $67 sythetic per hour game.
King County (Marymoor) Youth grass: $12 per hour, youth synthetic $45 per hour. Adult grass $20 per hour, synthetic $45 (same as adult)

(By the way youth camps do indeed pay the $25-$55 dollars per hour for our fields)

With just this information it is blatantly obvious to anyone that youth should always be playing in Seattle for $5 per hour on any surface. That should be enough to win the argument. Links to parks cost I used:
http://www.metrokc.gov/parks/fees/
http://www.cityofshoreline.com/parks/in … /index.cfm
http://www.seattle.gov/parks/reservatio … /field.htm

Eample #2: Summer 2007 YCC versus Adult Leagues at Magnuson on Monday Nights
If anyone at DiscNW says there are no occassions when youth didn't get fields because of adult, they are not correct. In the summer of 2007 the DiscNW YCC teams were sent by DiscNW out to Marymoor becasue there were no fields available in Seattle at Magnuson. The reason YCC couldn't be at Magnuson was because DiscNW put Summer Master's Hat, Summer Mens Hat, and Summer Womens Hat. These leagues were somewhat directed by or had the participation of several board members. (Including you Barney). Thanks for supporting youth there by forcing us out to Marymoor at $45 per hour instead of the $5 per hour the kids should have been paying in Seattle. And nice of you to increase the charges to the 2008 YCC kids to pay for the loss in 2007. Luckily the DiscNW adults saved $15 per hour and didn't have to drive out to Redmond. And yes, I have been angry about this since then seeing how I was one of the YCC coaches. (Shout out to Frank Nam who soldiered through a blown out knee to still go to Minnesota with YCC as the GM - very impressive)

Example # 3: Did anyone ask the 2007 HS Coed coaches if they would rather be at Magnuson on Sundays than at Marymoor on Saturdays?
(This one is complicated and frankly my skills at trying to explain it are not that strong. If any of you math people want a shot at this please do so.)
My formula (no playoffs for any league are part of these calculations):
2007 MS Coed League - Magnuson Saturdays
28 teams playing 8 games each = 224 total games. Divide total games by 2 because 2 teams on same field = 112 ultimate fields. 112 ultimate fields time 75 minutes = 140 game hours. Divide the league expenses by that amount and you have an average of about $5.70 per hour of expenses per game field.

2007 HS Coed League - Marymoor Saturdays
19 teams times 8 games = 152 games divided by two = 76 ultiamte fields times 90 minute games = 114 game hours. Divide the league expenses by that amount and you have an average of about $42.50 per hour of expenses per game field.

2007 Adult Spring League - Sundays at Magnuson
43 teams times 12 games = 516 games divided by 2 and multiplied by 2 hour games = 516 games hours. Divide league expenses by 516 = about $38.75 per game hour.

So the question remains did anyone happen to ask the HS coed league coaches if they would rather play in Seattle on Sundays for much less money? That question should have been asked and if enough people were looking out for youth it would have been. This is basically another example of youth paying the price literally and figuratively for being aligned with an adult organization. If youth truly had field priority or its own organization this would not have happend.

Has anyone asked HS coed about this upcoming year? Frankly there probably won't be enough field space at Magnuson on Saturdays for MS let alone HS. (As scheduler of MS last year I had to bump Whitman, Salmon Day and Mercer from the weekend league because there was not enough Saturday field space) And seeing how HS coed is more of a introduction/beginners league, it really shouldn't be so inaccessible to so many kids in Seattle that we are trying to reach.  And for the love of god whoever is organizing ES league this spring put it at Magnuson on Friday nights and bump the adult league. (This would be a great time for any coaches who have players (current or former) that participate in HS coed to pipe up.

That's all I got. The Husky game on TV is almost over and I have better things to do.

-Mike

Dear Mike,
Rusty's point was simply to suggest that staff expansion is not keeping up with program expansion, as might be the case with the UPA.  To the contrary, DiscNW staff has indeed expand considerably, and your additional comments seem to support my point further.

About that board meeting you attended - there were no printed handouts according to my records, my memory or the circulated agenda.  I read everything and am typically one of the most prepared in the room.  You were allotted fifteen minutes, took about 35, and if the particular point of field priority came up, it was lost in the more notable points of your speech, which were captured in the minutes as follows: 

“State of Youth Ultimate: Mike Mullen (guest)
Mike gave a summary of the state of Youth Ultimate and the YC position. Youth
Ultimate needs to grow and expand or decline. Mike feels like it is not growing like it
should be, that we are in a position to be able to expand and we are not taking the best
advantage of this opportunity. In regards to the YC position, Mike believes that we need
“growers” instead of managers. Setting some specific goals instead of being vague with
the job description would be more beneficial for growing the youth program. Ownership
of the Youth camps and the YC job position need to be discussed further.
Action Items:
Mike M. and William to discuss the next steps about how to realign the leadership of
the Youth committee.
Come up with a 3-5 year and a 10-year plan as to where we want Youth to go. This
will help set the direction."


Two months later, DiscNW hired a full time youth operations director.
We should let folks know that two years earlier, you asked for a half time youth program coordinator, and we hired one.

weeznation wrote:

Barney,

I'm flabbergasted by your responses. In your point to Rusty you talk about more staff. I count anyne who gets paid to work for DiscNW as staff. The camps alone paid out more than $46,000 to counselors and organizers. Plus the camp made enough profit to pay most of the youth director's salary. Next in line for staffing pay would probably be YCC with more than $5000 in pay. Back to your point. You seem to be saying "Look what DiscNW has done. This shows we know what we are doing." In fact all you are doing is taking credit for what the people who are arguing against you have done because they had the foresight, experience, and talent to make it camps and YCC happen. Those same people are using that same foresight to argue for a youth only board, separate financials, and youth priority for fields to keep youth in DiscNW.

You also said this: "Bottom line:  consult organizers, consult staff; if this doesn’t work, go up one level.  I know I never heard about this until recently." You are kidding right? We have been saying this stuff in various forms again, again, and again. It all comes down to the same argument of the DiscNW systems for youth are broken. Last year I wrote this down for the board and was invited to a board meeting to discuss. I got there and had to explain what I already written because many on the board didn't read it. I put it in writing in April in detail and sent it to the board first. The boards' response was to hire a youth coordinator who is very capable but give her a very poorly thought out job description that hamstrings her.

Yup, I don't want to be involved in this one.  Like I said, it's for sure a staff issue as well as a great topic for the summit.

weeznation wrote:

Bottom line. If you don't understand the argument you probably shouldn't be involved in it. The quality of your particular dialogue is not good.

Last edited by barney (2008-09-29 11:56 pm)

Barney,

Again your facts are a off. It was July 2007 that I e-mailed the board through the youth board person. (I'll send you a copy) It was Oct 15 that I met with the board. You actually hired a full time youth person in late June or early July. That is certainly not two months. In April I submitted "The Future of Seattle Youth Ultimate" which does not ask for a full time ED. I asked to take youth out of DiscNW.

If there are operations people on the board it is not an oversight board. You can't have it both ways. Again, I'm not arguing against an operations board. And I'm confident that Potlatch is straightened out...as I already said.

You said, "Furthermore, the youth program as a whole isn’t saving much of any money at all once you fully account for staff time, which we think is under reported, and account for a reasonable portion of fixed over head." We were up $27,000 in 2007 and it should have been more if you account for youth having to leave Seattle (YCC and HS coed). You mention the great financial system at DiscNW yet there is no way to fully account for staff time? What the hell is the tax for? Again... mystifying.

My argument still stands that we can make youth pay for itself whether it is in DiscNW or not. If we are in DiscNW we want separate financials to prove it. Tell us what part of the Ed's and the youth coordinators job we are responsible for and we will pay our share though we will demand strong service.

"DiscNW has about $100k in the bank, which has come from some 15 years of savings, mostly profits from adult spring league as I understand it." What about the $27K from youth in 2007. You mention that youth wasn't paying a share but then you say it is mostly profits from adult spring league. Where is your accounting system? How can you separate the money if it is all held on the same account?

You said, "This includes paying the Asa Mercer team’s housing costs for their trip to Vancouver this summer." Where did the money come from and how quick were you to support this trip or even summer outreach?

I got to go to work. Honestly I can't figure your arguments. Theoretical and practical are not matching up.

-Mike