Minutes from Board Meeting on May 7, 2009
Mary Cooperman, Bonnie Strittmatter, Jay Chu, Chuck Katter, David Blansfield, Steph Belleveau, Jeanne Bowles, Chris Gannon, Adrienne Williams, Barbara Wiederecht, Ellen Johnston
Approval of Minutes
The minutes from the April 2nd meeting were approved.
The books are up to date and people who are low on funds in their accounts are being billed so that the Long Course meets will be covered. Chris is also up to date on caps although she reports that we still have a big inventory.
New Swimmers: There are four new swimmers on the team. As has been the practice in the past, the Board agreed that they should be billed a $50 PET-WRAT fee and new accounts will be set up for them.
Sr. Spring Invitational: The meet is full. There is still some paperwork to complete, i.e. insurance certificates, etc. but Ellen is nearly ready to send the timing and meet information to participating teams. There was some discussion about the availability of the 50-meter cable for the timing system. We rent this piece of equipment but Ellen will check into the costs of getting our own. And, because we are currently having issues with our own scoreboard, she will also look for a less expensive, local repair alternative to the Colorado Timing technicians.
YNats: All receipts have been turned in except one, which she is still waiting for.
LC Invitational: The meet is oversubscribed and Ellen will cut teams and inform them. She is still waiting for the contract from Wesleyan. There is no meet manager so the board discussed getting different Sr. and AG parents to manage their own sessions.
Meet Schedule: Ellen is still waiting to get confirmation from Cheshire on the June 20-21 meet. She is confident we’ll get in the meet. A CSSL meet v. Shelton is being arranged for June 2 and she anticipates additional CSSL meets.
Practice Coverage: Ellen is working with coaches at all age groups, focusing on stroke technique and skills.
Nominating Committee Report
Adrienne is almost done filling the positions. She still needs a YNats coordinator but wasn’t concerned (and Barbara said she’d do it if need be.) Adrienne used the point structure that is currently in place. The Board needs to decide if any points changes will be made.
Steph assigned timing slots to those families who had not done their zero-point timing. She reported that there were four families that have no points but are no longer swimming and 29 others who have no volunteer points. The board decided that they will be billed at the end of Long Course. (And the families who have already left will NOT get their money back.)
There was discussion about whether we have too many timer slots for the SSI and not enough people for the other jobs. It was decided to fill the jobs and worry about the points later. Some jobs (and points) may need to be changed. One example is program sales. We don’t need a specific person/points for that. Someone on deck can run up and sell the programs.
The Board discussed the wording of the Meet Coordinator with respect to how much he/she will be responsible for the budget. It was decided that the wording would be changed to say that the Meet Coordinator will ensure that meets are run within budget. This change is considered a “friendly amendment” and the Board approved the bylaws as redone.
April was uneventful (Overall Jay reports a $1658 net expense. Income from YNat swimmer fees, caps and the pancake breakfast were offset by short course coaches gifts, YNat expenses, web design and the 60th Anniversary party.) YTD net income is $25,492 vs. a budget of $35,750, resulting in a negative variance of $10,257.
Jay reports a few budget lines trending lower with regard to expenses (such as the end of year Pet-Wrat fee payout.) He still needs to finish reconciling YNats and banquet expenses and he’ll have a better sense of where we are overall for the year next month after we’ve had two meets.
Recognition Night: Very successful. However, a number of parents dropped their children off. Next year we need to be more explicit regarding appropriate supervision.
60th Anniversary: Well attended, great food, and everyone enjoyed it. With donations the actual cost (about $1700) came in much, much lower than expected. The catering fees were also a bargain.
New Parent Orientation: The Board discussed a fall orientation plan. We all agreed that we still need an Expo (Barbara needs to connect with officials, the PET-WRAT Coordinator will need to assign timing slots, etc.) The tentative date is Sept. 13th. We also should have a mock meet for NEW parents. Experienced parents will teach new parents who can try out a couple of jobs. The Board decided the parent reps will organize this. The current reps will meet with the incoming reps over the summer to discuss. The mock meet will tentatively be held in early October.
The Website: Bonnie discussed the history of expenses from the start of the project last year up through the current bill from the web designer. The Board agreed that the site is terrific and we should pay the web designer all he is owed. However, the original plan was for the PC to contribute toward the cost of widening the Y site to make it like ours. Bonnie will discuss this with Dave and most likely we will hold off on gifting money to the Y for this purpose. This money can go toward the web designer’s bill. However, Chuck stressed that in the future on a big project like this we need to be more careful and more focused on costs.
The Board also agreed that there would be no additional changes to the site at this time but will consider putting $3000 in next year’s budget for website changes and tweaks. Jay will report how the money can best be incorporated while still maintaining a balanced budget. Mary will create a photo gallery via SmugMug, which will also save on design costs.
YNats Funding: Bonnie reviewed past costs and fundraising proceeds. Currently, the proceeds of the Senior Spring Invitational, the Pancake Breakfast, the car wash, goodie bag sales, bake sales and apparel sales, typically run primarily by YNats parents, are earmarked for the support of the team. Whatever is raised is divided equally among the swimmers on the team. This approach can lead to unpredictable and potentially inequitable amounts donated, depended on the amount of fundraising and the number of swimmers on the team. Bonnie suggested we make our contribution policy more concrete from year to year (for example, the PC will contribute a set amount per swimmer.) The Board did not make a decision and will come back to this issue when we do the budget.
The next meeting will be June 4, 2009.