May 8, 2006 Executive Committee Minutes

The meeting was called to order at 7:13 PM by Chairman Louise Lepie at the Houston Athletic Fencing Center at 4997 West Bellfort, Houston. Other Officers present were Vice Chairman Jerry Dunaway, Secretary Matt Delevoryas, and Treasurer Rachel El-Saleh.

A member moved to accept the draft minutes of the previous (March 8) meeting, as they had appeared on the Division Web site. The motion passed without objection.

The Treasurer reported that there had been significant financial activity since the last meeting of the Executive Committee when a report was given (March 8^th), related to the Division's 2006 qualifier tournament for Summer Nationals. Total tournament expenses had been $1,664.29, of which $124.50 was for referees and other officials' lunches, $862.50 was for referees, Rachel El-Saleh and Jerry Dunaway both waived any reimbursement for tournament services, armorer was $150, trainer was $75 for each of the two days, Terry Harkey's hotel bill was $277.29, and Terry Harkey was paid with a $100 charity donation for administrative services. The net profit was $1,550.71, of which a 50% share would be $775.35 and a half cent. Financial settlement between the Division and the host club had yet to occur. The bank statement showed $3,658.81 in the checking account, but the actual amount at the time of the meeting should have been $60 more than at the time of the statement. As yet, no money had been received from Texas A&M University Fencing Club for the Division's share of the profit from the 2005 Divisionals.

Matt Delevoryas, Chairman of the Equipment Committee, reported on the state of the equipment. He reported:

The two main strip scoring equipment sets are in good shape with one previously repaired item still pending reimbursement (item 2), one previously reported problem which has been corrected (item 3), six previously reported significant exceptions (items 1, 4-8), and one old and not urgent exception (item 9). No action by the Executive Committee is needed for progress on any of these matters except for the one which is old and not urgent (item 9).

1) The floor cords are still missing for the "red set" and still being substituted for by a better floor cord set owned by Texas A&M University Fencing Club. A previous meeting has authorized purchase of replacements for the Division cords. I have not yet exhausted the final resources in attempting to locate the lost cords, but it now seems beyond the point of diminishing returns. I anticipate replacing the cords promptly and returning the substitute cords to TAMUFC shortly. I had expected dealing with this during September, but unusual events intervened, and time since then has passed faster than expected.

2) Exactly two of the 16 rubber feet of the Favero Millennium reels had been missing from their mounting holes, both from reel #1 of the "yellow set". A previous meeting authorized my purchase, and reimbursement from the reserved equipment fund, of replacements for the rubber feet. I purchased two replacement feet during January for $3.60, and installed them. Reimbursement has yet to be requested.

3) One of the floor cords lent by Texas A&M University Fencing Club for use with the "red set" did not return intact from Oz Parsons. The cords have Prieur three-prong connectors. The plastic block which forms the body broke into two pieces, and the smaller piece, along with the prong mounted in it, is missing. The missing piece was not found at the Oz. When I received the equipment back at the end of the Oz, I inventoried everything, but my check was not so detailed as to include counting the number of prongs at all eight floor cord connectors. The January meeting authorized my purchase, and reimbursement from the reserved equipment fund, of one Prieur three-prong connector for repair of the cord. However, in the meantime, Sword Masters donated one Prieur three-prong connector to the Division. The replacement has been installed.

4) Reel #1 of the "yellow set" has two spots on the cable where the outer insulation is worn through or simply broken. Both are near the connector. At this moment there is tip tape covering the flaws. I intend to evaluate the situation and decide between continuing to treat the symptom with tip tape, heat-shrink tubing, and/or flexible adhesives, and shortening the cable as necessary to eliminate the bad spots.

5) Reel #1 of the "yellow set" has a worn cable guide, so worn that the spring on the connector jams in the guide and rips free from the connector. It appears that the major source of wear to the guide is use of the reel with the hole aimed at a diagonal to the length of the strip. The January meeting authorized my purchase, and reimbursement from the reserved equipment fund, of one replacement cable guide for this reel. I purchased a replacement cable guide during January for $4.50, but have not yet installed it. Reimbursement has yet to be requested.

6) Reel #2 of the "red set" has a worn cable guide, so worn that the spring connector not only jammed in the guide and ripped free from the connector, but got swallowed up inside the reel! At the moment, the spring is safely stored at the innermost reaches of the cable. The January meeting authorized my purchase, and reimbursement from the reserved equipment fund, of one replacement cable guide for this reel. I purchased a replacement cable guide during January for $4.50, but have not yet installed it. Reimbursement has yet to be requested.

7) Reel #2 of the "red set" has one spot on the cable where the outer insulation is damaged, one of the individual wires is pulled part way out the gap, and part of its insulation has been stripped. This is almost one meter from the connector. I strongly suspect that this was caused by the pulled-free spring jammed in the cable guide, or else caused by damage on the cable guide. I intend to evaluate the situation and decide between treating the symptom with tip tape, heat-shrink tubing, and/or flexible adhesives, and shortening the cable as necessary to eliminate the bad spots.

8) One of the floor cords for the "yellow set" has a basket on one of the prongs which is nearly destroyed by use. (As an aside, it should be noted that the equipment, as purchased, did not include Favero floor cords, but some off brand. The connectors on them are poor quality, and there have been chronic problems getting good connections with those connectors. And, these off-brand cables are the evidence I have the Texas A&M University Fencing Club actually did lose the cables from the "red set", because at 2004 SWIFA #1 A&M had one such cord in their possession, could not explain how they procured it, but did not have a second like it.) The January meeting authorized my purchase, and reimbursement from the reserved equipment fund, of one good three-prong connector to replace this entire connector (and keeping the replaced connector for replacement parts for the other three of the same type).

9) One of the latches for the plastic carrying case for the scoring box for the "yellow set" is snapped off. Some time ago, this broken latch got moved there, having originally been on a carrying case for reels (which are heavier and need intact latches more). It is also not clear whether the problem happened before or after the Division bought the equipment. (There is some circumstantial evidence that the equipment was used as rental equipment before the Division bought it.) I recommend taking no action at present, and the first action being researching whether replacement latches even exist.

There is no change in the status of the Escrime Technologies SG21V1 box.

The remote control units for the scoring boxes use 9 volt batteries. The January meeting authorized my purchase, and reimbursement from the reserved equipment fund, of replacement 9 volt batteries when needed, including having one replacement battery available with each remote control.

Since the March 8th Executive Committee meeting (the last at which a report was presented), the two main sets of equipment have been lent to the LOC for the Gold Blade Open (an SSCC tournament), to SHHSFT for Divisionals, to Academy of Fencing for Battle on the Bayou II, and to the LOC for Sectionals. They were requested by Salle Mauro for the April RYC, a philosophically appropriate loan, but the loan was denied for logistical reasons. They have not been requested for any other use, although CLFC may request them for its spring tournament in late May. They are subject to call, but have not yet been requested, for whatever tournament turns out to be the first SSCC tournament of 2006-2007.

Jerry Dunaway moved that, starting with the 2006-2007 fencing season, a trained medical person must be arranged for every qualifier tournament held under the authority of the Division. Discussion ensued. Louise Lepie moved to amend the motion, to add that there be a waiver and medical consent form put on the Division Web site by the Webmaster, and that, for all tournaments held under the authority of the Division, that waiver must be signed by the parent or guardian of a minor fencer and otherwise by the fencer, and that the signed forms be retained by the tournament organizer for one year. After discussion, the amendment passed. The main motion, as amended, passed.

The assembly discussed the current 50-50 profit (or loss) split policy between the Division and host clubs for the Division's two qualifier tournaments. Louise Lepie moved that starting with calendar year 2006, the split of the net profit or loss of a divisional qualifier be 70% for a host club and 30% for the Division. After discussion, the motion passed 2-1, with Jerry Dunaway recusing himself.

Louise Lepie related to the assembly some remarks made by USFA Board of Directors member Jerry Benson at the 2006 meeting of the Southwest Section. In particular, she mentioned competitor age limits and fencers being within the required age limits for competitions (a "competition" being a synonym for an "event", not for a "tournament" consisting of a collection of competitions). Jerry had said that there was not a policy of tournament organizers being able to hold competitions with arbitrarily young age limits, including so-called "Y8" competitions open to younger Y10 fencers and to fencers not even old enough to fence Y10. To hold such events would leave the status of coverage of that competition by USFA insurance in doubt, and leave in doubt whether the competition could have USFA sanction. But, the issue had arisen sufficiently recently that firm details were not available, and clarification of the status quo (if already unambiguous) or creation of an unambiguous status quo by the Board could be expected in the future. Jerry had also said that the Board was taking a dim view of events allowing fencers to participate who were younger than the age limit for that competition (in the absence of NRPS points in the next lower age group), and that as a standard policy any competition allowing underage fencers to participate would find USFA sanction revoked for the competition, with the consequential loss of any classifications which otherwise might be earned. The onus would be on the tournament organizers to determine the appropriateness of the fencers' ages. Matt Delevoryas reported that, notwithstanding some beliefs to the contrary, it would not be a trivial matter for a tournament organizer to determine the age of a USFA member from the USFA Web site, but instead such data would generally be available only to section and division officers, and, as such, the easiest way for a tournament in the Gulf Coast Texas Division to know of the adequacy of USFA fencers' ages would be to rely on the Division Secretary.

The assembly noted that at the beginning of 2005, it had created a logo contest with submission rules and a judging by the membership at the Annual Meeting. There were no submissions by the deadline, so no logo was selected. However, the assembly found merit in adopting some logo. The assembly examined a few draft logos. By general consent, it was resolved an approximate version of a Division logo was adopted and referred to the Webmaster for further graphical refinements to improve it.

Rachel El-Saleh moved to adjourn. The motion passed without objection. The meeting adjourned at 8:18 PM.