|
Post by schlager7 on Oct 20, 2003 22:11:14 GMT -6
From Gulf Coast Division Chair Andrey Geva:
To members of the Gulf Coast Division,
It has come to my attention that there are some misunderstandings regarding the division's policies and how they have been carried out. I would like to call a general membership meeting in order to clear up these misunderstandings as well as allow the membership to bring any other questions they may have to me at that time.
The meeting will cover the recent letter from the division to Bayou City Fencing Academy, questions raised regarding the minutes of the executive committee meetings posted, and policies regarding the future scheduling of tournaments.
The meeting will be held at the 2003 Katy Blades Invitational SSCC tournament at :
Bellaire Rec Center 5125 Laurel Bellaire, TX 77401 (713) 662-8286
on Sunday, Nov.16, at 2.30PM.
Best regards,
Andrey Geva 713-3017934 cell
|
|
|
Post by Passing Through on Oct 22, 2003 6:15:34 GMT -6
I'd like to believe this will lead to something good, but I'm cynical. Still, I should be knocked out of my DEs by then, so I'll take a gander.
It should be interesting to at least hear someone give a reason why the quals are going to be at Salle Mauro (home of mini-piste) AGAIN.
Then, too, after all this time, would it really even feel like a qualifying tournament WITHOUT a blade going through an overhead flourescent light?
It's actually not all THAT bad (mebbe), but isn't it SOMEONE else's turn?
|
|
|
Post by schlager7 on Oct 26, 2003 20:38:20 GMT -6
I have held off on posting this, but since Gulf Coast Division Chair Andrey Geva's call for a meeting of the membership specifically refers to it, I now reproduce the letter sent to Louise Lepie by Mr. Geva:
October 15, 2003
Louise Lepie Bayou City Fencing Academy 4826 Braesvalley Houston, TX 77096
Dear Ms. Louise Lepie:
It has come to the attention of the division officers that you have scheduled a tournament on Oct. 18-19. We were surprised to learn of this tournament since it was not on our schedule or the schedule we submitted to the Southwest Section. This tournament causes concern for the division officers for several reasons. The first is the scheduling of the tournament itself. The Gulf Coast Division requested all clubs submit their tournament schedule over the summer in order to work out possible conflicts before the start of the season. You did not respond at this time. On Aug. 18, the division schedule was posted to the Gulf Coast Division discussion board. After that time, you had a flier sent out with a Southwest Sectional mailing publicizing a youth tournament on the same dates as a youth tournament hosted by another club in the division. The officers of the division feel that you should have responded to the original request for tournament submissions in order to have allowed us to include your tournament on the division and sectional schedules as well as resolve this conflict.
The second point that needs to be discussed is the name of your tournament. The Southwest Section started a series of tournaments several years ago called the Regional Youth Circuit (RYC). These tournaments were so successful, that they have been nationalized and are being used to qualify young fencers for national tournaments. By naming your tournament a Regional Youth Tournament, we feel that you are trying to unfairly capitalize on the success of the RYC and risk confusing parents and youths as to whether this is a qualifying tournament. We would like to see this situation avoided in the future.
Finally, by the by-laws of the division, the division chair is required to serve as the chair of any tournament held within the division. While this duty is often performed by a proxy, by scheduling your tournament on the same dates as another divisional tournament, you force me to make a decision as to which tournament I should attend. Again, had you responded to the original request for tournament dates, we could have resolved this in advance of the season.
The officers of the division plan on taking the following steps in regards to this situation. First, a division meeting will be scheduled to discuss the responsibilities of the member clubs in working with the officers. Second, we will not be sending an officer to your tournament. This means that ratings will not be verified according to USFA procedures. Finally, we will not provide this tournament with any divisional equipment, bout committee or referees, or publicity.
In the future, we would like to be able to work with all clubs in the division regarding the scheduling of tournaments. We feel that there needs to be a more cohesive attitude in the division and more teamwork. We feel your club has much to offer the division and would like to work with you in the scheduling of further tournaments.
Sincerely,
Andrey Geva Chairman Gulf Coast Division
CC: USFA National Office Tournament Director Southwest Section of the USFA Officers Southwest Section USFA Division Officers Regional Youth Circuit Organizer Gulf Coast Division Club Contacts
|
|
|
Post by schlager7 on Oct 26, 2003 23:10:10 GMT -6
Since "the letter", this has been sent to the officers of the division:
To: Officers of the Gulf Coast Division From: Louise Lepie, Bayou City Fencing Academy Date:24 October 2003 Re:proof of charges
Dear Chairman Geva et. al.
We at Bayou City Fencing Academy have been accused of scheduling a tournaments in past years, on the same day as the Southwest Section Circuit Cup Competitions, specifically last year during the Crescent City Open in New Orleans. Additionally you have accused us of drawing directors from that tournament to work our tournament. Neither is true.
As a result of these false accusations (which we at Bayou City were never given an opportunity to address, deny, defend or discuss) Bayou City Fencing Academy has been sanctioned and denied the opportunity to be considered to host the Houston area Southwest Section Circuit Cup Tournament.
This false accusation, and subsequent sanction is not only unjust, and was certainly handled in an unfair manner, but denied us a great opportunity to serve the section. Secondly it has tarnished our reputation throughout the section. We see this as a very serious circumstance.
It affects our business, the integrity of the section and tarnishes our sport.
Pursuant to the above, we are requesting proof of the above mentioned accusations. We request any and all documentation leading to our being sanctioned. Additionally, we request a list of any directors we used at any time, in any of our tournaments, that prevented directors from working SSCC tournaments. Finally, we request a list of those people who communicated to section officers or division officers these false accusations. We request these in writing to the address below on or before October 28, 2003.
Thank you for your service.
Regards, Louise Lepie Bayou City Fencing Academy 4826 Braesvalley Houston, Texas 77096
|
|
|
Post by schlager7 on Oct 27, 2003 0:46:35 GMT -6
This was intended as a private communique from yours truly to the other division officers after receiving "the letter" prior to it being sent to BCFA. Since the letter now has taken on a position as a main focus of the upcoming meeting, I now reprint my letter of dissent of October 15th.
As I said, this was intended to be a private communique. I apologize in advance if it offends anyone reading it.
Andrey:
I have read the letter and, personally, think it is a bad idea.
The actions you described by the Bayou City Fencing Academy do, indeed, appear to be a deliberate maneuver to schedule a similar tournament opposite one by Salle Mauro. This was designed in part, no doubt, to get someone's attention. The letter confirms the maneuver's success in its intent.
It is also obvious that by naming the tournament a "Regional Youth Tournament" it deliberately compares itself to a "Regional Youth Circuit" tournament. I have difficulty, though, believing anyone with an IQ over 70 would not see through this. I cannot and do not believe the intent was deception (if it was, it failed) but to throw down a gauntlet (which your letter picks up).
I remain convinced that sending this letter will only encourage similar situations and deepen the schisms already running rampant throughout our division.
We have experienced a number of small successes in re-integrating a fractured and "Balkanized" division into a semi-cohesive community. There is every indication that Augie's concept of the Gulf Coast Divisional Circuit is working toward this end. I believe I had some small success in disseminating news of upcoming tournaments from all clubs to all clubs. Louise, herself, has aided this cause with her "First Friday" free fencing nights, which encourage all fencers to come together and fence, regardless of club affiliations, for free. Of late, Andrey has given us (for the first time in half a decade) a Division Chair that is reading the by-laws of the Gulf Coast Division.
Now seems a poor time to get into a snit over one conflicted weekend. In truth, not very long ago, there were OFTEN tournaments scheduled in conflict with each other, but the knowledge of the events so poorly passed on that both events occurred in complete ignorance of the other.
There is also one paragraph which assumes a position I find virtually indefensible. To quote:
"Finally, by the by-laws of the division, the division chair is required to serve as the chair of any tournament held within the division. While this duty is often performed by a proxy, by scheduling your tournament on the same dates as another divisional tournament, you force me to make a decision as to which tournament I should attend. "
For the last several years this duty has most assuredly not only not been performed, either by officer or by proxy, but has been completely ignored by the chair and sole executive officer for the three years preceding the last season. For all intents and purposes, the Gulf Coast Division created a precedent of neglect of this duty. I have attended a number of local tournaments since 1995.
No officer or officer's proxy attended any of the tournaments I attended until I found myself assuming Michael Mergens post as Acting Vice-Chair in 2002. It would appear that the Gulf Coast Division's neglect of this function was carried to such an extent that I am not certain that it could not be argued that it virtually abdicated that authority in 1999 or 2000.
I agree that we need to return to the by-laws and begin living up to our duties and obligations, but this looks like we are simply picking and choosing which obligations/authority to exercise. To pick this particular point upon which to exercise our "authority" (one which we have ignored for half a decade).
I think we serve our constituent fencers and fencing clubs far better if we just let it go, without comment. We have better ways to expend our resources and efforts.
Please consider this wordy reply a vote against sending the letter.
With best wishes, even in dissent,
John Trojanowski
|
|
|
Post by Inigo Montoya on Nov 17, 2003 10:59:46 GMT -6
I only caught part of it since I was fencing. I did peek in twice. The first time things were getting REAL heated, but the second time it was just everyone debating/working out different systems for holding/administering Div qualifiers and how to divide proceeds after expenses. Pretty civil at the end.
|
|
|
Post by Fencingfodder on Dec 12, 2003 9:31:05 GMT -6
Civil...only because one of the King's Men stood, confronted them, shamed them, and put them in their place...so to speak. Without that intervention, swords would still be rattling.
|
|