[SBU Board] Our Contribution to Seattle NextGenBridge

Sun Apr 17 22:47:03 PDT 2016

I have very strong feelings about this - we voted as a board to give money
to members of Seattle Next Gen Bridge under specific terms at the March SBU
meeting. For your reference, here is a quote from our meeting minutes:
Seattle NextGenBridge

Ann Farmer came to the meeting to request that we fund this organization to
send six kids to Washington DC for the youth NABC. The total cost is $10k,
she is getting $2.5k from the ACBL educational foundation, and would like
the SBU to match that donation.

The organization has 20 kids.They have experienced about a 50% attrition
rate over the school year.

Motion 16-6: Tim moved that we set aside $1000 as follows:

   -

   We will write a check to the winning team of the spring end of year
   tournament for $250.
   -

   We will fund up to $750 to be paid directly to the families of kids on
   the basis of financial need, to subsidize the trip to the 2016 summer NABC.
   If there is less than $750 of need, the additional money will not be
   provided.

David seconded, motion passed unopposed.

This is not open to interpretation, discussion, or negotiation. As I see
it, the board has voted to give money as specified in Motion 16-6. If we
want to change this allocation, it would be appropriate to follow our
processes: meet with quorum (in person or via email/telecon), propose and
second a motion, and vote upon that motion. It is counter to the
methodical, transparent way we run our organization to work outside this
process to completely overhaul the Seattle Next Gen Bridge funding that we
voted on.

At the April meeting, we discussed the specifics of how the need-based
funding would be distributed, as is captured in the meeting minutes
excerpted below:

Seattle Next-Gen Bridge

The unit will give $125 checks to each of the two players on the winning
pair. We will get giant novelty checks for the presentation ceremony.

We discussed how the $750 need-based money will be distributed. John
Weinberg, Patti, and Ann Romeo will push the Seattle Next-Gen Bridge board
to create a process for applying for the scholarships. John, Patti, and Ann
Romeo will be the ones who determine to whom the money will go, in what
amounts.

This does not change anything about our method or quantity of funding - it
simply clarifies how to select as recipients from all candidates
identifying themselves as having financial need.

I am wholly against giving money to Seattle Next Gen Bridge in any other
allocation than that specified in Motion 16-6. And I strongly believe that
we need to follow our units process in making changes of this magnitude.

-Jen

On Sun, Apr 17, 2016 at 9:54 PM, Tim White <trkwhite at gmail.com> wrote:

> Fellow Board Members,
>
> Thank you to everyone who has weighed in on this.  There was further
> discussion amongst some of us this evening during tear down at Bothell.  I
> share the view that the intended recipient's apparent inability to grasp --
> and apparent reluctance to implement -- the concept we approved (including
> a single overall winning pair) is unfortunate.  We've learned something
> from this experience.  Down the road, if and when we consider and act on
> another grant request from SNGB, I feel we should put the elements and
> associated conditions of the grant in writing, including measures to ensure
> its implementation as approved.
>
> Presently, given constraints of timing and (un)availabilities, it is
> impractical to convene the Unit Board to consider an alternative
> proposal that might be solicited from SNGB in connection with the May 6
> event, and might or might not ever come our way.  SNGB asked us for $2,500
> for travel support.  The particulars of the grant the Unit Board approved
> were formulated by us, not SNGB, and I doubt we would get something much
> different or in any additional detail -- if at all -- from what we were
> given before.
>
> A majority of Unit Board members are supportive of the concept John
> Weinberg worked out with Anne Farmer.  Unit Board members, Ann and Patti,
> will make the presentation directly to the winners on May 6 on behalf of
> Seattle Unit 446.  The amount is set (capped) at $400, below the maximum
> $250 + $750 we were prepared to fund.  It is in the vein of our objective
> of supporting youth bridge.
>
> I have given John W the green light to proceed with implementation of the
> concept he has coordinated.  I feel it is within the general nature and
> level of financial commitment of the grant we approved and the only
> practical approach to supporting the SNGB May 6 year-end event.  I believe
> it makes the best of the situation at hand.
>
> Tim
>
>
>
> On Apr 17, 2016, at 1:34 PM, "JC (TsuKata)" <tsukata at tsukata.org> wrote:
>
> I mostly want to +1 on Kim's comments.  While there is nothing in this
> compromise that I would not have voted to approve had it been presented
> this clearly and succinctly at the initial meeting, I am concerned about
> the precedent and practice of how this has happened.  Part of the reason we
> put so many controls on the funding is that Anne Farmer has a history of
> re-allocating the board's funding without communication and because the
> initial proposal we got from Anne was so unclear.
>
> That having been said, it is entirely reasonable for NextGenBridge to come
> back with an alternate proposal for a vote given logistics and/or improved
> information, but we're now without a meeting to do that motion and handle
> it in the way we need to do via by-laws, right?  Don't we have to have an
> in person meeting and quorum to approve this or do the by-laws allow for us
> to have an adjunct via email?
>
> If we can't handle this properly within our by-laws, I think we need to
> stick with the dollar amounts we allocated.  We can contribute the amount
> allocated for an award, which Anne and/or NGB can add to as they see fit to
> get to the awards Anne intends to distribute and/or add to the awards that
> Anne wants to distribute.  We can contribute the amount allocated for
> need-based travel expenses.
>
> Thanks,
> JC
>
>
> On Sun, Apr 17, 2016 at 2:50 PM, Eng, Kim <Keng at forestridge.org> wrote:
>
>> I have to admit I am a little confused. I am not clear why we as a board
>> vote on a proposal and agree what we want to do, and then Anne decides that
>> she wants to do something different. And we let her.
>>
>>
>>
>> This is bridge. There aren’t 4 winners. There are 2.
>>
>>
>>
>> To be clear, I am sorry John, that you and the others on the next gen
>> board have to deal with this craziness. But, how are we going to stop the
>> craziness if we let it happen?
>>
>>
>>
>> As a matter of policy, I am uncomfortable with the board approving one
>> number and then a subset of members agreeing to a different number. This is
>> true no matter what the money is going to.
>>
>>
>>
>> Does this mean that we are only offering $600 as a financial scholarship
>> instead of $750? I get that Anne thinks there is only one family that may
>> need it this year. What about the following years?
>>
>>
>>
>> I would much prefer giving Seattle Unit money to kids in need and not
>> pretending that there are 4 winners.
>>
>>
>>
>> Clearly I’m frustrated. Probably not half as frustrated as you were,
>> John, during the phone call.
>>
>>
>>
>> Kim
>>
>>
>>
>> *From:* Sbuboard [mailto:sbuboard-bounces+kimen=
>> forestridge.org at mailman.celestial.com] *On Behalf Of *John
>> *Sent:* Saturday, April 16, 2016 2:34 PM
>> *To:* Seattle ACBL Unit Board <sbuboard at mailman.celestial.com>
>> *Subject:* [SBU Board] Our Contribution to Seattle NextGenBridge
>>
>>
>>
>> Greetings, all!
>>
>>
>>
>> As we decided at our board meeting this week, I called Anne Farmer to
>> work out the details for our contribution to the kids in her group.
>>
>> As always seems to be the case in this relationship, things did not go
>> entirely smoothly or as expected.
>>
>> But I think we have worked out a resolution which will satisfy just about
>> everybody.
>>
>>
>>
>> As you recall, Anne is running the end-of-season tournament for her kids
>> on May 6.
>>
>> Our intention was to give $125 cash to each member of the winning pair.
>>
>>
>>
>> Her organization is also taking some of the kids in the group to the
>> Youth NABCs in Washington D.C.
>>
>> We offered to pay up to $750 total to kids who could demonstrate to our
>> satisfaction that they needed the subsidy.
>>
>>
>>
>> Here is what has developed since then.
>>
>> At the tournament May 6, there will be four winners – a North-South pair,
>> and an East-West pair.
>>
>> Also, Anne wants to award an Amazon gift card of $100 to each of the
>> winners.
>>
>>
>>
>> As to travel to D.C., she expects a total of four kids to go, all from
>> the McClure Middle School.
>>
>> Of those, she thinks three of the families are financially
>> self-sufficient; and only one kid needs a partial subsidy to be able to go.
>>
>> Anne says she is prepared to pay that subsidy herself (or maybe it is
>> Seattle NextGenBridge money).
>>
>>
>>
>> She and I discussed it (at some length!); and here is what we worked out,
>> subject to your approval.
>>
>> We propose that the Unit buy the four Amazon gift cards, for a total of
>> $400.
>>
>> Patti, or Ann Romeo, will be present at the tournament, and will award
>> those prizes to the four winners, on behalf of the Unit.
>>
>> Travel subsidies will be totally up to Anne Farmer and NextGenBridge.
>>
>>
>>
>> I have discussed this proposed resolution with Tim, and with Patti and
>> Ann Romeo.
>>
>> Patti, Ann and I are the members of our Unit board who are also members
>> of the board of Seattle NextGenBridge.
>>
>> The four of this are agreeable to this resolution – although I think all
>> of us are a little frustrated as to the bumpy road which led to it.
>>
>>
>>
>> The purpose of this e-mail is to see if any of the other members of the
>> Unit board object to this resolution.
>>
>> If so, please “reply to all” this weekend.
>>
>> But if I don’t hear any prompt objections from anyone, I will let Anne
>> know that this will be the arrangement.
>>
>>
>>
>> Thanks!
>>
>>
>>
>> John W.
>>
>>
>>
>> Sent from Mail <https://go.microsoft.com/fwlink/?LinkId=550986> for
>> Windows 10
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Sbuboard mailing list
>> Sbuboard at mailman.celestial.com
>> http://mailman.celestial.com/mailman/listinfo/sbuboard
>>
>>
> _______________________________________________
> Sbuboard mailing list
> Sbuboard at mailman.celestial.com
> http://mailman.celestial.com/mailman/listinfo/sbuboard
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Sbuboard mailing list
> Sbuboard at mailman.celestial.com
> http://mailman.celestial.com/mailman/listinfo/sbuboard
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.celestial.com/pipermail/sbuboard/attachments/20160417/9fa415fc/attachment-0001.html>