Motions

Board of Directors Meeting

Stratosphere Hotel, Dec. 17, 2006

            Board Members Present: Sheri Pittman (SP), Ed Hogshead (EH), Tim Boggan (TB), Robert Blackwell (RB), George Braithwaite (GB), Barney D. Reed (BR), Dell Sweeris (DS), Joseph Wells (JW), Ashu Jain (AJ), Whitney Ping (WP).
            Also Present (for a short or extended time): USATT Executive Director Doru Gheorghe; USATT Accounting Advisor Deborah Gray; USATT General Counsel Dennis Taylor; USA Table Tennis Editor, League and Club Programs Director Larry Hodges; USATT Nominating/Election Committee Chair Ed Mercier; Grant Misbach; Shashin Shodhan; Mitch Seidenfeld, Joseph Helfand; Willy Leparulo; David Del Vecchio; Kagin Lee, USATT Disabled Players Committee Co-Chair Jennifer Johnson, Jim Beckford, Andre Scott, Ken Ping.

Board Members Absent: Jiing Wang, Lily Yip, Khoa Nguyen.

At 9:00 a.m., President Pittman opened the Meeting by congratulating Tim Boggan on receiving the Mark Matthews Lifetime Achievement Award. She then congratulated the Board’s returning electees, Dr. Jiing Wang, Barney Reed, George Braithwaite, and our newly elected Treasurer Ed Hogshead; and gave thanks to Ed Mercier’s Nominating/Election Committee for doing outstanding work.
Given the USOC’s reduction in our spending, Sheri said the Board must take immediate steps to address the problems cited by the USOC. One of her two top priorities centers on High Performance activities, so she thanks us for approving Ross Brown’s nomination as Elite Athlete Committee Co-Chair. Her other priority is to urge a new spirit of Board cooperation. Harmony is also essential if we’re to work hand-in-glove with the USOC and the ITTF.
Today’s primary objective is to cooperatively approve the 2007 Budget.
More visitors than usual are present at this Meeting, and, as we have a heavy agenda and time frames are tight, Sheri asks that, unless someone from the outside has a pressing communication, he/she observe quietly.
Sheri would like Board members to wait until a presentation is concluded before raising a hand to be called on for comment. Everybody will be given a chance to speak. But everybody must be courteous—the key to moving on is Board teamwork.
Sheri expects that in the near future all Board members will have specific responsibilities—clearly defined roles that will link them to certain committees. We want to use our website to encourage greater transparency. In this regard, it’s important that the Nominating/Election Committee remain active.
At the beginning of 2007, Sheri and Doru will speak of proposed activities regarding state associations and marketing. The Chinese, recalling their Ping-Pong Diplomacy visit to the States in 1972, recognize 2007 as a 35th Anniversary year and this may impact upon us.
 
Nominating/Election Committee Chair Ed Mercier gave his Report. After detailing the votes those running for office individually received, Ed made the point that only 12% of USATT members eligible to vote did so. He speculates that the reasons for this poor turnout might be due to the compressed time frame for the election, and the fact that campaign statements were not included in the Association’s magazine. After the Board approved an e-mail election for the two Elite Athlete positions on the Board, Ed said ballots were sent out Dec. 3 and were to be returned by Dec. 24. Ed, Dennis Taylor, and Wendell Dillon will tally the results independently to insure a fair count. Ed thanked the Board for their confidence in him.

Grant Misbach, who’d finished second in the election for Treasurer, spoke to the Board. Table Tennis has given him many positive experiences—from allowing him to recuperate from a heart problem to meeting many good people from different backgrounds and cultures. He likes people to express themselves freely, and urges the Board to stress greater transparency, particularly in financial matters, and to practice strong ethics, particularly where there might be, as there always are in life, conflicts of interest. The Board has great responsibilities, said Grant—which meant challenges, but also opportunities.

Dell Sweeris gave his Foundation Report. Meetings, like the one just concluded here in Vegas (in which 6 of the 9 members were present), are held annually. In the last year, the Foundation has changed its method of investing to 2/3 equity, 1/3 fixed funds for a diversified portfolio. Neil Smyth and Carl Danner have offered helpful input. During the first half of 2006 the old investments didn’t do so well. But now, after the change, the returns are better, and the Foundation is able to issue an extra $9,450 to the USATT. The Foundation has a 2007 target of distributing 1% per quarter of the market value of assets at the end of the year. With about a $1,000,000 investment, that’s $10,000 per quarter for 2007.
The Foundation representative appreciates being a voting member of the USATT Board. The next step for the Foundation is to raise more funds—not just depend on investment results. In response to a question by Treasurer Hogshead, Dell made it clear that the Foundation is intent on holding 100% to the principal monies it has. Its charge is to guard the Foundation. Though mindful that the Association didn’t get the sponsorship money from a source it expected, Dell said that, since the Association has a considerable reserve, it won’t have to come to the Foundation—which is just as well, for the Board’s not to think of the Foundation as a source of funds.   

Elite Athlete representatives Whitney Ping and Ashu Jain reported that they’d held short but open meetings here in Vegas with Elite Athletes (some came, some who were also athlete-driven didn’t). All these athletes know funds are limited, but they want more direct communication with the Board. E-mail Meetings are needed, wanted. Our emphasis must be: Athletes first. Robert agreed. We have to seriously look after the athletes. Have to continually ask ourselves, “Are we doing the right thing by them?” We have to motivate the young to make sacrifices. Barney added a Thanks for the Vegas Elite Athletes Meetings.
Ashu spoke of the USOC teaming up with the ADECCO company. The idea is to train athletes to bring in revenues, help them to get and hold on to jobs, and to offer them health insurance. At the moment, 6 USATT athletes—3 men, 3 women (the top 3 in the Trials)—get life insurance coverage from the USOC.

Executive Director Doru’s Report was extensive. And despite Sherri’s plea to hold comments until a speaker was finished this didn’t happen—which Tim for one thought best, since responses needed to be “hot.” However, in the interests of continuity here, I’m going to let Doru make points, and then present comments by Board members that are germane to what he’d said.
Doru began by pointing out how from 2004 through 2007 the USOC has specifically cut our base funding from $251,500 in 2004 (during which time the USATT contributed $19,559 to the Elite Athletes programs) to $250,000 in 2005, then to $183,00 in 2006 (during which years the USATT contributed nothing to the Elite Athletes programs) to $48,500 in 2007 ($45,500 of which goes to Gao Jun for travel, coaching, and direct athlete support).
Doru acknowledged that some Board members don’t believe in the USATT’s Strategic Plan. But, he said, like any plan it’s subject to adjustments. Except Board members aren’t giving him much, if any, input. Please let him know of any specific suggestions for a new or modified plan and the costs of same. Actually, says Doru, if the Plan we have wasn’t good, why has the USOC been giving us money the last three years?
It’s not the Plan, but the fact that the Board doesn’t support and invest money in the Plan. The Board is not committed to the Plan, as is evident in that it’s not providing any monies for the Elite Athletes. Consequently, the USOC has concluded that the USATT “is not a sound investment for the USOC at this time.”
            Doru says he’s heard Board members say the USATT hasn’t been honest with the USOC when we told them we will have x number of men in top 100/top 50 world ranking in any given year. To reach this goal we have to depend on our juniors, our cadets. But the requisite training they need is not forthcoming; if the Board wants the juniors and cadets to perform better, then it has to provide the funding for it. Of course winning medals is very hard to accomplish—but the USOC wants us to do our best, which means following a plan. Being on the right track means not using what money we have elsewhere—where it won’t allow us to even have a chance at winning medals. Doru thinks some changes in our Bylaws would help.
            Doru believes the many “fights” among Board members contributed to the USOC’s decision to cut our funds. He cites an excerpt from Sports Partnership: “We rarely get to talk about sport and pipeline development with USATT as the majority of our time and energy is spent on Board and governance issues. Until the Board and governance issues are resolved we question if the group can address and be truly committed to a long-term plan.” Doru says if we focus on the “real” issues, then disagreements, “fights,” might be o.k.; after all, Board members ought to speak their mind.
Gao has often had to pay her own expenses to tournaments. But of course she needs the international competition to have a chance to win medals. When we see the USOC supporting her financially, we know they recognize her potential. Doru then details her considerable achievements—from which you get a very good idea of what it takes to be a medal winner. Since 2004 Gao played in 18-20 Pro Tour tournaments (not including Olympic Games, Women’s World Cup, Pro Tour finals, NA Championships, World Championships). In world rankings she moved from World #31 to World #11.
Doru’s bottom line? Let’s work together as a team—find and follow a workable plan.
           
Now for the intermittent responses Doru’s Report has so far brought out.
Robert warns that Peter Ueberroth—“a hard-nosed businessman”—has brought new leadership to the USOC. He’s moving their resources towards winning medals. Our Board does have governance issues. We’ve been dishonest with the USOC in letting them believe we believe we’re serious about achieving our medal milestones. We need to measure something besides how much we make or lose at a U.S. Open or Closed. If we’re really concerned about our juniors, our cadets, do we know who our top 12 boys/girls are, and what kind of commitment to table tennis we can expect from their parents? Without such monitoring, why would sponsors invest?
Dell asks a similar question: “Who are our best potential players for 2012, 2016?”
Tim says, “This is hard to predict. It may be difficult to get believable long-term or even short-term commitments from parents.”
Ed wonders how to commit juniors. There’s not enough recognition for them, he says. They need an opportunity for college scholarships. Ashu urges us to find a way to GET scholarships, so we can offer them—this, instead of talking about what we can offer without having it to offer. College scholarships are certainly to be wanted, says Tim. But he questions if giving college scholarships will lead to medal winners. Perhaps if such scholarships are deferred. Tim doesn’t believe that one can become a world-class player while seriously pursuing any demanding course of study. Robert says, “Table Tennis players are generally smart athletes.” Joseph says he knows of world-class athletes in some sports who go to college. Tim says, “Who in table tennis has done this?” Ashu says that “Table Tennis requires more maximum training and skill than most other sports.”
Nevertheless, to get kids and their parents committed, Robert says, there are incentives we could pursue. Help the parents financially. Emphasize the opportunity, the Olympic Dream. At any event, the USATT has to become performance-driven. We need to find a pipeline figure who’ll keep informing of us, say, “How are our 11-year-olds doing?”
Sheri estimates that such a pipeline figure might be expected to work 20-40 hours a week. She thinks Elite Athletes Co-Chair Ross Brown might do it. Robert thinks a professional is needed—that is, someone who’s developed world-class athletes.
Stellan Bengtsson? Some voiced the thought simultaneously. Stellan’s available. Barney said, “It’s like Lance Armstrong falling into our laps.” We need a full-time training center, an assembly plant, Barney said—what in 2003 we were moving in the direction of, towards a partnership with the USOTC. Barney had been pushing for a National Training Center at Chula Vista, CA. As of now, Doru said, they had no dorms available and no indoor venue. If we find money to build our own venue and dorms, they will provide the land. Ed Hogshead agreed: a training center—one where not just anybody could get in—would be a good use of our money. Doru said he’d received one bid for a training center—at Texas Wesleyan University—but hasn’t received any feedback from the Training Center Committee.  Doru also notes that due to lack of funding our contract with the two Regional Training Centers will end Dec. 31, 2006.
Robert emphasized that there are so many issues before us to consider. There’s not enough transparency about the Agenda—it comes to us just before the Meeting. A Budget Meeting. Have we had enough Budget info? Budget comparisons to study?
And there’s the question of marketing. Doru says other NGB’s have marketing  problems, presumably money problems, and hopes that this coming year the USOC can help us, perhaps in a joint venture with other NGBs. Robert laments that the USATT has no one in charge with marketing expertise. What are we selling now? he asks. What can we sell? We should follow a model. Tennis comes immediately to mind. Tennis has a $200,000,000 property. Their U.S. Open. They own it. They use it. It’s their platform for sponsor development. We need to own everything to do with our U.S. Open.

            I’ll have Doru now return to his Report where he speaks about, not the U.S. Open, but the U.S. Closed. There was a record 888 entries this year. Next year’s National’s will also be in Las Vegas, Dec. 19-22, shortly after the World Junior Championships in San Francisco, Dec. 9-16.
            Doru continued with information pertinent to Elite Athletes. The Elite Athlete Committee made the following decisions (pending Budget approval). World Championships: USATT will fully fund the top 2 men, top 2 women. Since Gao Jun is already funded, the winner of the Pan Am Trials, held Feb.28/Mar. 1-3, 2007, will become the 2nd woman funded. Next in line finisher will receive free hospitality, but will be responsible for his/her airfare. At the World’s, each country is allowed free hospitality for 3 men, 3 women. The 4th spot on the Men’s/Women’s Teams will go to the top finisher under 21 (after Jan. 1, 1986) at the Pan Am Trials (no expenses paid). The 5th spot goes to the next finisher (no expenses paid). Two coaches will be fully funded, but there are no USATT funds for a training camp. Doru said unused funds from different 2006 programs could be used to cover the cost of these Trials.
            For the North American Championships, the USATT will fully fund 2 Junior Boys and Girls, 2 Cadet Boys and Girls, and 2 coaches.
            The USATT will charge $100 entry fee for payers entering the Pan Am/National Team Trials. The players making the Pan Am Team (3 men, 2 women) will be reimbursed the entry fee.
            The top 3 boys and girls selected for the World Junior Championships (based on performance, commitment, and monthly training reports) will be fully funded; the next three boys and girls selected will receive hospitality only. For a training camp prior to these Championships, the USTTA will fully fund 3 boys, 3 girls.
For a junior camp connected to the ITTF World Junior Circuit, USATT will fund 50% of the expenses for 3 boys, 3 girls, and 100% of the expenses for 2 coaches.
            For a Cadet Camp and the World Cadet Challenge Cup, the USATT will fully fund 2 Cadet Boys, 2 Cadet Girls, and 1 coach. It’s possible the ITTF might want to expand trials to include Mexico and Latin America? If so, we want to cooperate with them. Barney thinks the Junior Olympics ought to be thought more highly of.
            Women’s Development Program. This didn’t work out well (National Team members were too involved with school schedules)—we need a better Program.
            Summer Training Camp—2 training camps of 12 days each for junior and cadet National Team members and (if willing to pay) selected others. Open, too, to active certified coaches (at their expense).
            Doru reported that the Tournament Committee was taking up sanction fees, prize money requirements, and matters pertaining to just when two tournaments or more, of what star quality, could be held the same weekend; also, whether a tournament could be sanctioned in advance; and whether a traditional tournament would take precedence over all others, etc.
            Doru said that all potential Olympic athletes (potential meaning…?) must attend the USOC’s Olympic Ambassador Program (3 sessions—includes coaches and team leaders too). This Program is meant to prepare them to serve their sport well at the 2008 Olympic Games. Also, the USOC is partnering with the National Center for Safety Initiatives (NCSI) to conduct mandatory background checks for Team Leaders and Coaches at Pan Am and Olympic Games.
            The USATT has to decide by Jan. 1, 2007 whether to renew its Rating Contract with NATT. If it takes no action, the agreement will automatically be renewed for 4 more years at the same payment. Doru urges a renewal—says the players are happy with the job NATT’s doing. In his Tournament Sanctioning Committee report (sanctioning went smoothly in 2006), Allen Barth says he was asked to refrain from granting an extended 5-year sanction to NATT to run the Baltimore Team’s that “caused some understandable consternation at NATT.” One wonders the effect on NATT if the Rating Contract’s not renewed. NATT also has a proposal before the Tournament Committee to develop free software that would be used by all USATT Tournament Directors to submit the results of their tournaments electronically, instead of by paper. This would expedite the processing of the tournament results and the publication of ratings.
            The USA Table Tennis magazine did not sell as well as hoped, so Doru asked the Board to approve the termination of the contract with Ingram Periodical—but no action was taken at this Meeting.
            Mike Babuin, Chair of the Hard Bat Committee made a number of written suggestions—paramount among them being the establishment of both Classic and generic hard bat events at both the Open and Closed. The NATT replied that this just wasn’t feasible without serious conflicts. Later, Ashu said that Hardbat talk wasn’t relevant to our priorities, our medal-winning aims. Decisions on the Hardbat suggestions were deferred to an e-mail discussion. 

            Shashin Shodhan gave a presentation. He wants to start and be the Commissioner of a TMS International League that will be the official USATT Elite League. He says he has the ITTF as a sponsor, and in the past for his Northern California League he says he’s proven he can get other sponsors.  He has hopes this spring of two Conferences, one featuring North and South California players; the other featuring N,Y., N.J., Maryland and Texas players. He thinks that school programs can interest kids, and that they and their families can form fan bases. His aim would be to garner Elite players—would offer them monetary incentives and media visibility. George asked, “How would you classify an Elite player?” “From 1700 up,” said Shashin. Though Whitney didn’t like the idea, Ed Hoghead hit the right note when he asked Shashin to present us in writing with specifics regarding the terms, conditions, rights, and responsibilities both parties would have.

            Larry Hodges gave us a USATT Junior Training Proposal. HE, if no one else, has a stated specific “VISION: Hundreds of professional clubs with coaches, junior training programs, classes, and leagues; thousands of recreational clubs with leagues or training programs; and hundreds of thousands playing in leagues and training programs.”
            This, he says, is table tennis in Europe and Asia. It’s what could be in the U.S. too IF we follow his suggestions.
            Where are we now with our Juniors? In a crisis situation—that’s blunt, but true. Robert had wanted measurements—alright, we have all of 183 rated over 1500. That’s not much of a base. “How many girls?” Dell would later ask. Larry wasn’t sure, but said he’d look it up, and afterwards reported there were about 40. Further, says Larry there are at most “10 serious junior programs in the entire country.” He offers a specific Goal: 100 serious junior training programs in the U.S. within five years.
            So what kind of a pipeline are we talking about? Begin, says Larry, by promoting clinics for coaches. Make them professionals capable of developing junior programs, classes, and leagues, while showing them how they can make $50,000 a year by coaching just 25 hours a week. The USATT really doesn’t have many active coaches, perhaps because so many players and half-interested coaches have a mind-set that unless you’re a top player you can’t be a good coach. This just isn’t true.
            To develop the program Larry has in mind, we should ask the USOC for $100,000 a year funding for five years. The focus would be to build up our club structure and in particular our junior program. $50,000 of that yearly $100,000 would go to hiring an ambitious, highly competent National Junior Development Director. The rest would be expenses for travel and hiring others part-time for specific programs and clinics. The Director would organize camps for developing full-time professional coaches—see Larry’s manuals: the Professional Table Tennis Coaches Primer, the Junior Training Primer, and the Beginning Class Primer. Clubs have to be convinced to set up Junior Training Programs and Leagues with the help of an enthusiastic trained Coach whose aim is to make a good living coaching. This could happen, if the Association worked at it, and in 5 years we’d have junior training centers all over the U.S.
            The coaches would need support, encouragement. Clubs could work out agreements with leading table manufacturers, improve their club’s appearance and playing conditions. A coach who begins to realize he can make a living doing something he really wants to do—teaching—could do wonders for a club. The members would pitch in—help him recruit league players, bring warmth to the club. Larry says that USA Cadet Coach Sean O’Neill said that if we had 30 top cadets training hard, with regular training camps together, we could develop Olympic medalists. Maybe, maybe not. But, as Doru said, the USOC has got to see us trying…something.
            Robert says there’s a problem: the sport doesn’t seem to be attractive to young people. We have an “old image.” The average age of our membership? Men: 40; Women: 37. Our 2006 National Men’s Champion is 43. Our 2004 Champion was 46. There’s nothing sexy about our sport. We need to somehow make it attractive to young people. Larry says, If juniors see other juniors playing, they’ll play.
            Barney asks, Where are all these prospective coaches? Larry says they’re there—but they need to be trained, need to see the point of being trained.
            Larry closes by saying that if we don’t follow his plan, or find another, “not only will the sport not progress, but the USOC will have no reason not to take further steps beyond cutting our funding.” So, will there be any follow-up?
            Ed and Sheri speak of talking with Bengtsson. Sheri relayed that she and Doru had met with Stellan and his wife Angie (a former U.S. Women’s Team member) to discuss some of the possibilities for cooperating with USATT.
           
            Though it’s getting toward lunch time, Ed will begin his overview of the Budget. (Barney, apparently checking out, has to take care of his luggage, so momentarily leaves the Meeting). Ed said he talked with Tong Lee last night (Tong’s the Budget Committee Chair till the end of the year) about the best use of funds and the 3 files Tong e-mailed: (1) the 2006 budget without actual results and with notes; (2) the 2007 budget; and (3) the USATT Financial Policies document. Ed says he’s gone through the Budget that Doru/Deborah created and that he’s learning how the process was completed. We have little money to use. There’s no way, he says pessimistically, that we’re going to meet a Dec. 20th Budget deadline. Ed asks, “What happens if we don’t approve a budget?” Ed wants to see all of the financial information including the prior 3 years’ info before going forward. Dell commented on the timing of getting pertinent info—ordinarily the Finance/Budget Committee would present critical points to us. Regardless, we have to act. Sheri says Deborah can help us enough.
            Robert says, “We can’t approve a Budget without Board approval. A normal procedure would be to check on how we did last year compared to what we’d said we’ do to date. Where are we now? Sheri said that Deborah can give us an overview as of Dec. 7. Ed says he doesn’t have sufficient info for today’s meeting, but he knows we’ll have a deficit budget. Dell says, “We can’t get bogged down.” Both Dell and Robert want facts. Deborah says she’ll address questions as they come up—says there’s no time to go line by line, she’ll hit the salient points. Sheri says we need to go forward. Ed says he doesn’t have all of the tools—nothing supporting the budget has been forwarded to him. Sheri says that if we take a lunch break now, Deborah can make copies of year-to-date financials for everyone, then we can pick up with the budget when we return.
            After lunch, Deborah has come with helpful Budget figures. There now ensues some varied talk—something of an overview about how we might start to save money, or make it. We need to have a thorough Meeting says Robert. There’s a coaching thread. Guest Jim Beckford says we should encourage amateur part-time coaches; guest Mitch Seidenfeld supports Larry’s emphasis on professional coaches. Barney says we should get all kinds of coaching info on line. Robert says we should take content from one coaching seminar and make a video of it.
            Now Robert’s again talking about the U.S. Open. It’s a USATT property, but we don’t do anything with it. It could be an investment for us, but it costs money to market it. Guest David Del Vecchio says we ought to find out who’s likely to come to the Open. Someone says that perhaps we should insert Open entry forms into the magazine. Someone says, “Goals and objectives first, then budgets.” As we didn’t hire anyone to find a sponsor for a Pro Tour with China and the ITTF, we can eliminate monies for that. Robert says we should have a U.S. Open, but why a Pro Tour? Answer: To get the world-class players here—they get points for participating in a Pro Tour, points quite a few of them need. Ashu says we should study U.S. Open options. 
            Robert asks if we couldn’t have more USATT services on line. Membership cards—they have little value. We’re spending $11,500 a year on postage and delivery. Someone else says, “We’d lose 1/3 of our Membership if we did away with cards.” Robert says we need to have a magazine on line. Ashu says maybe our magazine should be quarterly. We could take a survey at the Open and Closed. Robert says maybe two issues a year would be enough—a majority of those who get the magazine have stopped playing in tournaments. All this, however, is speculation, says Sheri—it isn’t going to happen because we have contracts to fulfill regarding the magazine, including the promise of six magazines a year to the membership. There would be all kinds of breach of contract issues. Meanwhile, Larry’s cutting costs.
              Continuing to look for a way of reducing expenses, we decide that those who need help with airfare/lodging, defined in our Bylaws as reasonable expenses to be paid Board members for attending Meetings, should forego them, or, if absolutely necessary, ask for them in private.
            We’ll return shortly with specific Motions so as to come up with a viable Budget for 2007.
 
            Though realizing we have Budget restrictions, Willy Leparulo for the ACUI, and Joseph Wells for the NCTTA, both seeking funds, address us. Willy speaks of standardizing the 15 Regional ACU-I tournaments to fit USATT standards. Regional winners will meet for the ACUI and NCTTA Championships at Ohio State University, Mar. 29 to Apr. 1. But there’s a big need to upgrade these tournaments, change the ACUI Image, for they’re now thought of as merely recreation tournaments. If we could have a Regional Outreach Program, provide travel stipends to competent volunteers, umpires, and experienced directors to these tournaments, it would help us show the importance of college play, and likely bring in new members to the Association. Willy asks for $3,080—$5,330 funding. Dell wanted to know if the Regionals/Championship would still be held without funding. Yes, but….Ashu asked how many ACU-I members would attend. About a 100. Question that has to be answered: Can the USATT “impose” our trained umpires/directors on these Regionals—are they wanted?
Willy would also like us to fund $31,000 for a U.S. College Team to the Universiade tournament that will take place in the summer of 2007 in Thailand. But, well, he knows this really isn’t possible, but perhaps in the future?
            NCAA Committee Chair Dennis Davis reported that, though he’s pushing for Women’s Collegiate Table Tennis, the NCAA Olympic Sports Liaison Committee feels that there’s just too small a pool of competitive women and qualified coaches, and no High School programs, for them to get involved. Joseph says USTTA NCAA guidelines are being followed with the promotion of a Women’s NCTTA Intercollegiate Championship, held in conjunction with the ACUI/NCTTA Championships at Ohio State. One wonders if this event will take place without the $5,850 for tournament expenses and travel reimbursement Joseph’s asking for. How about applying the brainpower of those in college clubs to raise funds? How about alumni interested in student play as a source of funding?

            USA Disabled Players Committee Co-Chairs Jennifer Johnson and Sharon Frant Brooks gave a written background Report detailing the year’s activities—tournaments here and abroad, training camps, the NCTTA’s addition of disabled table tennis to their National Championships, grants and other funding received ($10,000 from US Paralympics, $5,000 from the Redman Foundation). Jennifer, addressing us, posits a needed budget of $12,000 for 7 events in 2007, asks for our help. Given our Budget restrictions, what would be a minimum she’d need for immediate “working” money? $1,000.
           
            As we’re about ready to vote on the Budget Motions, Deborah sums up our situation. Cash in the bank as of Dec. 7: $527,403.54. Sheri and Deborah remind us of Auditor Waugh’s strong suggestion that the Association ought to have a comfortable reserve of 25-35% of the Budget. Though we’ll have a 2007 Deficit Budget, we’re healthy—but we need a plan to hit the reserve money. Dell says how about investing in 4% money market funds? Deborah will check. Guest Misbach, a retired banker, says be sure not to leave idle cash in a checking account.
           
            Robert speaks of different categories of members. It’d be nice if we had some demographics—5-year trends, for example.
            Motion I: Move to increase 3-year Membership from $100 to $105.
Proposed by: DS: seconded by: WP.
Passed: 9-1.
Opposed: BR

Dennis says Robert and Tong have agreed to settle their differences in binding arbitration by a 3-person USOC panel. Barney expressed his opinion (to enlighten new Board member Ed Hogshead?) that we had an opportunity to bring closure to Tong-Robert’s differences before, but Robert said that a USATT Disciplinary ruling was not done fairly, consistently, so he’d asked the USOC to intervene. Dennis said our Bylaws had to be amended to move forward on this issue. Robert said that though he wasn’t speaking directly to any ruling in his case, he just didn’t think it wise if there wasn’t an opportunity to appeal. This brought on some varied discussion, a suggestion to table the matter, and a confusing vote. Sheri will be irritated by all the abstentions—questions if that’s being responsible.
Motion II: Move to amend, with the exclusion of proviso (c), the following Section 3 to Chapter XIX of the USATT Bylaws:

“Section 3. Extraordinary Circumstances. Should a member conduct matter be referred to the Ethics and Disciplinary Committee pursuant to Section 2 of this Chapter, and should the USATT Board of Directors make a finding that extraordinary circumstances are present which would merit review outside the procedures listed in Section 2 of this Chapter, USATT may refer the matter to an ethics panel under USOC auspices for a hearing.

(a) Such a referral may be made at any time prior to a final decision is reached under the Section 2 procedures.

(b) Such a referral may only be made if both the complainant and the respondent member agree to be bound by the USOC panel’s holding.

(c) No party may appeal the holding of the USOC panel.

(d) The complainant, the respondent member, and USATT shall execute an agreement to be bound by the holding of the USOC panel. Only the USATT Executive Director may execute the agreement on behalf of USATT.

(e) If USOC declines to hear the matter, the complaint must be returned to the jurisdiction of the Ethics and Disciplinary Committee for adjudication under Section 2 of this Chapter.

(f) Once USOC accepts a referral under this Section, USOC has full discretion regarding the composition of the panel and the panel’s procedures.”

Proposed by: DS; seconded by: BR.
Failed: 5-0-5.
Abstained: DS, RB, EH, BR, WP

Ashu feels it’s more reasonable to increase Ratings Fees by only $1—i.e., for 1-3-star tournaments from $3 to $4; for 4-5-star tournaments from $6 to $7. Robert is against raising fees. Such “taxes” will create negative results.

Motion III: Move to increase Ratings Fees, not by $2, but by $1.
Proposed by: AJ; seconded by: WP.
Passed: 7-3.
Opposed: EH, RB, BR.

Motion IV: Move to increase Equipment Approval Fees by 10%.
Proposed by: WP; seconded by: AJ.
Passed: 9-0-1.
Abstained: RB.

Motion V: Move not to increase Sanction Fees at all.
Proposed by: RB; seconded by: AJ.
Passed: 9-1.
Opposed: WP.

After examining many line items, we concluded we have a 2007 Deficit Budget of -$50,395. Treasurer Hogshead says he wants to see goals, plans. If we don’t have good Opens/Closeds in 2007, the Deficit could increase.
Motion VI: Move to accept the 2007 Budget.
Proposed by: EH; seconded by: RB.
Passed: 10-0.

Motion VII: Move to accept the prize money increase recommended by the USATT Tournament Committee.
Proposed by: EH; seconded by: RB.
Passed: 10-0.

Motion VIII: Move that Gao Jun be named Sportswoman of the Year.
Proposed by: WP; seconded by: AJ.
Passed: 10-0.

Motion IX: Move that Tahl Leibovitz be named Sportsman of the Year.
Proposed by: WP; seconded by: EH.
Passed: 9-0-1.
Abstained: RB.

Motion X: Move that the Team of the Year be the U.S. Junior Boys Team.
Proposed by: EH; seconded by: BR.
Failed: 4-5-1.
Against: SP, TB, WP, AJ, DS.
Abstained: JW.

Motion XI: Move that the Team of the Year be the U.S. Women’s Team.
Proposed by: AJ; seconded by BR.
Passed: 9-0-1.
Abstained: JW.

Motion XII. Move that Tahl Leibovitz be named Paralympian of the Year.
Proposed by: EH; seconded by: DS.
Passed: 9-0-1.
Abstained: RB.

The following Motion precipitated some discussion, for though it was moved at Elite Athlete Co-Chair Ross Brown’s request, neither Ashu nor Whitney had heard of it, and urged that the EAC, after getting input from the athletes, should make a formal recommendation.
Motion XIII. Move that Dr. Jeffcoat be a member of the Elite Athlete Committee.
Proposed by: TB; seconded by: BR.
[After discussion, TB withdraws Motion.]

Motion XIV. Move that the USATT formally protest the ITTF’s Age Discrimination Policy with Umpires.
Proposed by: EH; seconded by JW.
Passed: 6-0-4.
Abstained: AJ; WP; DS; BR.

Motion XV: Move to insert a Section 2-a into Chapter IX of the Bylaws as follows: The President may appoint a Board member to serve in an ex-officio, non-voting position on any committee in lieu of the President, subject to Board approval.
Proposed by: RB; seconded by: TB.
Passed: 10-0.

Motion XVI: Move to have Ed Hogshead chair an Ad Hoc Committee to solicit from Board members Vision/Mission objectives and ways of tactically achieving these in a timely manner.
Proposed by: SP; seconded by: RB.
Passed: 10-0.

                        Respectfully submitted Dec. 30, 2006
                                    Secretary Tim Boggan