GLIAC Membership / Expansion Committee
Conference Call
November 7, 2012
11:00 am – 11:50 am
On Phone:
Steven Rackley, Committee Chair
Robert Ackerman
Jeff Blair
Claudette Charney
Mark Hamilton
Dell Robinson
Julie Rochester
Suzanne Sanregret
Mike Watson
Key Points:
I. Ursuline request to be an Affiliate Member in Women’s Lacrosse and Swimming.
A. Women’s Lacrosse
1. Would be the 10th (including NDC).
2. Effective date of the request would be for the next academic year. (2013-2014)
3. Ursuline member of the GMAC, only want swimming and lacrosse.
4. The University of Findlay would welcome as a member Ursuline.
5. Penalty for affiliate members for leaving early.
a) Post Convention will be laid out.
b) the bylaws can already be approved
6. If and when The GLIAC admits Ursuline as an affiliate member, they are to be notified that they are
subject to withdrawal penalties that have yet to be finalized.
Motion by Steven Rackley to recommend that the GLIAC Managing Council accepts Ursuline as an affiliate member for Women’s Lacrosse.
Motion Seconded by Suzanne Sanregret.
Point of discussion: There are no divisions in lacrosse, play each team once and the rest of the schedule is filled with non-conference matches.
Vote: Motion passed.
Opposed: Mike (does not have lacrosse)
II. Notre Dame College wants to continue with wrestling and lacrosse.
A. Do we want to continue our relationship with Notre Dame College in those respects?
1. The University of Findlay does not want to continue with wrestling.
2. Notre Dame is withdrawing in everything else.
3. They pay penalty if they leave early.
Motion by Steven Rackley to recommend that the GLIAC Managing Council does not keep NDC as an affiliate in wrestling.
Motion Seconded by Suzanne Sanregret.
Point of discussion: There is not a championship for wrestling like other sports.
Vote: Motion passed unanimously.
Motion by Mark Hamilton to recommend that the GLIAC Managing Council discontinues any affiliate relationship with NDC for lacrosse.
Motion Seconded by Julie Rochester.
Points of discussion: Would be more open to consider were it not for the manner in which NDC chose to
withdrawal affiliate membership.
Benefit of retaining NDC for lacrosse is location with respect also to travel expenses and more games are desired than are being scheduled.
According to Dell an initial three year term with review for affiliates should be written into any agreement.
There will be room for future GLIAC members that add lacrosse later.
Call to Vote by Steven Rackley, To recommend that the GLIAC Managing Council remove NDC as an affiliate lacrosse member.
All present voted in favor of approving.
Motion by Steven Rackley to recommend a three year term agreement with Ursuline with a review annually, to the GLIAC Managing Council.
Call to vote by Steven Rackley. Motion passed unanimously.
III. Swimming
A. Present ten schools.
B. When only eight lane pools? (relays and heats)
C. Wayne State University believes that Ursuline brings nothing to the conference for women’s swim.
D. The University of Findlay’s swim coach is fine with Ursuline.
E. Does not hurt, swim is all based on times.
Motion by Mark Hamilton to recommend to the GLIAC Managing Council to make Ursuline an affiliate for swim for three years.
Motion seconded by Jeff Blair.
Vote: Passed
Opposed: Bob & Mike
Conference call concluded.
Appendix C
Championships Committee Conference Call
December 10, 2012
In attendance – Mike Watson, Keri Becker, Krista Plummer, Jeff Ligney, Don Brubacher
Absent – Sam Webster
The primary topic for the committee was addressing updates in the GLIAC Championship Tournament Host School Rotation document. The document was updated, and in the discussion of the details associated with the host school rotation several issues regarding these championship events came to light. It was decided the membership should be made aware of those issues, which are:
Should every team participating in a given sport be placed in the rotation to host the championship event in that sport, regardless of whether or not the school has an acceptable facility?
Will the above statement hold true for the championship events for some sports but not for others?
Are the primary issues with the above questions financial support of the championship event, staff support of the event, or the actual location of the event?
Where are new members inserted into the host site rotation?
The committee also developed a list of topics for future discussion including:
Championship Awards – T-Shirts instead of medals?
Championships – Division, Regular Season, and Tournament, sport by sport
Championship event evaluations
Possible adjustments to reimbursements for championship events
Review of Championship Tournament Guidelines
Review of Operating Codes
Appendix D
Equity Committee Minutes 12/3/12
Present: Julie Rochester, Jon Coles, Bill Sproule, Tim Walker, Bryan Snyder, Brandi Laurita, Kris Hengesbach
Discussion: The committee discussed four items concerning Equity:
1) Equity in Officiating- The committee looked at data from 4 sports (Football, Volleyball, Men’s Basketball, and Women’s Basketball) and the availability of women and minority officials. The Data showed that we have a low percentage of minority and female officials available in the sports where data was available. The committee will continue to look into the use of women and minority officials and see how we compare to other conferences in our geographic region. The NCAA does not track data on the use of women and minority in officiating. Once we have a comparison to other conference we can work with the official assigners to increase the number of women and minority officials used in GLIAC contests. The committee also discussed adding an emphasis to the strategic plan to increase equity in officiating and as data becomes available the committee will bring this information to the strategic planning committee.
2) NCAA Matching Grant: A Grant Proposal was submitted to the NCAA Matching Funds for Equity in Officiating. The GLIAC was notified that they did not receive the matching grant, but the NCAA suggested that the conference reapply in the future. The GLIAC will submit the grant proposal in the future in an effort to gain funds to increase equity in officiating.
3) Committee Assignments: The Committee looked at GLIAC committee assignments and the equity of SWA, FAR and additional administrator involvement. The committee feels that it is important to continue to increase the roles of SWA, FAR, and additional administrator involvement in the GLAIC committee structure and make sure that there is representation of each group on committees. The group would like to see the replacement of committee members when terms are up with someone of the same position and work to get all that want to be involved on committees.
4) Additional Meetings at Management Council- The committee discussed the idea of adding an additional breakout meeting at Management Council for additional administrators who are present so that they may have professional development opportunities. It was also suggested to use management council as a place to have other administrative groups meet to cut down on travel and costs of additional meetings like the game management group, compliance, and marketing. The concern with this idea was that the same individual might represent multiple groups so this would have to be looked at.
Motion: To add an additional breakout session to GLIAC Management Council meetings for all additional administrators who are present at Management Council who do not fall in the role of SWA, AD, or FAR.
Rationale: The additional meeting would allow for professional development for administrators who are attending management council but do not fall into the SWA, FAR, or AD role.
Defer to Committee:
Estimated Budget Impact: None (unless room rental fees were applicable.)
Question for discussion: Would it be beneficial to look into moving the additional administrator meetings (game management, compliance, and marketing) meetings to the spring management council meeting?
Share with your friends: |