Agenda 11/10/2013
Planning Board Meeting November 10, 2013
5:30pm Pacific Time
Call In Information:
Toll-Free Dial-In Number: 1.800.977.8002
Participant Conference Code: 189209#
1. Call to Order
Chair, Erin Stephens, called the meeting to order at 5:34 pm PST.
2. Discussions
-
2014 Budget Expenses
Erin worked on budget and got numbers from Holly. Need to know how many members we need to bring in. Erin talked to Scott Seltzer about creating a cap for eJuggle – of $1,000, so $4k back into operating. $40,680 available. See accounts below. What to do with archives? Donate to library? Would cost a lot to ship. Little point to pay to store stuff where it cannot be seen. Bookkeeper is highest expense. Discussion on how we are to pay festival director. Jared thought it was supposed to be paid if there was a profit. Motion was to pay director $5,000 whether or not there is a profit. Need profit from merchandise, festival, members etc. to close $4,000 gap. Can we save on our conference calls? Jared will look into other possibilities.
Scott: we in tighter cash flow this year than last. But we have not closed festival books, so profit (?) from fest not on books. Hope to do that in next few weeks. Scott will get in touch with Cody.
Working Operating budget:
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0Ahd68x2rE4RsdF9CWnFJQ1ZVcXNIUWpuR2pyWVhDTmc&usp=drive_web#gid=0
-
Membership Drive
-
How will reduced cost of membership expenses affect the budget?
-
Membership Drive without price reduction.
-
Discussion on whether to cut membership fee to $25 during a month-long membership drive. Doing a video to show value of being a member. Loss of magazine has hurt membership, but was important monetarily. We need new value propositions. We will have a proposal on this for November board meeting.
-
Website Re-design
-
Brainstorm a new plan of action.
-
Discuss AMS options: https://drive.google.com/#folders/0B6ww3HhAi2CsczZsMUpoZGJhLTQ
Pages 20 – 22 outline the benefits, drawbacks, and pricing of the 3 AMS systems recommended by a consultant for the IJA. -
Turbo has requested a modernized image from the IJA – says the IJA’s image will affect the level of support they are able to receive from the government.
-
Discussion: reference to Mike’s options and pros and cons of various systems. Turbo wants us to have an improved web presence and general image. We can also modernize the logo. We can fix up the front end of the site, at least. The suggestion of a Kickstarter or some such fundraiser. Hiring web designer to “spruce up” site is affordable. Even the text needs improving. Can we give it one strong voice and one strong presence? Kyle would like to be a part of the effort, but gradually. But feels we need major overhaul. Mike has been asked if he would re-involve himself. A possible redesigner has been found. Would Scott Selzer be interested in working on website redesign? Feeling expressed that we need single website. Check to see where Scott Ahern is.
-
Communication
-
IJA Forums
-
Other ideas for better ongoing communication.
-
We need to be better regularly checking and commenting on items on BoardPlus and Board. We will try as a board having more discussions on the Board forum, checking several times a week. And let’s respond to e-mails within 48 hours.
-
Newsletter Contributions
Don Lewis requests more news from board members and particularly profiles from new members. -
Review proposed changes for IJA Championships from Jack Kalvan.
Jack wrote me with the below idea for a way to change the current championships style.
Please review.
I like seeing a wide variety of acts at IJA, but it doesn’t make sense to compare Anthony Gatto to Michael Moschen to Wes Peden. We want to reward top jugglers (in various fields: technique, original performance, comedy, diabolo skills, etc).
For polished stage performances, I think the only competition that makes sense is a “People’s Choice” style competition. This would encourage even more diversity, comedy, etc. We don’t see many great acts (working professionals) in the current competitions because they don’t have the technical ability to compete with today’s teen hobbyists.
I think if we are judging technique, Individual Prop competitions really make the most sense. (Did they even have it this year?) I also think XJuggling makes sense, but maybe I’m biased.
Here’s my Radical Plan:
1. Make the IJA’s main competitions Individual Prop! (balls event, clubs event, rings event, diabolos event, etc., 3 minute routines, with a scoring system similar to the current stage scoring). Also pick an over-all winner since some jugglers will be able to compete in more than one prop.
2. Polished performances are featured in nightly stage shows. After all the shows, People’s choice voting picks the Stage winners. Have decent prize money for the top 3-5 acts. Instead of ranking 1st, 2nd, 3rd… maybe the prizes are like:
Most Innovative Presentation of Juggling
Best Comedy Juggling Act
Technical Virtuosity
Artistic Excellence
Quality Team Juggling Act (Passing Zone Trophy)
Best Up-and-Coming Performer (under 18)
Most Inspirational Young Female Juggler (if you like the current Flamingo Award)
Most Unbelievable 9-year-old
etc.
3. Not ready for prime-time? Show your stuff at Renegade or Youth Showcase.
I think this will encourage more variety, reward more talent, and make more entertaining shows.
I know this is pretty radical, but I feel strongly that it’s a good way to go. I would even volunteer to take on the job of championships director to implement this. What do you think?
Jack.
Few had read Jack’s letter. All agreed changes are very radical. But there was agreement that changes should perhaps be made. Can the technical juggling be separated from the various entertainment aspects of juggling. But we are now only 6 months from the competition and people are preparing. Need to announce any ‘next year’ changes at the festival a year before. We will need a group to work on this, as there will be strong feelings.
6. Confirm Nov. 24, 5:30pm PST for next board meeting.
7. Adjourn
Jared made the motion to adjourn the meeting at 6:48 pm PST.
Discussion:
Vote: Unanimous