MHS Girls Hockey User Fee (5 minutes) vote required

Transcript (~13 min @ 2:35:30)

Speakers identified by voice; unnamed voices are numbered within this recording. Auto-caption text — verify against the video.

▶ 2:35:26 Speaker 1: that brings us to finance and facilities with ms mcandrew thank you hello everyone welcome to

▶ 2:35:44 Jennifer McAndrew: finance and facilities we have one item this evening um related to the melrose girls ice hockey user fee um just to remind everyone that the melrose girls ice hockey team is combined with stonem this year which is something we talked about at a previous meeting and mr fogarty is here to talk to us about this fee recommendation and thank you for being here

▶ 2:36:14 Speaker 9: for our whole meeting thank you so last spring we came to you and asked about a co-op with stonem high school due to our lack of numbers their lack of numbers neither school was able to provide a team of their own so with that stonem is the host school they've taken on much of the financial responsibility they've asked us to share the ice time with them the cost of the ice time They charge $300 for their all or any user fee at Stoneham High School. We have a tiered system. We charge $600. It would be my recommendation to go with their fee. They are the host school. Our costs have been cut drastically because of this. They'll take on the expense of game day personnel, transportation, half of the ice time. So we're coming to it. winter season starts in just over a month and that's a question that stone amassed do you want the use of fees to go 300 with them 600 with us we just want to iron out some details before the season does begin thank you for purposes

▶ 2:37:19 Jennifer McAndrew: of discussion is there a motion to approve made by mr. skill second second by mr. Salm are there any questions for mr. Fogarty on this I have a couple

▶ 2:37:35 Speaker 5: questions i uh thomas thank you um so how much is the total cost of ice time

▶ 2:37:41 Speaker 9: they're anticipating somewhere between 22 24 000 if the season gets extended with playoffs um

▶ 2:37:50 Speaker 5: different factors fall into that but so we'll be we'll be uh picking up 50 of that whatever

▶ 2:37:56 Speaker 9: it winds up correct okay and they have a reduced rate from where we were last year paying at the flinn their cost at stonem is a lot less and it's a good deal i know they're being very generous

▶ 2:38:04 Speaker 5: with us i'm just wondering why we would decrease fees for one class of athletes i know it's because we're partnering with stonem but isn't that being unequitable to other other hockey players the male

▶ 2:38:21 Speaker 9: hockey players for the male hockey players their costs haven't changed yeah they'll still have the full cost of transportation full cost of game day personnel full cost of transportation and uh full

▶ 2:38:33 Speaker 5: cost of ice but the fees aren't going to get anywhere near what we're going to throw in to

▶ 2:38:40 Speaker 5: the 50 i'm not following so i know that i know that it's never equitable in terms of the amount of fees that you pay for certain sports so like you know both hockey and football tend to be the most expensive and why would we're still going to be paying out as a district a lot of money for the time on the ice which we should because that's part of the deal but why would we decrease the amount that we're charging if we're still going to be paying a lot of money for this time

▶ 2:39:07 Speaker 6: a couple of things first of all when we calculate the tiered system we did a very thorough analysis we had a very big committee that did it include an ad from another city and it's based on the overall cost estimate of that program so hockey is probably the most expensive sport that you can have when you do ice time, referees, coaches, buses, everything else. What's happening here is we're going to Stoneham, and those costs are being removed from the calculation for our girls team. Okay? We no longer have to worry about paying the Flynn rink what they charge. We don't have to worry about the buses. They're absorbing it into their athletic budget.

▶ 2:39:53 Speaker 6: But when Steven came to me, he is very concerned about, I'm a Melrose parent sitting next to a Stoneham parent, our girls are on the same team, you're paying 300 and I'm paying 600, and Stoneham's paying for most of the bill. That's a problem among parents and for the kids, and that's why he's making the recommendation he's making. about what it's costing us for the sport not who's playing the sport what it's costing us for the

▶ 2:40:26 Speaker 5: sport no i understand that but what it's costing us for the ice time is much more than the fees

▶ 2:40:33 Speaker 6: whether it's 300 or 600 but all all our all our fees pay contribute about 46 percent yeah at the end of the day that's what we've calculated most of our fees can contribute about 46 percent so is

▶ 2:40:44 Speaker 5: Is the 300 then 46% or is it less or more than that? And is the 600 46%?

▶ 2:40:52 Speaker 6: We're their guest, Jen. We're their guest and they said that in order to do this, they wanna partner with us and invite us and they're going to do the majority of the charges, okay? I don't know how their AD figures their fees. I don't know how the Stone School Committee calculates what they contribute to their athletic budget or not. I can't answer those for you. All I can answer is I know how we calculate ours and what we base the 600 on. Now that we no longer have that expense and we're going to be partnering with Stoneham, you know, we're concerned that we're charging our parents double what Stoneham is charging for service that Stoneham is providing. that's that's the dilemma we have in front of us so okay i understand okay i mean i want i want to

▶ 2:41:50 Speaker 6: i know you're uncomfortable because you're you're concerned about the equity um and i and i you know

▶ 2:42:01 Speaker 5: respect that but well i think it's really incredibly generous it's very generous it's like the best deal in hockey probably in the state of massachusetts i understand that yeah but i just think it's it's i don't know if we should make decisions because we're worried about parents arguing over who's paying what so some of the game day costs come from the officials

▶ 2:42:19 Speaker 9: comes from the announcer you have to have a site administrator in these cases there'll be security there there'll be ticket takers you're talking 600 to 800 per game on top of ice transportation so

▶ 2:42:40 Speaker 9: it is a significant cost and i'm faced with the fact that they're paying free and and we're asking for six i'm just looking for clarity mr simon um thank you uh

▶ 2:43:00 Speaker 7: through the chair uh if i'm able to um 80 40. uh so um just correct me if i'm wrong this uh uh i'm gonna shift gears but i'll tie it in uh uh please grant me a little leeway if you would madam chair um there's what's the roster for a standard hockey team at the high school 21 22. i believe 22. 22 okay um and so i'm sorry i'm impressed you know that and so former ice hockey

▶ 2:43:31 Speaker 7: official um that's how i paid my way through college i refereed ice hockey um and so off the the cuff math 22 players paying 600 per we're talking roughly $13,000 so cutting that in half where you're imagining that would be a discount to the overall budget of $6,600 roughly fair enough my question is in terms of equity and in terms of men's sports women's sports might we not expand this and contend to all hockey players this season one time only as a cost equity because the turn what you said on your on its head Madam Superintendent what we may in fact do is create a situation where we now have a Melrose family who has a son playing hockey for Melrose and a daughter playing hockey for this combined Melrose Stoneham team and their bill is now nine hundred dollars versus six hundred or twelve hundred dollars because as I recall we don't have a family cap we do

▶ 2:45:06 Speaker 7: with family cap of a thousand fifteen hundred dollars so why don't we consider extending that one season only to all hockey players and mowers. I would not

▶ 2:45:19 Speaker 6: agree to that without knowing our anticipated cost for the Flynn rink. And I don't know what those anticipated costs are right now for the Flynn rink.

▶ 2:45:31 Margaret Raymond Driscoll: Ms. Driscoll. I think that we've passed a budget and I think if we I think we're trying to do what's fair here and i think if we cut it anymore we're um not um going to make our budget to the extent that we voted it and that would be a concern for me thank you mr rossi

▶ 2:45:49 Speaker 5: thomas i just would wonder what if we should consult with amy lindquist on it too just because it's a it's a fee change in the middle of the year too right i just i worried about the implic

▶ 2:46:02 Speaker 5: can we change fees like we can change fees anytime okay and we can change fees for one class of athletes okay are there any other comments mr. sound just to

▶ 2:46:18 Speaker 7: redirect we're talking about a decrease combined decrease assuming varsity only

▶ 2:46:25 Speaker 9: we have projected seven to eight hockey players coming from Melrose high school we lost several to private schools several to graduation and therefore we can't feel their own team and that's what prompted this relationship with Stoneham so we're anticipating if I had nine sign up I'd be shocked so we're

▶ 2:46:43 Speaker 7: anticipating a loss from the women's team of $2,100 well 300 times seven

▶ 2:46:58 Speaker 6: players I'm sorry does anybody remember when we did the combined team with watertown did the the girls team pay a different athletic fee than the boys team back then

▶ 2:47:13 Speaker 6: does anybody remember no you don't remember i do not recall i do not believe we did okay

▶ 2:47:19 Margaret Raymond Driscoll: i think that i think that they were the same but i don't think the array i think the arrangement with watertown was different financially i'm not sure to what extent they absorbed as much of the cost stone correct so that's the question and um point of clarification mr still madam chair um so i just wanted to um say that i support the motion as it's here and my point about the budget

▶ 2:47:54 Jennifer McAndrew: related to the the men's team or the boys team just to be clear thank you um and also just to harken back to the budget we budget half for the girls team than we do for the men the boys team now in operating funds the boys team has a JV program right for other reasons I'm

▶ 2:48:08 Jennifer McAndrew: just saying to your point it's a small number are there any other comments or

▶ 2:48:14 Jennifer McAndrew: questions about the motion on the floor seeing none all in favor opposed that

▶ 2:48:25 Jennifer McAndrew: motion carries 5 in favor 2 opposed thank you and that concludes finance and facilities for today thank you thank you mr. McAndrew and that brings us to

▶ 2:48:47 Margaret Raymond Driscoll: policy and planning with miss Driscoll thank you so much this evening we have two policies on our agenda the first is policy I J and D access to digital resources and you'll note that there is a clause indicating that it's under number five the district will provide the committee with at least one annual report to communicate its digital resources safety measures the committee will review this policy in conjunction with that report so if it is your pleasure I would be interested in starting and taking these one at a time and inviting the superintendent to speak to policy IJ ND so one of the things