March 2001, US SAILING Judges Committee Minutes

US SAILING JUDGES COMMITTEE
Spring Meeting - March 24, 2001
Adam's Mark Hotel, Charlotte, NC

Except as noted by an asterisk (*) below, all members of the Judges Committee and Lacey Howe (US SAILING Race Administration Director) were present:

Jim Capron (Chair)
Ron Ward (Chair, Umpires Subcommittee)
Sandy Grosvenor (Secretary)
Regional Administrative Judges (RAJs)
John Dieselman (Area A)*
Mary M. Savage (Area B)
Brad Dellenbaugh (Area C)*
Ann F. Newton (Area D)

Ted Everingham (Area E)
Marty Ottenheimer (Area F)*
Tom Roberts (Area G)
Richard H. Lootens (Area H-East)*
Joe Cochran (Area H-West)*
Barry Ault (Area J)
Warwick Coppleson (Area K)*

Mr. Capron called the meeting to order shortly after 9:42, welcomed approximately 40 observers and introduced the members of the Committee.

The minutes of the meeting (open sessions) in New Orleans on October 12th were approved as distributed via email.

Sandy Grosvenor and Chris Luppens (Race Management Committee) have developed an online system for use by all race officials to report activities and availability. This system has been available at www.ussailing.org/raceadmin as a prototype for about a month. Currently, the system supports the equivalent of the old paper driven Annual Activity Report. The consensus of the JC members who have tested the prototype was that it was ready for general use. Sandy will amend the Judges Web Site accordingly.

Currently the system does not generate reports. Barry Ault volunteered to work with Lacey and Sandy to develop reports for use by the RAJs (such as Judges whose terms are expiring). Sandy and Lacey agreed to work towards getting Lacey's currently separate database of information on workshop attendance and test results integrated into the system as well.

The lack of password protection for access to one's online information (both the SOARS information and the general membership information) was noted. The JC confirmed their support of the Race Administration Committee's resolution to strongly encourage that the priority for implementing password protection be heightened.

The consensus from the closed session concerning the process handling objections to judge applications was reviewed briefly. The recommended process is the applicant's RAJ and the objecting JC members will try to work out the issues. If that fails, then the application will be tabled until the next Closed Session of the Judges Committee, where it is discussed and subject to approval of the whole committee. Ann Newton will circulate this amendment, and all should review and approve the revised manual.

Jim Capron passed around the current "official" list of committee membership. He asked for updates and corrections, especially concerning what members had athlete ratings.

The Executive Committee is being asked to approve a resolution to amend the US SAILING bylaws to have appeals relating to RRS 69 (Gross Misconduct) sent directly to Article 14 Review Board, by-passing the current practice of sending them first through the regular appeals process. Both Rules Committee and the Appeals Committee had recommended that rule 69 appeals bypass regional appeals and go directly to national level, and to the top of the priority list at that level. The ExComm has instead proposed that rule 69 appeals go straight to the Article 14 Review Board.

The Race Administration Committee (RAC) has asked the JC to review the ramifications of this bylaw change and submit a report to the Executive Committee. Jim has agreed on behalf of the JC to do this and agreed to have a report ready within 30 days. Initially this issue had not been thought to be relevant to the Judges Committee, but the JC does have a definite interest in how the confirmation/appeal of its Judges' actions get handled.

Ted Everingham confirmed that the ExComm will likely welcome additional input and analytical assistance. Jim Capron confirmed that this change is NOT driven by existing or pending appeals. It has been over 15 years since there was an appeal to the US Sailing Appeals Committee based on rule 69, and there are none currently in process.

Jim Capron suggested that further discussion be continued via email. Mary Savage agreed to take the lead in developing the report. The JC confirmed that they were all comfortable with (and indeed welcomed) Ted Everingham's participation in this discussion even though he is member of Article 14 Review Board.

Ted asked if the RAC was planning to oppose the vote on the bylaws resolution on Sunday the 25th. The answer is no, not at this time, but the RAC wanted to ensure that the issue is thoroughly considered before final action is taken in October.

ISAF is attempting to reduce the overall size of its Annual Meeting. It has proposed that several subcommittee meetings, including subcommittee meetings for umpires, judges, and race officials NOT be held at the Annual Meeting but instead that these committees meet separately in advance of the main meeting. All relevant committees at the ISAF level opposed it, however the proposal remains. The JC confirmed its opposition to this move for several reasons: (a) the approval process for IJ/IU appointments would be disrupted, (b) a separate meeting will likely be less well attended and therefore have an even lower US participation rate, and (c) since many of the same people are involved in both these subcommittees and other ISAF meetings, it would a significant drain on these volunteers' time and on US SAILING expenses to send them to two separate meetings.

The JC approved a motion to request that US SAILING's ISAF delegation oppose moving these subcommittees to a separate meeting.

Art Engel of the Rules Committee spoke to the committee briefly and passed around a draft of the new rulebook. Which is smaller than the 1997 version and will be wire bound! Art then left for another meeting before he could be properly thanked for all his work.

Stephen Jeffries suggested to the JC and observers that those that agree that the smaller size and wire binding are indeed a good thing be sure to pass that opinion along. The size and wire binding do make it more expensive to publish the rulebook. This year, the argument that US SAILING would have a net benefit from the improved public perception affiliated with publishing a better rulebook "won the day."

Jim Capron asked each RAJ to briefly review that status of judges in their area.

Area D: Tom Roberts reported that he has 4 new prospective judges that have successfully completed the test and workshop and just need experience. Tom does not foresee any problems with current volume of judges nor with bringing along the current prospective judges.

Area A (from an observer). The observer expressed concern about the drop in the number of judges in Area A. The Southern Massachusetts Sailing Association is working on a club judge seminar to recruit and train jury members at a level below the full Judges program.

Area B: Mary Savage reported that the area is fairly stable. She had big jump in judges in '99 due to largely to a successful seminar and test. The Area recently decertified 4 judges who declined to do workshop and test, but she has several more in the pipeline.

Area C: Brad Dellenbaugh was unable to attend due to a very pregnant wife. Speaking for Area C, Ron Ward said he felt that the trend in judge quality in the area was good. He was concerned about paperwork delays, but believes that is improving.

Area D. Ann Newton reported that the area is down significantly in certified judges, with several judges who have chosen not to stay current. She has good prospects, although many are weak on Race Management experience. Ann is having trouble getting these prospects invitations to serve on area RCs as several of the RCs are not amenable to inviting new participation. It was suggested that this be brought to the attention of the Race Management Committee.

Area E: Ted Everingham reported that he has some prospective judges, and believes there is a need for new judges in the area. But it is not yet a critical issue.

Area J. Barry Ault reported that his area is short on umpires, but in good shape on judges. Two good seminars have a produced a throng of interested people. He has several outstanding applications that have not yet been turned in for processing. In the meantime, he is using the "passed" list from latest workshop and test to identify prospective judges and coordinate getting them experience. Barry is also encouraging and promoting active sailors to become involved as judges.

Area K. Observer Allen Teske reported that they have success combining a workshop with new rules seminar. And have had success with a buddy system whereby more experienced judges work with a prospective judge in a mentoring system.

Chuck Fuller asked the committee to reconsider establishing a club judge program. Jim Capron reviewed briefly why the proposal has been voted down in the past: The main reasons for not having a formal US SAILING Club Judge Program: (1) Resources. The committee and staff resources are too small and the effort too large to support the program. (2) Insurance. There have been ongoing concerns about insurance issue regarding judges certified at a lower level than the main program.

Jim reiterated that local areas are quite welcome to establish their own clubs judge programs, as SAYRA has done. They are also welcome to tap materials from the US SAILING Judges Workshop to aid in training of these club judges.

Sandy Grosvenor asked about creating a standard one-day Introduction to Protest Committee. Mary Savage responded that she has met this need in the past by welcoming people who are not yet interested in full certification to attend just one day of the two-day workshop.

Observer John Lee spoke briefly about the SAYRA system for club judge, which has its own workshop and rules seminar. They initiated the program a few years ago. The test is a take home test that the test-takers have 30 days to complete. They are allowed to use any resource except another person to complete the test.

Observer Means Davis commented that the SAYRA directory publishes the names of their club judges and uses this publication as a way of both encouraging their club judges and as a way getting the word out about prospective judges looking for experience.

Observer Donna Hobbs commented that while she has lots of RC experience, she has had trouble getting judge experience and has found that many clubs have fairly closed attitudes towards new judges.

Tom Roberts reminded all there is no reason why a panel cannot have 4 or 5 members, 3 of whom are certified and one or two are prospective judges gaining experience. This maintains the overall quality of the panel while also developing good new judges.

While unable to attend, Marty Ottenheimer has reported to Jim that the entire pool of 565 test questions has been adapted for the 2001-2004 rules. Each test is made up by randomly pulling from this pool of questions. Any comments, concerns or suggestions about the test or specific questions should be routed to Marty.

Jim Capron reported that the certification process for International Judges is likely to soon require an ISAF Seminar and Test for all new IJ's (currently it is possible to get an IJ certification on the basis of experience alone). He does not foresee that an ISAF seminar and test will necessarily be required for re-certification in the near future. Jim also reported that the US has the highest passing rate of the challenging international tests over the last three years, about 50% compared to the overall pass rate of about 30%.

Ron Ward reported that the subcommittee is working well and has a good overall geographic distribution. The revised certification process approved last fall by the JC may be modified slightly to incorporate comments that the on-water evaluation process may currently be a bit too stringent and overly comprehensive. Instead of rating applicants on a Satisfactory/UnSatisfactory basis, the scale is likely to change to a numeric system.

Seminars are being held as opportunities and demand arise. In the past year, seminars have been held in conjunction with the Prince of Wales Championship, at last fall's Annual General Meeting, and in Massachusetts. The subcommittee hopes to continue to have a seminar with the POW, although the timing of this year's POW (Columbus day weekend and very close to the AGM) may make it difficult this year.

The test needs to have more questions added to the overall pool of questions, but the overall presentation of the seminar is being well received.

ISAF is expected to release the new 2001-2004 Umpires Call Book within the next week [Secretary's note, indeed between the JC meeting and the development of these minutes, the call book has been posted to the ISAF website at http://www.sailing.org/rrs2001/]. ISAF is also expected to release a Team Racing Call Book in the not too distant future.

The JC is jointly working on revised the Judges Manual. This includes a overall re-organization of the existing contents to better align with the Judges Workshop. Jim encouraged JC members to keep the process of revising the manual moving and targeting completion within 2 months of the Spring Meeting.

Jim also reported that progress is being made at the overall Race Administration level on using a dynamic on-line publishing system that will allow people to order the various Race Administration publications (such as Rules, Appeals, Judges Manual, Race Management Manual) to be printed in individual customizable bundles (such as Rules, Appeals and Judges Manual in one binder). This dynamic system will also allow US SAILING to avoid the costs of upfront printing of many copies that subsequently requiring storing and become out of date.

Jim asked if there was a consensus among the JC that a Judges Workshop should be held at the Fall AGM in St Petersburg. Answer: Yes.

Bruce Cook reported that the Youth Committee had some concerns about training Judges to effectively work at Youth events. Jim Capron pointed out that the Judges Manual does have a section on youth events. Jim volunteered to pass a copy of that section to James Appel of the Youth Championships Committee and solicit his suggestions and comments as part of the current revisions of the Judges Manual.