I was the registrar for soccer for CPYSL (Clark Park Youth Soccer League) and have a better feeling for the numbers than most. While the soccer program usually have 130-160 young people in a season and there are about 100 unique families, all the families are "family members" which means that they get two votes. Since there are two soccer seasons in a year and FoCP membership lasts one year, the real number is how many annual membership CPYSL is responsible for. We offer preregistration to families that have been in soccer within the previous year. While our bookkeeping is improving and will not know until August when our new system is in place, we usually offer about 160 families pre-registration. Every season about 30 new families join. That makes about 200 families in CPYSL per year. So soccer easily represents one-half of the FoCP possible votes. That said, soccer families rarely come to FoCP meeting because they have other things to do at night (Soccer families of the park unite! You have nothing to lose but your evenings with your kids). Kathleen has addressed how affordable CPYSL is (cheaper than the vet!).
Clark park is a fantastic location for family soccer. With playgrounds for siblings and after soccer and the Farmer's Market and Greenline for the parents, Saturday mornings at Clark Park where a major draw for me as a parent. Th epoint of CPYSL is not to train soccer athletes it is for young people to have fun playing soccer how would fences boundaries help that? Jim Cummings On 6/14/07, Glenn <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Kathleen, Thanks for the correct information about the soccer. I still honestly wish park events were free to all. I also honestly think the parents and children would be better served by moving slightly to the lovely field at the Recreation Center. These have a healthier athletic field, the bathrooms, storage, fence boundaries, etc. which would benefit the activity. I love intramural sports so don't get me wrong about this; these are my honest opinions and I've never been an enemy of the soccer program as I've heard the rumor machine has been pumping out for years. I met one of the soccer leaders recently. He started cracking up when I told him that "I was the one." He was laughing and said something like, you're not so bad. Also, there is no "a" on the end of my name. I like the name, Reyom Nnelg, if you want to insult me in the future. Glenn ----- Original Message ----- From: "Turner,Kathleen" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Glenn" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Cc: <UnivCity@list.purple.com> Sent: Thursday, June 14, 2007 8:58 AM Subject: RE: [UC] The FOCP complaint Dear Glenda, The maximum number of participants in the youth soccer program has been about 130 kids; given that we have many families with multiple kids enrolled, I would place the total number of families at about 90. That hardly constitutes the majority of the FOCP membership. I suspect that the rest of the members are residents of the community who, like myself, feel that FOCP contributes significantly to the maintenance, appearance and safety of the park. BTW, total cost for a child to register for soccer for one season is $32. Of that, the $10 FOCP membership fee, and the EPYSA fee of $7 (which provides insurance coverage) extend over two seasons, so the actual cost is less than $24/season. The cost goes down even further for multiple children in one family, and many, many players are subsidized by "soccerships" which we are able to offer through the generosity of the many local businesses and individuals who support the soccer program. Oh, just for comparison, the registration fee for the Fairmount Soccer program is $100 per child for one season. I don't know about the other 349 or so members of FOCP, but I'm not terribly embarrassed by Tony West's reporting the following: "UCD Executive Director Lewis Wendell attended the meeting. He read a previously published statement. Fenton, he reiterated, is still on paid administrative leave pending the results of an internal investigation. In addition, he said, 'We are in discussions to resolve the matter.' " It seems to be straightforward, unbiased reporting that one would expect from a professional journalist. Lunatic ranting, on the other hand, clearly comes from other sources. Kathleen (NOT, if you please "Kathy") -----Original Message----- From: Glenn [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, June 14, 2007 8:01 AM To: Turner,Kathleen Cc: UnivCity@list.purple.com Subject: Re: [UC] The FOCP complaint ----- Original Message ----- From: "Brian Siano" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Cc: <UnivCity@list.purple.com> Sent: Wednesday, June 13, 2007 10:25 PM Subject: Re: [UC] The FOCP complaint > Turner,Kathleen wrote: > >> Brian, just out of curiousity, can you give us a rough count of the >> membership of FOCP? I'm wondering just how many of us are out there >> embarrassing the people of this community. > > > Why certainly, Kathleen. > > The Friends of Clark Park includes nearly _three hundred and fifty_ > members. And very single one of them works hard at embarassing the > community. Ms. Turner, You and Mr. Siano, The Secretary of FOCP, are attempting an appeal known as astroturfing. Do the 350 members want to spread deliberate misinformation publicly in order to defend the UCD? Do the 350 members wish to insinuate that our elected councilperson is lying by making up a "clearly stated" denial of the gag order placed on Mr. Fenton? For that matter, did the 350 members want to lie about conducting "17 public meetings" in Clark Park about the UCD redesign? Of course not! Probably a third to half pay money to FoCP just so that their children are allowed to play soccer in Clark Park. I don't follow what the cost is for kids to play soccer in the public park, but I think it's close to $50. Kathy, now that astroturfing has been discussed on the list, I fear that you may make yourself look silly if you continue this approach and strategy. I have long maintained that the leadership of FoCP does not represent or communicate appropriately with the membership of the association nor the "community" as claimed. However, when the leadership engages in dishonest activity, it is the organization as a whole that loses credibility. In fact, the very appeal you are making to astroturfing would work against your members. If I am correct about events a week ago, you are asserting that 350 people do desire deliberately making up false information about a publicly observed meeting. I say that the members have been victims of an out of control leadership. But it is the members, ultimately, who have not managed to demand responsible leadership or processes. Can you see how the organization as a whole loses credibility when the leadership lies about public events? I am not the one passing deliberate false information on a public listserv. With full impunity from FOCP leadership, it is the identified representative of the FOCP doing this. I've been sorry about that for a long time, but clearly not the cause. I tried hard when I was a member of FOCP! I was forced to deal with the association as a leader of an outside organization and as a community member proposing the Clark Park Farmer's Market. Sincerely, Mr. Moyer Whether it's planting trees, supervising youth soccer, > raising funds for park projects, soliciting public opinion and public > feedback for the Park A reconstruction, or just picking up trash, the > Friends of Clark Park have worked long and hard to make our community look > inept, stupid and ridiculous, what with our strutting about and looking > pompous while we do all these things. > > And the future looks bright for the Friends, what with the terrific > opportunities for embarassing the community. The new basketball court > coming by this fall should make us look _especially_ ridiculous. Events > such as Shakespeare in the Park also enable us to make our neighbors look > like comical fools. > > Yes, there's a grand future of embarassment ahead for the Friends of Clark > Park.If anyone out there would like to help us embarass the community, > meet up with our table at the Farmers' Markets every Saturday. > > > ---- > You are receiving this because you are subscribed to the > list named "UnivCity." To unsubscribe or for archive information, see > <http://www.purple.com/list.html>. > > > -- > No virus found in this incoming message. > Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.5.472 / Virus Database: > 269.8.15/847 - Release Date: 6/12/2007 9:42 PM > > -- No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.5.472 / Virus Database: 269.8.15/847 - Release Date: 6/12/2007 9:42 PM ---- You are receiving this because you are subscribed to the list named "UnivCity." To unsubscribe or for archive information, see <http://www.purple.com/list.html>.
-- Jim Cummings ---- You are receiving this because you are subscribed to the list named "UnivCity." To unsubscribe or for archive information, see <http://www.purple.com/list.html>.
