What Should BOF Do?

[maprun]

Page 5 of Focus has a "strategic budget" costing £372,752 including salaries of £175,622 and "most prudent" costing £98,430 without salaries. A question is posed in the penultimate paragraph on what we want BOF to do. Unfortunately as many will have observed the second option is not costed as no salaries are included. So only one costed option on the table.

I have no strong views either way, larger than proposed perhaps? Regardless of how the AGM goes funding wise, there are other options available. We had a functioning NGB in the Tony Walker professional officer days and a couple of full time staff (hazy memory). Has anyone views on the missing number salaries and the amounts saved between the two?

Back in the day we had The Orienteer, a cross between Compass Sport and Focus, and this issue has some good articles by members. We have the website and emails now, any thoughts?

[maprun]

"Most Prudent" has room for £141,847 of salaries without any funding changes in 2017. Focus contrasts the options, "an organisation with 3 or 4 staff that can only look after members/club interests." £142k for two/three admin staff and someone to head it up, a lot less than £142k hopefully, so we can currently afford more than this "Most Prudent" option.

[greywolf]

Consult the membership, and provide more detailed information so we can evaluate the options.

[maprun]

Can't argue with that!

[graeme]

kick-the-can-down-the-road.jpg (28.37 KiB) Viewed 10500 times

Until we all agree.
The average age of orienteers is going up by 1 year every two years, and the only thing keeping it that low is our habit of dying. This is not a road which goes on forever.

[maprun]

Or vote NO on the proxy form against proposal 3, Membership and Levy fees 2017, so we are given time for consultation.

[housewife]

BOF should ideally have a board of directors made up of regular orienteers, talented in their individual field:
http://www.scottish-orienteering.org/soa/contacts

It should have an elite program that makes the most of a limited budget, is welcoming of athletes at every stage of development, is planned around the needs of the elite athletes, and is assisted by the best orienteering coaches in the country:
http://www.scottish-orienteering.org/seds

It should have an excellent newsletter that covers a wide range of topics of interest to members:
http://www.scottish-orienteering.org/so ... e-mar-2016

It should have a thriving junior section:
http://www.scottish-orienteering.org/scotjos

It should have a top quality forest league:
http://www.scottish-orienteering.org/sol

and an urban league too:
http://www.scottish-orienteering.org/soul

just generally run a bit more like Scottish Orienteering - by the members, for the members.

[graeme]

just generally run a bit more like Scottish Orienteering - by the members, for the members.

they could also trust members to make themselves a bit of money. For example, I offered to do RacetheCastles through BOF, but they didn't want to know. SOA took it on and once the dust had settled and the clubs pocketed over £10k, there was £5k left for SOA.
RtC also paid £5.5k levies, half to BOF, half to SOA. (Yes, SOA has its own hefty event levy which isn't begrudged for the reasons housewife sets out above.)

Putting it all together, RtC was an event whose income was about £20k more than expenditure. That's £20k BOF could have pocketed, if it had only backed its members*.

Another example, BOF have turned down the chance to support JEC 2016. lard will be back on here in November to report how much profit that generates.

So, one thing BOF could do is engage in activities that actually generate cash.

*Or presumably much more if the event had been run professionally rather than by a bunch of amateurs in our spare time.

[Big Jon]

BOF should ideally have a board of directors made up of regular orienteers, talented in their individual field:
http://www.scottish-orienteering.org/soa/contacts

It should have an elite program that makes the most of a limited budget, is welcoming of athletes at every stage of development, is planned around the needs of the elite athletes, and is assisted by the best orienteering coaches in the country:
http://www.scottish-orienteering.org/seds

It should have an excellent newsletter that covers a wide range of topics of interest to members:
http://www.scottish-orienteering.org/so ... e-mar-2016

It should have a thriving junior section:
http://www.scottish-orienteering.org/scotjos

It should have a top quality forest league:
http://www.scottish-orienteering.org/sol

and an urban league too:
http://www.scottish-orienteering.org/soul

just generally run a bit more like Scottish Orienteering - by the members, for the members.

Like

[andy]

Another example, BOF have turned down the chance to support JEC 2016. lard will be back on here in November to report how much profit that generates.

I don't know the numbers but I'm pretty sure the last JEC made a profit (we hosted it in 2010, organised by Lard)

[denbydale]

Or vote NO on the proxy form against proposal 3, Membership and Levy fees 2017, so we are given time for consultation.

Done

[greywolf]

Or vote NO on the proxy form against proposal 3, Membership and Levy fees 2017, so we are given time for consultation.

A poll on the resolution needs to be demanded too, otherwise it will be decided on a show of hands, and proxy votes ignored.

Until we all agree.

that would be optimistic, but the accounts make clear that BOF is a going concern and has finance in place until end-March 2017, so there's time to consider some options

The average age of orienteers is going up by 1 year every two years

Indeed, and the current proposal appears designed to accelerate that process

[Scott]

A poll on the resolution needs to be demanded too, otherwise it will be decided on a show of hands, and proxy votes ignored.

I'll be at the AGM and am happy to demand a poll, although I've never known the proxies not to be counted for anything remotely controversial, regardless of whether anyone at the meeting has said the magic words. It would be a pretty bold move from the Chair to accept a show of hands for something like this.

[smf]

RtC also paid £5.5k levies, half to BOF, half to SOA. (Yes, SOA has its own hefty event levy which isn't begrudged for the reasons housewife sets out above.)

Sorry Graeme, but the SOA levy is begrudged. In 2014 the SOA accounts show income of £237k expenditure of £230k. Levies of £16k and a bank balance of £160k, yet they won't update the tax (levy) barrier of £8.00, therefore events such as the recent SNC and SSC had entry fees of £10 when they would have been £8.50, if it wasn't for this tax.

This tax is killing level C events in the South of Scotland as the numbers generally don't add up. There used to be upto 9 events in the SoSOL league this has reduced in recent years to 5 or 6. If the British Orienteering levy increases to £1.35 in 2017, these events will have to charge £10 and participation will reduce again.

[smf]

Another example, BOF have turned down the chance to support JEC 2016. lard will be back on here in November to report how much profit that generates.

I don't know the numbers but I'm pretty sure the last JEC made a profit (we hosted it in 2010, organised by Lard)

Yes £500.00 and no BOF or SOA levy because at that time juniors didn't pay levies. Entry fees where £4.00 per junior.