1. 2017 City of Ottawa Fields Meeting
Monday October 3rd
Nepean Sportsplex
10/03/2016

2. New City of Ottawa Allocations Policy
Allocation of hours will be based on need rather then historical use
All prior entitlements are eliminated
Organizations with highest demonstrated need get priority
Need is defined by number of adult teams or youth participants
Number of teams will be verified with the organization’s governing body from the previous summer
Users would be allotted a number of hours in a week
This could be on the night they want or on undesirable nights – Fridays
All users will be expected to take some percentage of the undesirable nights
No ‘half-permits’ to account for away games
Field time is non-transferable and not assignable
For example: a club that has 1 team that plays on Thursdays and 1 team that plays on Mondays will get one 2 hour time slot of field space in a week. This field time is not guaranteed to be on a Thursday or a Monday. That field could be on a Friday
10/03/2016

3. Options OCSL applies for fields on the basis of team numbers
The City of Ottawa no longer issues permits for senior soccer teams to the individual clubs, but rather to the OCSL
All clubs apply directly on the basis of their own team numbers
The City of Ottawa no longer issues permit to the OCSL. All individual clubs will have to get their own field time
Status Quo
Not exactly as it has been, because clubs will need to decide in previous October
10/03/2016

4. Option 1
OCSL applies for all fields for all clubs based on team numbers
OCSL would be allocated all the field time for its City of Ottawa teams
The OCSL would then assign the field time to the teams in the league
Similar to the current practice with teams that get field time from the OCSL, but on a larger scale.
NOTE – I don’t think you have characterized this correctly. The City cannot enforce this, they would look to us to do it. They would be obligated to continue to accept applications, but if we had already applied obviously they have zero participants. But without the vote, clubs will have an opt-out pathway.
10/03/2016

5. Option 1 – Pros
As a large user, the OCSL would be one of the first organizations to be allotted fields after youth, more likely to get the requested portfolio
OCSL would be able to share fields across clubs = better field usage
The requirement to take undesirable field time would not affect the OCSL because of the wide range of needs
OCSL already asks for more Friday permits than the City would require
The OCSL would be able to further decrease the cost of standard field time to teams already getting field time from the league
The OCSL will be given x number of hours of field time in a week. Because we have demand for multiple teams on every day (including the undesirable Fridays) we would be able to balance out the prime time and undesirable time across the league.
There would be a higher chance of getting the same field across the whole week. Costs could be cut by doing this. The lining costs of that field would be spread across more users.
OCSL would take into account historical usage when assigning fields. The OCSL would publish a field assigning policy at the AGM that would lay out the exact process for assigning fields (for example the order in which teams are assigned)
10/03/2016

6. Option 1 – Cons
All clubs in the City of Ottawa would have to get their fields from the OCSL
Cost is uncertain as compared to getting fields directly now
This can be at least partially mitigated by being able to reduce overall lining expense
10/03/2016

7. Option 2 The City of Ottawa does not issue permits to the OCSL
All clubs would have to apply to the city for their field time
Clubs would be responsible for making bilateral arrangements with other clubs to provide fields in their own required divisions by May 1
The OCSL would have no capacity to provide any fields for teams that were unable to do so
Without a field revenue stream, the OCSL’s capacity to assist in making bilateral arrangements would be very limited
Clubs would be responsible for providing fields for any rescheduled games
The OCSL would have no capacity to provide fields for rescheduled games
This new policy is going to affect the smaller clubs the most.
10/03/2016

8. Option 2 – Pros
Clubs might be able to save some money on their field cost
OCSL could possibly reduce summer student staffing
Eliminate the primary source of financial risk for the league
Save work for the Office
10/03/2016

9. Option 2 – Cons Clubs may not be able to get the field time they want
Clubs may not be able to get the field time they actually need, or be forced to take on extra time that they do not want
Clubs may not even get fields on the night that they need – very unlikely to get exactly what a club needs
Increase in club time to manage their fields
Clubs will remain responsible for fields they are allowing other clubs to use
Swaps probably have to be informal, not clear that a legal instrument can be devised that does not violate City policy
10/03/2016

10. Option 2 – Cons Clubs would be responsible for lining their own fields
There are fines in the OCSL for clubs that do not ensure their fields are lined for a game
2017 Summer Applications are expected in October
Very difficult to enter a new team unless you already have to apply for a field permit on the required night
Very difficult to enter a new team unless you already have to apply for a field permit on the required night
Can’t apply for the new time, unless you have a team registered with the OCSL
10/03/2016

11. Option 3 Status quo – some clubs apply directly, some apply to OCSL
Decision would have to take place at the end of preceding season
OCSL would reconcile total numbers and subtract clubs applying alone, City would verify against EODSA data
This would place a larger administrative demand on City and OCSL staff
The staff would have to comb through all the applications and track who is applying for what so that there is no double applications
10/03/2016

12. Option 3 – Pros
Clubs getting field time from the OCSL would have a higher chance of getting the field they want on the night they want it than applying alone
Clubs willing to do the work and take the risk to apply directly could end up with cheaper field time
10/03/2016

13. Option 3 – Cons
Clubs that do not get their fields from the OCSL will be assigned fields by the City later in the process, depending on participant numbers
Results could be not getting any field time, not getting the night you need fields, or not getting the fields you want
What the OCSL is able deliver is a function of how many clubs participate
You will not be allowed to trade your field time with another club.
10/03/2016

14. Summer 2016 Example – Ottawa Bears
Option 1
Option 2
Option 3
Apply for four OCSL fields
Apply for 3 fields, expect 1 Friday, 2 others
Two extra teams count to OCSL total
Find partner to take and pay for ½ Friday, ½ for two other nights
Need to find ½ field for the remaining night
Two extra teams count toward OCSL total
Process begins with team applications, done March 1
Applications filed October 2015, but club had three teams not come back (Monday, 2 x Thursday)
Financially responsible for 4 OCSL fields
Financially responsible for 4 full field permits for 6 teams
6 Teams – 3 OT, 1 MR6, 1 MR4, 1 WR5
Fields – need ½ Friday, ½ Monday, ½ Tuesday, ½ Wednesday – have access to non-City Friday evening field
10/03/2016

15. Decision Time
The City of Ottawa Field applications are due Early October
The OCSL needs to know if they are applying for fields and how much field time they need
The LMB is recommending Option 1 - that the OCSL apply for all field time for its City of Ottawa teams
Option 2 would be a disaster for scheduling. Inevitably teams would not have permits in order on May 1, very few options but to remove them from the OCSL
10/03/2016

16. Board Recommendation
The OCSL has become better at managing the field portfolio over the past few years
We are prepared for this. Most clubs are not.
OCSL will eliminate the legal and financial risks involved in informal swaps
A larger pool of fields may allow increased savings
Premium fields will be more manageable, possibly cheaper
In the past two years, the smaller total number of Premium fields has meant it has not been possible to bring costs down, as the cost of any surplus is shared over a smaller number of users
10/03/2016