status
Posted: Wed Oct 31, 2007 3:47 pm
thanks for the update!!
Elliot: any update on the Nov meeting that was going to look at this issue.
thanks
HighSchoolHockeyForums.com
The Largest Prep Hockey Message Board Community on the Web
https://www.ushsho.com/forums/
redistricting
Page 13 of 18
status
Posted: Tue Nov 13, 2007 3:45 pm
Re: status
Posted: Thu Nov 15, 2007 5:06 pm
The November meeting was held and completed its objective of deciding who would work on this, establishing the work meeting - date, time, location etc and the agenda. Several things were tossed around and went into the agenda process. Meeting went from 6 to 9 pm at New Hope Arena with 6 committee members and 2 other attendees.puckboy wrote:Elliot: any update on the Nov meeting that was going to look at this issue.
thanks
December 8th is the next meeting scheduled from 9 to 5 with a working lunch.
Not all the 6 steering committeee members are onteh same page as to the 'process' and when we could reach a solution. But all are of agreement we come to a resolution of this issue.
Posted: Fri Nov 16, 2007 11:02 am
Elliot,
sounds like MN Hockey is making progress. One suggesiotn I would have it to solicit input from large and small metro associations along will input from southern and northern associations.
thanks!
sounds like MN Hockey is making progress. One suggesiotn I would have it to solicit input from large and small metro associations along will input from southern and northern associations.
thanks!
Posted: Fri Nov 16, 2007 11:15 am
puckboy wrote:Elliot,
sounds like MN Hockey is making progress. One suggesiotn I would have it to solicit input from large and small metro associations along will input from southern and northern associations.
thanks!
Our first goal is to put together a questionnaire for local Presidents, a sampling of coaches and parents (at various levels),a nd other selected groups.
And, of course, I am still erading this site and taking emails.
Posted: Fri Dec 07, 2007 3:52 pm
Just an opinion on the matter, but sometimes pragmatic management would serve MN Hockey real well. There is a time for consensus building, but initiatives can also get lost in that process. This issue has been a long time coming, and I hope the process will finally play out.
For those of us interested, even a definative NO, or an individual process for teams to seek movement, would be better than what seems at times as a lack of interest.
Your efforts and your willingness to engage in debate on this board are appreciated.
For those of us interested, even a definative NO, or an individual process for teams to seek movement, would be better than what seems at times as a lack of interest.
Your efforts and your willingness to engage in debate on this board are appreciated.
Posted: Tue Dec 11, 2007 4:17 pm
Meeting Dec. 8th of the new committee...
Although redistricting/restructuring is a big part of what we are doing, the name did not seemto fit so we are now called the OD committee.
Organization Discernment.
In other words, we are attempting to revamp MN Hockey for the betterment of hockey (in particular the youth and girls programs).
The committee consists of all 12 district directors.
10 of the 12 were present. Distrcit 8's assistant was there as the DD had a prior committment. D11 was absent due to an emergency.
The planning committees was there.
Also attending were Dennis Green, MN Hockey president, Mark Jorgensen, executive director of MN Hockey and his assistant, and a volunteer from a company that does fact gathering via various methods including questionnaires. So we had 25 or so people in attendance.
The first part of the day wsa spent in bringing people up to speed as to what the steering committee had done, presenting the data we had collected, learning to use a methodolgy to support our soluions/decisions, and stress that on this day we were not seeking solutions, but rather what we are trying to accomplish and the process necessary to do that.
To this end the steering committee had established five 'buckets' of similar type agenda items in the buckets. They are:
1. Residency Policy
2. Season Structure
3. State Structure
4. Distric - MN Hockey Support of Local Associations.
5. Other: Catch-All
We, in broke into 4 group of 4 - 5 people with a facilitator and two people roving the room.
Each group had a topic. Within each topic were the following items.
1. Residency Policy
Basic policy, community based and definition of community, inconsistency across the state, waivers, open enrollment, and private schools.
2. Season Structure
League, team, player competive
3. State Structure
4. Distric - MN Hockey Support of Local Associations.
5. Other: Catch-All
TO BE CONTINUED
Although redistricting/restructuring is a big part of what we are doing, the name did not seemto fit so we are now called the OD committee.
Organization Discernment.
In other words, we are attempting to revamp MN Hockey for the betterment of hockey (in particular the youth and girls programs).
The committee consists of all 12 district directors.
10 of the 12 were present. Distrcit 8's assistant was there as the DD had a prior committment. D11 was absent due to an emergency.
The planning committees was there.
Also attending were Dennis Green, MN Hockey president, Mark Jorgensen, executive director of MN Hockey and his assistant, and a volunteer from a company that does fact gathering via various methods including questionnaires. So we had 25 or so people in attendance.
The first part of the day wsa spent in bringing people up to speed as to what the steering committee had done, presenting the data we had collected, learning to use a methodolgy to support our soluions/decisions, and stress that on this day we were not seeking solutions, but rather what we are trying to accomplish and the process necessary to do that.
To this end the steering committee had established five 'buckets' of similar type agenda items in the buckets. They are:
1. Residency Policy
2. Season Structure
3. State Structure
4. Distric - MN Hockey Support of Local Associations.
5. Other: Catch-All
We, in broke into 4 group of 4 - 5 people with a facilitator and two people roving the room.
Each group had a topic. Within each topic were the following items.
1. Residency Policy
Basic policy, community based and definition of community, inconsistency across the state, waivers, open enrollment, and private schools.
2. Season Structure
League, team, player competive
3. State Structure
4. Distric - MN Hockey Support of Local Associations.
5. Other: Catch-All
TO BE CONTINUED
Posted: Tue Dec 11, 2007 5:07 pm
Meeting Dec. 8th of the new committee...
Although redistricting/restructuring is a big part of what we are doing, the name did not seemto fit so we are now called the OD committee.
Organization Discernment.
In other words, we are attempting to revamp MN Hockey for the betterment of hockey (in particular the youth and girls programs).
The committee consists of all 12 district directors.
10 of the 12 were present. Distrcit 8's assistant was there as the DD had a prior committment. D11 was absent due to an emergency.
The planning committees was there.
Also attending were Dennis Green, MN Hockey president, Mark Jorgensen, executive director of MN Hockey and his assistant, and a volunteer from a company that does fact gathering via various methods including questionnaires. So we had 25 or so people in attendance.
The first part of the day wsa spent in bringing people up to speed as to what the steering committee had done, presenting the data we had collected, learning to use a methodolgy to support our soluions/decisions, and stress that on this day we were not seeking solutions, but rather what we are trying to accomplish and the process necessary to do that.
To this end the steering committee had established five 'buckets' of similar type agenda items in the buckets. They are:
1. Residency Policy
2. Season Structure
3. State Structure
4. Distric - MN Hockey Support of Local Associations.
5. Other: Catch-All
We, in broke into 4 group of 4 - 5 people with a facilitator and two people roving the room.
Each group had a topic. Within each topic were the following items.
1. Residency Policy
Basic policy, community based and definition of community, inconsistency across the state, waivers, open enrollment, and private schools.
2. Season Structure
League, team, player competive
3. State Structure
4. Distric - MN Hockey Support of Local Associations.
5. Other: Catch-All
TO BE CONTINUED
Although redistricting/restructuring is a big part of what we are doing, the name did not seemto fit so we are now called the OD committee.
Organization Discernment.
In other words, we are attempting to revamp MN Hockey for the betterment of hockey (in particular the youth and girls programs).
The committee consists of all 12 district directors.
10 of the 12 were present. Distrcit 8's assistant was there as the DD had a prior committment. D11 was absent due to an emergency.
The planning committees was there.
Also attending were Dennis Green, MN Hockey president, Mark Jorgensen, executive director of MN Hockey and his assistant, and a volunteer from a company that does fact gathering via various methods including questionnaires. So we had 25 or so people in attendance.
The first part of the day wsa spent in bringing people up to speed as to what the steering committee had done, presenting the data we had collected, learning to use a methodolgy to support our soluions/decisions, and stress that on this day we were not seeking solutions, but rather what we are trying to accomplish and the process necessary to do that.
To this end the steering committee had established five 'buckets' of similar type agenda items in the buckets. They are:
1. Residency Policy
2. Season Structure
3. State Structure
4. Distric - MN Hockey Support of Local Associations.
5. Other: Catch-All
We, in broke into 4 group of 4 - 5 people with a facilitator and two people roving the room.
Each group had a topic. Within each topic were the following items.
1. Residency Policy
Basic policy, community based and definition of community, inconsistency across the state, waivers, open enrollment, and private schools.
2. Season Structure
League, team, player competive
3. State Structure
4. Distric - MN Hockey Support of Local Associations.
5. Other: Catch-All
TO BE CONTINUED
Posted: Wed Jan 23, 2008 10:48 pm
We are gathering information including sending out a questonnaire (probably 2 different ones).
We have a variety of things on the agenda and it makes for interesting exchange.
Forms will probably go to parents, associations presidents\leaders and coaches.
We have a variety of things on the agenda and it makes for interesting exchange.
Forms will probably go to parents, associations presidents\leaders and coaches.
Posted: Fri Jan 25, 2008 9:42 am
elliottelliott70 wrote:We are gathering information including sending out a questonnaire (probably 2 different ones).
We have a variety of things on the agenda and it makes for interesting exchange.
Forms will probably go to parents, associations presidents\leaders and coaches.
Any update on Private school issues? what are the status' of the agreements? see your MN board topic page 3 for questions.
Thanks,
Posted: Fri Jan 25, 2008 12:47 pm
It is on the table and being discussed. We plan on having a conclusion by mid-April.Ontheice wrote:elliottelliott70 wrote:We are gathering information including sending out a questonnaire (probably 2 different ones).
We have a variety of things on the agenda and it makes for interesting exchange.
Forms will probably go to parents, associations presidents\leaders and coaches.
Any update on Private school issues? what are the status' of the agreements? see your MN board topic page 3 for questions.
Thanks,
Some strongly for, some strongly against, but all working on getting as much information as we can and applying logic to come to a good decision.
Re: If you have ideas (opinions)
Posted: Tue Feb 19, 2008 12:42 am
I don't understand why Rochester is in with the metro area teams. Rochester should play teams like Cannon Falls, Austin and Dodge County. Maybe it's because they get no competition from those teams.JOHNSONPREZ wrote:Hey Elliott, Here at Johnson we are in the TC district. I know in the past we have been mentioned to be placed in district 2. My concern is that we have fewer and fewer kids playing in the city structure but we feel a better fit for us would be District 8 and make most or all of this district Dakota county teams and add the Saint Paul teams with them and take Rochester and move them South. The longest you woul have to travel is from St. Paul to Farmington. This is just a thought. <p></p><i></i>
Posted: Thu Mar 20, 2008 11:53 pm
Elliott,elliott70 wrote:It is on the table and being discussed. We plan on having a conclusion by mid-April.Ontheice wrote:elliottelliott70 wrote:We are gathering information including sending out a questonnaire (probably 2 different ones).
We have a variety of things on the agenda and it makes for interesting exchange.
Forms will probably go to parents, associations presidents\leaders and coaches.
Any update on Private school issues? what are the status' of the agreements? see your MN board topic page 3 for questions.
Thanks,
Some strongly for, some strongly against, but all working on getting as much information as we can and applying logic to come to a good decision.
How does the mid-april timeframe look? Any progress? It was great to see the survey come out within a reasonable timeframe?
Posted: Mon Apr 28, 2008 9:25 am
Ontheice wrote:Elliott,elliott70 wrote:The discernment committee is still trying to get it out of neutral.Ontheice wrote: elliott
Any update on Private school issues? what are the status' of the agreements? see your MN board topic page 3 for questions.
Thanks,
It is on the table and being discussed. We plan on having a conclusion by mid-April.
Some strongly for, some strongly against, but all working on getting as much information as we can and applying logic to come to a good decision.
How does the mid-april timeframe look? Any progress? It was great to see the survey come out within a reasonable timeframe?
Posted: Mon Apr 28, 2008 10:35 am
OK elliot that last one stumped me unless it was to tell me things remain the same.
How did the private school presentations go?
From the state tournament thread I sensed a little weariness on your part. A favorite song of mine is titled and comes to mind "Don't let the b*stards grind you down"
Can anything be done about the state tournaments or has that left the barn?
Thanks for everything!
How did the private school presentations go?
From the state tournament thread I sensed a little weariness on your part. A favorite song of mine is titled and comes to mind "Don't let the b*stards grind you down"
Can anything be done about the state tournaments or has that left the barn?
Thanks for everything!
Posted: Fri Aug 22, 2008 9:55 am
I hope MN Hockey redistricts the entire state in the next year or two so all districts have close to an equal number of associations and teams. Right now you have some Districts with 6 associations and some Districts with over 20 associations. It will be a painful change for some as the whole state will be reshuffled to make all the Districts equal in size but I think the time has come. I say MN Hockey but the decision isn't really theirs. They just facilitate hockey in Minnesota for the associations and Districts. They don't make many decisions. District leadership makes decisions and this is why nothing has happened as some District leadership has likely been opposed to the reshuffling. There are currently 11 unbalanced Districts in the state. I believe we should start the 2009-2010 season with 11 new, equal in size, districts. 2010-2011 a better goal?
Issues for some?
Can you have associations in new Districts that don't touch each other geographically?
Do we just draw 11 new boxes on the map?
Should we look more closely at the tier system Wisconsin uses so teams are assigned to tiers based on association size? Under 500 skaters and over 500 skaters?
http://www.minnesotahockey.org/MINNMAP/Map.asp
Issues for some?
Can you have associations in new Districts that don't touch each other geographically?
Do we just draw 11 new boxes on the map?
Should we look more closely at the tier system Wisconsin uses so teams are assigned to tiers based on association size? Under 500 skaters and over 500 skaters?
http://www.minnesotahockey.org/MINNMAP/Map.asp
Posted: Wed Sep 17, 2008 3:45 pm
Night Train wrote:I hope MN Hockey redistricts the entire state in the next year or two so all districts have close to an equal number of associations and teams. Right now you have some Districts with 6 associations and some Districts with over 20 associations. It will be a painful change for some as the whole state will be reshuffled to make all the Districts equal in size but I think the time has come. I say MN Hockey but the decision isn't really theirs. They just facilitate hockey in Minnesota for the associations and Districts. They don't make many decisions. District leadership makes decisions and this is why nothing has happened as some District leadership has likely been opposed to the reshuffling. There are currently 11 unbalanced Districts in the state. I believe we should start the 2009-2010 season with 11 new, equal in size, districts. 2010-2011 a better goal?
Issues for some?
Actually 12 districts.
Some districts are very protective of their turf.
MH board has the power to re-shape.
2009 may be a long shot.
Can you have associations in new Districts that don't touch each other geographically?
Probably not likely.
Do we just draw 11 new boxes on the map?
Should we look more closely at the tier system Wisconsin uses so teams are assigned to tiers based on association size? Under 500 skaters and over 500 skaters?
http://www.minnesotahockey.org/MINNMAP/Map.asp
Posted: Sun Nov 02, 2008 4:44 pm
Can anyone tell me what districts are included in the south region?
Posted: Mon Dec 01, 2008 12:31 pm
Posted: Sat Dec 27, 2008 11:02 pm
Peewee & Bantam Region Tournaments
2008-2009
North
Districts 16 12 11
South
1 4 5
East
6 8 2
West
10 15 3
2008-2009
North
Districts 16 12 11
South
1 4 5
East
6 8 2
West
10 15 3
District 8 schedules
Posted: Wed Jan 14, 2009 11:12 am
Here is my beef. Im not one to complain, I just want someone to explain. For the first year in the last few I think that District 8 has got it right at the Bantam level by regulating what teams get into the district. Now here is my problem..... I just dont understand how they figured out our schedules. I am directly involved with the B1 Bantams, and there are 17 teams in the district. You play 16 games against district opponents, so this is great right????? you play everyone once and we see who is truly the better teams in the district. No! My team for example does not play 4 of the teams in the district. 5 of our 16 games are against a Woodbury or an Eagan team. This just doesnt seem right to me. We already travel down south and they travel up here, so with the double header system in place I see no reason that everybody shouldnt play everybody once. What kind of league does something like this, and what is behind it. Some kind of an explanation would be appreciated.
Re: District 8 schedules
Posted: Sat Jan 17, 2009 1:11 pm
Its a district issue.packerpuck19 wrote:Here is my beef. Im not one to complain, I just want someone to explain. For the first year in the last few I think that District 8 has got it right at the Bantam level by regulating what teams get into the district. Now here is my problem..... I just dont understand how they figured out our schedules. I am directly involved with the B1 Bantams, and there are 17 teams in the district. You play 16 games against district opponents, so this is great right????? you play everyone once and we see who is truly the better teams in the district. No! My team for example does not play 4 of the teams in the district. 5 of our 16 games are against a Woodbury or an Eagan team. This just doesnt seem right to me. We already travel down south and they travel up here, so with the double header system in place I see no reason that everybody shouldnt play everybody once. What kind of league does something like this, and what is behind it. Some kind of an explanation would be appreciated.
Your association president or district rep should be able to answer this.
If not the bantam rep at districts or the district director should be able to answer it.
Posted: Wed Jan 28, 2009 3:36 pm
Any word on when re-districting might occur? My concern is with District 1. I would like to see some form of this district in the future so we don't see the demise of "inner-city" hockey.
My proposal, as part of any re-districting plan, would be to increase the size of D1 to look this this:
Highland
Johnson
Como
Mahtomedi
North St Paul
Irondale
Mounds View
Spring Lake Park
Richfield
Washburn
Armstrong/Cooper
Hopkins
Roseville
There are rumors circulating that Johnson and Como may merge/co-op, as well as possibly re-uniting Irondale and Mounds View to once again be called "Lake Region". Richfield and Washburn are already in a co-op situation. So this list, could shrink to approx 10 associations total to look like the following:
Highland
Johnson/Como
Mahtomedi
North St. Paul
Lake Region (Irondale/Mounds View)
Spring Lake Park
Richfield/Washburn
Armstrong/Cooper
Hopkins
Roseville
My proposal, as part of any re-districting plan, would be to increase the size of D1 to look this this:
Highland
Johnson
Como
Mahtomedi
North St Paul
Irondale
Mounds View
Spring Lake Park
Richfield
Washburn
Armstrong/Cooper
Hopkins
Roseville
There are rumors circulating that Johnson and Como may merge/co-op, as well as possibly re-uniting Irondale and Mounds View to once again be called "Lake Region". Richfield and Washburn are already in a co-op situation. So this list, could shrink to approx 10 associations total to look like the following:
Highland
Johnson/Como
Mahtomedi
North St. Paul
Lake Region (Irondale/Mounds View)
Spring Lake Park
Richfield/Washburn
Armstrong/Cooper
Hopkins
Roseville
Posted: Fri Jan 30, 2009 7:03 am
I like the idea. You're missing Minneapolis Southwest-St. Louis Park (Mpls-Park).
Posted: Fri Jan 30, 2009 8:04 am
I did that on purpose, figuring that they could join another district in the west or south with Wayzata, OMG, etc.Night Train wrote:I like the idea. You're missing Minneapolis Southwest-St. Louis Park (Mpls-Park).