Recently in amalgamation Category

The new Board of Directors will be comprised of both Rice Lake and Millbrook members and work very closely together with the Amalgamation Committees to make the transition both smoother and in the best interest of both parties. It has been and will continue to be a team effort. No amount of effort has been spared in all decisions the committees have made. The decisions have not been made lightly every effort to include the majority of members was taken in to account.

For the 2011/12 Season we expect to run with a larger than normal executive to make sure that the transition from separate associations to one association is smooth and to make sure that we maintain as much institutional knowledge as possible.

Over time we expect to trim down the number of executive members, how we do so will be a subject of on-going discussion.

For 2011/12 the following positions will be maintained as they are currently filled, with a representative from each centre:

• President
• Vice President
• Treasurer
• OMHA Rep
• Local League Rep
• Equipment Convenor
• Scheduler
• Time-Keeper / Gate-Keeper Scheduler
• Referee in Chief

While we expect these positions to return to being held by a single person over time, we do think that we will probably maintain a VP - Millbrook and a VP - Rice Lake.

The following positions will be open for applicants. The decision of who will fill each position will be determined by the amalgamation committees with an eye towards maintaing equal distribution (and therefore votes) across the two centres.

• Secretary
• Coach Coordinator
• Tournament Convenor
• Fundraising Convenor
• Skills Coordinator
• Public Relations

In an amalgamation we have to decide on our new boundaries. There are two types of boundaries: hard boundaries, and soft (right-of-choice) boundaries. Hard boundaries are just what they sound like, firm boundaries with all surrounding centres where all people inside the boundaries are residence restricted. Soft boundaries or "right-of-choice" depend on the location of a centre point and measuring the distance out from that point as well as the distance from other centres to determine whether a family is residence restricted or right-of-choice.

After an enormous amount of time, effort and discussion the amalgamation committees have decided both to maintain soft boundaries and to keep the new amalgamated centre's centre point located at the Millbrook Postal Office.

We came to this decision for a number of reasons:

1. MDMHA has more families to the north and west who would be effected if we moved the centre point than Rice Lake has to the south and east.
2. Port Hope has made it clear that they intend to attempt to expand their northern boundary to take in much of Rice Lake's territory. Depending on how much they manage to expand (if at all) this gives us the greatest protection and room to grow (to the north).
3. Notwithstanding the above we think that there is more long term growth potential to the north than the south.
4. We feel that this centre point will be the most acceptable to our surrounding centres and therefore easy to get approved.
5. Because Millbrook is hoping to build a new Community Centre with rink in the very near future it is important for fund-raising purposes to make sure as much of the township is within the right-of-choice area as possible.

It is difficult to draw right-of-choice boundaries on a map because they depend on determining the distance (on well travelled roads) from any given address to an associations centre point, however we have attempted to demonstrate the outer limits of our right-of-choice area on the map below. The purple line represents what we believe the outer limits of the new right-of-choice are to be, without us actually having gone out and driven all the distances. Note that while it looks as if there no members in the northern-most area of the proposed boundary this is because the Omemee/Ops amalgamation and the relocation of their centre point to Reaboro has moved their right-of-choice area to the west and north and thereby expanded our right-of-choice area accordingly.

Click on the map to view it full size.

After a great deal of research and finally having received some actual documentation from the OMHA we have found that much of what we were told about voting at the beginning of the process was incorrect. We have also spoken to Omemee/Ops and Fenlon Falls/Bobcaygeon about how they ran their vote. The voting rules for an amalgamation of two not-for-profit hockey associations are based on the Ontario Government's Corporations Act.

The Ontario Government's Memorandum: Amalgamation of Not-for-Profit Corporations (February 25, 2011) states:

"(2) The amalgamation agreement must then be submitted for approval by a 2/3rds vote (special resolution) of the members of each of the amalgamating corporations."

and the Corporations Act (Ontario) states:

"Adoption by shareholders (3) The agreement shall be submitted to the shareholders of each of the amalgamating companies at general meetings thereof called for the purpose of considering the agreement, and, if two-thirds of the votes cast at each such meeting are in favour of the adoption of the agreement, that fact shall be certified upon the agreement by the secretary of each of the amalgamating companies."

With this in mind the amalgamation committees have decided that for amalgamation to pass we will require a 2/3 majority of votes in favour from each centre of whoever shows up to vote. There will be no proxy votes.

1. Does the OMHA have certain criteria when selecting the new centre point for an amalgamated centre?

The Centre Point defaults to the main post office if none is selected. The Centre Point, if different from main post office, must be approved along with the boundary agreement by all adjacent centres.

2. Are "hard" boundaries a requirement for the new amalgamated centre, or can it be left to the Right of Choice style boundary as defined in the OMHA Manual of Operations?

The boundaries are a matter that must be determined in conjunction with your adjacent centres. While the option for 'right of choice' boundaries exist they are not always the best choice due to the amount of administration required to maintain the records of players ensuring the 'right of choice' has been made and agreed to. It also increased the potential for appeal opportunities when players disagree with an association's decision to not release them from their 'right of choice' creating additional administration during this process. Hard boundaries protect your association by having a well defined draw area, but, ultimately the choice will be your associations and either way would require adjacent centre and OMHA Board approval.

3. If "hard" boundaries are used, does the OMHA have any criteria as to how / where they are placed between centres, or is it strictly up to the centres involved with that section of the boundary? (ie, should it be set as the midpoint between centres, or a boundary somewhat related to the pre-amalgamation boundaries?)

As per above it will be up to the centre to determine and then obtain agreement from their adjacent centres in conjunction with support from your Regional Executive Member.

4. What happens to the players that are currently right of choice to Millbrook, and wish to continue playing in the new amalgamated centre? Can they be "grandfathered" in to the new amalgamated centre even though they now live outside of the "hard" boundary (or are now resident restricted to another centre if right of choice style boundaries are used)?

Assuming they are "grandfathered" in to the new amalgamated centre, is the Declaration of Right of Choice document all they need to sign, or are they required to complete other documentation?

Does it make a difference if the child has never played Rep hockey and has never signed a Declaration of Right of Choice document?

A agreement as to who is eligible to be grandfathered regardless of the boundary issues, etc., and based on the player's current home association, would need to be determined. Once the players to be offered grandfathering are determined an offer is given to them which they would either accept of deny.

5. For a family in the above situation (assuming their child is "grandfathered") who also has younger children not yet playing hockey, will they too be eligible to stay in the new amalgamated centre?

At what point will they be required to complete the necessary documentation for their younger children?

Do the younger children have the option NOT to play in the new amalgamated centre?

Again, this would have to be worked out in the grandfathering agreement. Some associations have included siblings while others have not.

6. Again with the scenario indicated above. If a child has never registered to play hockey in Millbrook, but plans to for this coming season. If they register prior to the amalgamation, do they fall into the same category as the family in question #4?

Are they eligible to register with the amalgamated centre for this coming season if they wait until after the amalgamation occurs?

This also would be based on the terms of the agreement. In general, however, it is based on those players registered with the association that are eligible for representative programming with that association as of a predetermined date.

7. Can a family / families appeal the location of a hard boundary with the OMHA, or once all centres involved have agreed, it's a done deal?

Once the associations agree upon the boundaries (this not only means a committee from the association agrees to the boundary but that the membership votes on it and agrees) and the OMHA Board approves the boundary is a done deal.

8. How is the AAA zone for the amalgamated centre decided? Millbrook's is Peterborough, Rice Lake's is Lindsay? I assume those players that have made AAA teams for the coming season will be able to stay there to complete the coming season (2011-2012).

This would be determined in conjunction with your Regional Executive Member who would consult with the Zone Committee. Grandfathering would be an option in this matter as well. I suspect that one zone would need to be determined.

Where will the AAA players from the respective centres go to try-out for the 2012-2013 centre?

Would be dependent on the AAA zone that you would become a member of with the exception of those players that opt to remain with their previous zone through grandfathering.

May they continue to try-out in the AAA centre that they have played for over the past number of years, or do they have to switch?

As per above one zone would most likely be determined and players affected would be offered grandfathering opportunities.

Can they switch if they wish to? (assuming a single AAA centre is used for the amalgamated centre, and that that centre is not the player's previous centre).

Unlikely that they would remain with two different zones but this would need to be determined. I'm not sure what the scenario would be regarding continued eligibility.

Dear Members of MDMHA,

March 7, 2011

As you may have heard enrollment across Ontario has been falling. While Millbrook has traditionally been a strong hockey community, we too have been affected. The Ontario Minor Hockey Association (OMHA) has been encouraging centres to consider amalgamation to bolster their numbers and stay competitive. We have been in discussion with the Rice Lake Minor Hockey Association (Bewdley) about amalgamating our two centres. Rice Lake has nearly 70 players right now and MDMHA has nearly 200. By joining together we can strengthen both associations. Our increased numbers will allow us to field Rep teams at all levels and have good numbers for our house league teams. In short, it means better and more competitive hockey for everybody.

Many other centres in Ontario have already amalgamated or are in the process and ideally we would like to be able to choose who we join with rather than wait until our numbers have dropped low enough that we may not have a choice.

We are certain that you will have a lot of questions and we will be holding four information meetings in the coming months to make sure that all concerns are addressed and that all questions are answered. Following the four information meetings we will hold a fifth meeting during which there will be a vote by the membership of the MDMHA and RLMHA to determine if we will move forward with amalgamation.

The meeting dates and locations are as follows:

• Wednesday March 30th,, 7 - 9 pm at the Millbrook Lion's Den
• Wednesday April 13th,, 7 - 9 pm at the Bewdley Arena
• Tuesday May 17th, 7 - 9 pm at the Bewdley Arena
• Wednesday May 18th, 7 - 9 pm at the Millbrook Lion's Den
• Final Vote:
• Wednesday June 22nd, 7 - 8 pm South Monaghan Public School (to be confirmed on May 18th)

In the meantime, we thought we would try and cover what we think will be the most commonly asked questions:

What will our centre be called?

We don't know. Right now, we are thinking that we will hold a contest for the name and logo.

When will this amalgamation take place?

We are hoping that we can have a tentative agreement in place for the 2011/12 season.

What will the boundaries be?

We don't know - yet. The amalgamation team is currently researching this and will report back

with the boundaries.

Which rink will we be using?

Both rinks, as we do already.

What Classification will we be?

Bewdley is currently a "D" Centre and Millbrook is a "DD" Centre. We hope to remain a "DD" Centre.

What will the fees be?

For 2011/12 our fees will remain the same as posted. Going forward, our fees should remain approximately the same (given standard yearly increases), because both our associations have very similar fees now. They are just collected differently). Our ice rental fees are almost identical.

We hope that you will join us at any or all of the meetings so that you can have all your questions addressed.

Sincerely,

Melisande Neal

President

Sandy Towle

Secretary