Tumultuous times ahead for youth soccer in Alameda?
Tonight, the Alameda Soccer Club will be voting on an issue that will have long standing ramifications for Alameda children’s access to fields in the city. If you’re child plays ASC soccer, you’re a member and can attend.
Quick background:
- The Jack London Youth Soccer League (JLYSL) is made up of six clubs, Alameda, Grass Valley, Montclair, Oakland, Piedmont and Rockridge. It is currently headed by an Alamedan.
- Alameda Soccer Club comprises about 19% of the players in JLYSL.
- Alameda provides 60% of the playing fields for JLYSL games and 35-40% of the practice fields.
- For a past number of years, Piedmont soccer and Bay Oaks (a select group of players from the six clubs) have had an exclusive lease on four of the fields at Alameda Point. This lease becomes available in September.
- Hornet Field, out at Alameda Point is the premier field in the league. Alameda teams have used it approximate 12% of the time. The lease became available in December ’08 and ASC has now scheduled the field for 100% Alameda games and practices.
- JLYSL has requested that ASC pay an additional $60,000 to cover the field expenses of other clubs.
The story:
Alameda Soccer Club (ASC) has been growing steadily over the past years, and field use is becoming an issue. Last year many teams shared practice fields with up to three others, some Alameda teams played almost every game out of town. Last November, PM Realty approached the club about leasing the Alameda Point fields directly from the ARRA (Alameda Point Joint Powers Authority) and was quote $18,000 a month and said “no thanks.” Subsequently, word was passed down via JLYSL that Piedmont had signed a new five-year deal for the fields at no-cost, and won JLYSL approval to spend $70,000 of JL funds on improvements on the fields. Piedmont and Bay Oaks would then split the use of the fields among themselves.
Case closed, or so it seemed. In late May, “City Leaders” called ASC to say that they have concerns about Piedmont leasing Alameda’s fields and that the deal was not done yet. This was news to ASC, that the fields’ lease was still apparently up for grabs.
The ASC board voted to ask the city for a direct lease of the 4 Alameda Point fields that Piedmont has been leasing, with the stipulation that Piedmont/Bay Oaks would have a one-year sublease during the first year.
Piedmont freaked out and JLYSL flipped out and passed the following after a reminder that members of JLYSL means that you are required to abide by the policies and rules of the league:
The league supports and endorses the efforts of the Piedmont Soccer Club in their efforts to renew the lease at Alameda Point fields due in part to their investment, stewardship and equity in making the facility available to the entire league.
Any negotiations regarding field acquisition, control and permitting with the various bureaucratic entities must be channeled through the League’s Gopher Committee in order to present a single, common voice that represents the League’s interest. Each club has a representative on this committee.
An individual that interferes or undermines these relationships by purporting to represent the interests of the league or member clubs without the expressed permission of the Gophers’ committee may be subject to suspension from all league activities.
President Christopher Seiwald is authorized to issue a statement to the powers that be regarding the League’s position on the awarding the lease at Alameda Point.
Essentially hog-tying ASC, making it impossible for ASC to negotiate for fields under negotiations already approved by the gopher league. Further, these new policies make it difficult for the club to address the inequality of a $60,000 subsidy from ASC to the Oakland clubs.
This growing strife could very easily be the beginnings of ASC breaking away from JLYSL in the hopes that its own size will be enough to create a dynamic league and local field use will become more readily available. More to come….I’m sure.
- By the way, the league is looking for U-10 coaches, as enrollment for the Fall is way up. If you have coached in the past, contact the league.
Popularity: 1% [?]
J.E.A.
August 10th, 2009 at 4:20 pm
I’m confused……I pay dues for my child to play soccer (Rec) and Piedmont and Bay Oaks have exclusive rights to the best fields in Alameda while we get the leftovers. Something is very wrong here. And, if I’m reading your post correctly they don’t pay extra for this? If ASC breaks off from JLYSL would the fields no longer be available to Piedmont and Bay Oaks and be divided up between the Alameda teams? Of course if ASC decided to break with JLYSL then the older teams would not have enough competition to make it fun. I guess my question would be what do you think ASC should do?
tony
August 10th, 2009 at 7:01 pm
“I pay dues for my child to play soccer (Rec) and Piedmont and Bay Oaks have exclusive rights to the best fields in Alameda while we get the leftovers.”
Those clubs (PSC and BO) do not have access to the best fields in Alameda. They have access to the utility fields out on the old Naval Base and have done their best to maintain them despite limited funds. This arrangement has gone on for over ten years and it has worked very well to help spread equity of field upkeep and stewardship to all of the clubs in JLYSL.
ASC has been offered time on those fields for the past few years and they have never taken advantage of them.
The reality is most coaches in ASC don’t want to travel to that end of the island for practice. They would rather train “closer” to home.
The bad thing about all this is the mis information being spread around by uniformed ASC board members who have no history of how things run in the local soccer community.
Cynthia
August 10th, 2009 at 8:13 pm
I would like to add–Thank you, Tony–and the ‘real’ story is a lot bigger than what is listed here. BO and PSC wouldn’t have exclusive rights to the best fields. ASC already has over 10 fields in the city, but it doesn’t use them, and plus it is currently ruining the best field in the city (Hornet) by over watering certain sections, and not watering other areas—and then moaning about having to take care of it. When teams use it they pay—it’s not used for free! Plus, let’s not forget all of these clubs are SUPPOSED to be working together for the kids. Why are they fighting different branches of the same organization??? It is Absolutely ridiculous! Stop the power struggles and work for the betterment of the kids in the area who would like to learn how to play soccer!
J.E.A.
August 10th, 2009 at 8:31 pm
OK….I am now more confused. ASC has ten fields that it does not use but this Spring we had to share a field for practice. Where are these fields and where should I go to get more information. So, Tony and Cynthia point me in the right direction to get the info I need. Thanks
Know a bit
August 10th, 2009 at 9:24 pm
Sad that John Knox White is struggling so much with the facts on this, and like most things, there is much going on between the lines. Cynthia who commented earlier certainly knows a thing or two for sure.
The basics start with the simple fact that ASC was taken over in a coup last year by a group who are in way over their heads and are now extending their Jihad against their neighbours. Its a mess.
Also sad that the CIty of Alameda cannot seem to prioritize youth sports and make city sports fields available in a more coherent fashion, but that is another story entirely.
That out of town clubs want to bring money into Alameda to upgrade additional fields that also benefit Alameda kids is something that ought to be supported not fought over.
Yeah!, ‘close the draw bridges’….So sad. How about, ‘Welcome’, that a thank you for investing in Alameda!!
Lastly, Bay Oaks is an Alameda club. That would be the club many if not most of the Alameda girls and boys high school teams play on.
Please, for the sake of kids, knock it off already !!
Know a bit
August 10th, 2009 at 9:37 pm
Lastly, the quote in the story “some Alameda teams played almost every game out of town.” is utter nonsense.
For the very reasons stated in the story – Alameda has most of the fields – ASC teams play almost every game at home, and almost never play away.
My kids have played soccer for over 10 seasons combined in ASC and we have maybe played two games out-of-town.
Much to the happiness, I may add, of the parents who don’t want to play in Oakland.
J.E.A.
August 10th, 2009 at 9:56 pm
First let me say if one lives in Alameda and has children that play soccer we know what Bay Oaks is but my question was should they have exclusive rights to the fields? Knows a bit, Tony and Cynthia all agree that JKW post is factually incorrect so I’m just trying to find out where I get the real story so that I can make an informed judgement. So, once again if someone can point me in the right direction I would greatly appreciate it.
John Knox White
August 10th, 2009 at 11:11 pm
Know a bit,
Just to be clear, my son’s Alameda Rec team played all but two games outside of Alameda last year. It may not be normal, but it’s certainly happened.
JAE,
The answer to your initial comment is “I don’t know.”
I think that the answer probably lies between the two sides of issue. There do seem to be some field space issues, but it’s also important to keep in mind that JLYSL offers a lot of benefits to Alameda players and to realize that there’s a benefit to working together regionally.
In the interest of keeping the post short(ish), I kept my personal opinion out, trying to cover the overall issue I hadn’t meant to endorse it as my own POV, just push the info out there. I plan to write about my own thoughts another day.
Cynthia and Tony, feel free to hit me with more info, I’ll be happy to add it to the above page, or present it separately in its own post.
Know a bit
August 11th, 2009 at 1:08 am
In the interest of clearing the fog, let me present a few basics on the situation at hand (and a few editorial comments just to get it off my chest.)
1) Most of the fields for the JLYSL are in Alameda.
2) Most players are from parts of Oakland, ie Rockridge, Montclair, etc.
3) Oakland doesn’t do a whole lot right and sports fields are no exception. However, the Rockridge and Montclair clubs do have money.
4) Peidmont has few fields, no space but they have money too.
5) Alameda hosts most games JLYSL plays and ASC teams play the vast, vast majority of games at home. Parents all cheer !!
6) That there is a shortage of fields as Alameda is dominated by three main facts. One, long time baseball interests dominate, although soccer is the No. 1 kids sport, particularly for girls; Two, Alameda’s parks were build before soccer was popular so a retrofit is needed in park priorities; and Three, the drought and the financial crisis are not helping. The city is closing access to fields on both accounts.
7) City government has to do a lot of things, but not a whole lot is done great. Soccer fields take a lot of work as the sport is hard on fields (“if only those pesky kids weren’t around, the parks would be great”).
However, let me editorialize, Its a shame that Alameda has kicked them off Alameda’s fields as these are Alameda’s High School soccer teams by and large and they have to play most games away. Shame and more shame on Alameda parks and wrecks. Mr. Dale Lillard and that board really needs to wake up on this issue as the worst of Alameda’s draw bridge mentality is at play on this issue.
9) JLYSL tries to manage this best they can and the deal for Piedmont to pay to manage Alameda Point’s 3 u-12-14 fields and one U-10 field at Alameda Point is more than reasonable.
10) These fields are used for home games for ASC kids as well.
11) One big issue here, restated, is that Bay Oaks teams have been kicked off Alameda’s city owned fields. This is likely one reason why they want access to Alameda point fields in this deal, paid for, I may add, by Piedmont. That means that Alameda’s best soccer players can actually play in town, paid for by outsiders. Not a bad deal if you can get it, I’d say.
12) So the bottom line is that Alameda’s kids gets an investment in fields, and more home games.
13) ASC is going thru a transition as a new group tossed out the old group because one Dad was mad about who was coaching one girls Select team. No, this is not made up. Just like term- limits in Sacramento, this has led to a new group (at ASC) having to come up to speed on lots of issues and holding a grudge on fields, Bay Oaks, etc. is just part of that. No shock that some of what is going on is personal, but let’s leave that out for now a for a moment pretend to focus on the kids.
What is the deal here anyway? Alameda should want out-of-towners coming in, spending money at Soccer Post, etc. Alameda is in dire need of a new identity anyway and being a regional destination for sports and soccer is hardly a downer in my view.
Come on people. Stop baiting the issue as out of towner’s abusing Alameda.
Accept the basic facts. JLYSL is almost certainly better than going alone, Oakland is a mess and short on fields but the clubs have a bit of money they want to spend here in Alameda on the old base for the time being.
Lastly, allow Alameda’s best players who play on Bay Oaks and have access to fields in town and move on already.
Hope this helps
Soccer Fan
August 11th, 2009 at 9:33 am
YAY to Know A Bit…As a parent and resident of Alameda, I have three children who play soccer, two of which play competitively. It is ashame that so much misinformation is being spread around by ASC. Before they or anyone publish these so called facts, they need to do their research and give out TRUE FACTS, not FICTION.
Of course in this blog, they don’t mention there is a rule in Alameda that your team must consist of 75% Alameda residents to use their fields. My kids’ team can’t even play on these fields even though 50% of their team is from Alameda. How sad is that? I am an Alameda taxpayer and my kids can’t even play on these fields. How can ASC claim that PSC or Bay Oaks have exclusive rights to these fields? Do they even know the history behind all of this? Sad they didn’t know they had rights to the fields too but didn’t take advantage of it. So now they want their sister clubs to look bad.
As any club in Jack London, we pay to play on these fields. These fields aren’t free to these clubs and the only one who basically has exclusive rights to certain fields is Alameda Soccer Club.
J.E.A., if you want a list of these field rich fields, go to the Alameda Soccer Club or the Jack London website and look under fields.
Here are the list of fields they don’t mention about that aren’t even available to Alameda residents if you don’t belong to a team in ASC or have 75% of players from Alameda.
1) Alameda Multi-purpose
Lincoln Park
2) Atlantic 1 & 2
3) Bayport
4) Coast Guard
5) Godfrey
6) Harrington
7) Hornet
9) Tillman
10) Witter 1
11) Wood Track
Not to mention, there are fields at the various schools in Alameda.
How can they say they are lacking fields? If their field scheduler was doing their job correctly, they wouldn’t have 3 teams at one time practicing at the same field. We were long time ASC members and we never had these type of issues until this new board came in. Someone needs to fire them!! They aren’t doing it for the kids, it’s all for selfish reasons.
You need to ask, what is the driving factor behind all this? Why aren’t they willing to work with Jack London and their sister clubs? Don’t they want money coming in for Alameda city? I sure do.
How can they be upset that their sister clubs want to help rehabilitate a field by using their own club money? This just doesn’t make sense.
J.E.A.
August 11th, 2009 at 10:45 am
Yikes….so much to think about. It seems like the clubs could use a mediator (not a parent) to come in and straighten things out. Hopefully cooler minds will prevail and the children (of all the clubs) will come out winners with fields to play on.
Soccer Mom in the Making
August 15th, 2009 at 12:42 pm
As mom to a boy who is just getting started with the whole ASC thing, I am very disappointed to read all these postings. It really makes me feel like I should talk my son into playing something else!
Waiting for the Update...
August 19th, 2009 at 1:55 pm
Is there an update or outcome from the meeting?
John Knox White
August 19th, 2009 at 2:24 pm
update is: “no action taken”
More info to come, between the recall, computer issues and non-blog commitments, I haven’t been able to get back to it.
Shortly. Thanks for your patience.
soccer mom 2
September 1st, 2009 at 7:02 am
i have no idea what the real facts are and like JKW, i suspect they lie somewhere in the middle.
Fact: my son’s Alameda U10 soccer team last year played 8 of 10 games in Oakland and all tournament play was in Oakland
Fact: my son’s Alameda U12 team played 100% of games in Alameda