• Thank you for such great performances at Championships
  • For groups moving on to World Championships good luck and safe travels
  • Information regarding the spring meeting will be announced soon

Proposals submitted for June meeting...

Proposals submitted for June meeting...

Proposals – Both Advisory Boards


Title: 01-2008 Judge Travel Pay

Submitted By: Kenneth Coultas (Lawrence County HS)

Referred To: BOTH Advisory Boards

Proposal: All judges will receive the current government mileage rate for travel (as of Jan. 1 of the calendar year) to and from all SCGC events.

Rationale:  Fuel costs are rising at an alarming rate. If judges are expected to be professionals and act professionally, they should be remunerated as such.  WGI does it.

Financial Impact: This could be handled in one of the following ways: 

Show sponsors are responsible for the cost. The travel fee that show sponsors currently pay could be abolished and the mileage fee could be added to each judge’s check. A roster of judge’s addresses could be maintained by the SCGC contest director. Mileage to and from the event could be calculated before-hand and the charges given to the contest host in time to include it on the salary check. Show hosts would have to budget for this extra expense.

The travel fee for contest sponsors could be raised to a more substantial amount and the SCGC could continue to issue monthly travel checks as it currently does.

The current travel fee could be maintained, but circuit member dues could be raised to cover the cost of additional travel. The SCGC provides a service that its members are purchasing. Everything service or product in this country has increased in price due to fuel costs. Each unit that utilizes buses or other forms of corporate transportation will have to charge their members more this upcoming season to compensate for the rising fuel costs. The SCGC may have to the same



                                                                                                   Title: 02-2008 Ties and Medals

Submitted By: Kenneth Coultas (Lawrence County HS)

Referred To: BOTH Advisory Boards

Proposal: In the event of a tie in the top three placements at SCGC championships, the following protocol will be utilized

In the event of a first place tie: the two units that are tied will each receive Gold medals. The next highest scoring group will be indicated as being the third place unit and will receive Bronze medals.

In the event of a second place tie: the top scoring unit will receive Gold medals. The tied units will receive Silver medals. There will be no Bronze medalist unit. The next highest scoring team will be in fourth place.

In the event of a third place tie: the top scoring unit will receive Gold medals. The second highest score will receive Silver medals. Both tied units will receive Bronze medals. The next highest team will be in fifth place.

Rationale:  The WGI tabulation program utilizes this practice. And until this season, this was common practice both in the SCGC and WGI. (Re: WGI ’03 MCM, SCGC ’07 Lawrence Co. Varsity) When the decision was made at this year’s championships, no policy was found in writing. This proposal is being presented in an effort to establish protocol that parallels WGI.

Financial Impact:  Should the situation occur again, one less set of medals would have to be provided by the circuit.


Title: 03-2008 Elimination of State Representatives

Submitted By: Kenneth Coultas (Lawrence County HS)

Referred To: BOTH Advisory Boards

Proposal: Eliminate the position of State Representatives from the SCGC structure. The current state representative position on the Board of Directors could be filled with a guard or percussion rep. It could also be held by a guard or percussion director on an alternating schedule (every two years.)

Rationale:  The state representative positions were necessary at a time when our circuit leadership consisted of one person.  The duties outlined for the state representative are the same as those of the CG and Percussion Coordinators which are paid positions in the current SCGC structure.  Only three states—KY, AL, and TN—have the required number of unit members to warrant having a state representative. All three of these states currently have representation on the SCGC board of directors.

Financial Impact: NONE


Proposals – Color Guard Advisory Board


Title: 04-2008 CG field day format

Submitted By: Gilles Ouellette/Contest Coordinator

Referred To: Color Guard Advisory Board

Proposal: Change the CG field day format for the Regional and A classes to the following: Units registered in the Novice and SB classes will compete in 1 grouping and from that evaluation we will create the classes. Units registered in the SAAA-SAA-SA classes will compete in 1 grouping and from that evaluation we will create the classes. The order of appearance will be random within each grouping. The scores and a dialog between the judges and the CG Coordinator will determine the make up of the classes

Rationale: Get a better balance of the classes sooner in the season. Reduce the potential high number of promotions (referring to last year).

Financial Impact: none


Title: 05-2008 Promotion criteria for CG

Submitted By: Gilles Ouellette/Contest Coordinator

Referred To: Color Guard Advisory Board

Proposal: Redefine the criteria for CG promotions to the following. Use the unit’s score (pre determined) as a "red flag".CG Coordinator and judging panel will have a dialogue and determine if the unit should be promoted (looking at potential growth, skill level, # hours they rehearse a week, etc we can put a list in place if the proposal gets accepted).  The CG Coordinator will inform the unit’s director before making the announcement public. At that time, the unit’s director will to able to object to it and a dialogue will take place including at this time the Contest Director. Only when all parties agree, will the promotion become official. This process could happen beyond the weekend of the contest but resolve before the following weekend.  Once a unit has been promoted, there will be no going back.

Rationale: Establish a procedure that is standard to the circuit. Eliminate the potential confusions.

Financial Impact: possible (will elaborate in my next proposal)


Title: 06-2008 Championships medal award policy.

Submitted By: Gilles Ouellette/Contest Coordinator

Referred To: Color Guard advisory board

Proposal: Include in our policy manual, a policy regarding medal recipients when there is a tie in a top 3 spot at Circuit Championships. Policy to be define as follows:

If a tie occurs in a top 3 spot, we will always crown a gold, silver and bronze medalist recipient, even if this means crowning potentially 6 units (ties in all 3 positions).

Rationale: Consistency. In the past 2 years, we have had ties in the top 3 medalist positions of a class and we have not been consistent in how we crown our medalist.

Financial Impact: Potential medals for a 4th, 5th and 6th unit.


Title: 07-2008 Field Day


Referred To: Color Guard Advisory Board

Proposal: Change the Field day process to allow all Novice and Scholastic B units to compete in one group and all A class units to compete in one group and allow the color guards to be seeded and placed in the class that best fits each unit. A placement committee would consist of the color guard coordinator and a downstairs judge and an upstairs judge. The committee would evaluate each unit and decide what class the unit is best suited for.

Rationale: By placing the color guard at field day each unit has a greater chance of starting the season in a class that they can be competitive in.

Financial Impact: Possible if we bring in extra judges to be in the evaluation committee. Otherwise None.

The structure of field day would need some discussion to decide a one or two day event north and south etc...


Title: 08-2008 Education

Submitted By: Dean Payne Color Guard Coordinator

Referred To: Color Guard Advisory Board

Proposal: Have a circuit sponsored education day during the month of October or November. This could be on a Sunday after a significant contest perhaps utilizing the judges involved in the contest to help with education (saving the circuit airfare) and we could have different seminars allowing vendors to set up booths and have classes on design, technique, and understanding the judges’ sheets etc...Or have it on a Saturday in November and make it an all day event.

Rationale: Being financially burdened the past few years the education in the circuit has been less than it needs to be. By having an education day we can help the growth of the circuit and build for the future.

Financial Impact: Could be significant depending on who, what, when, and where. We could charge a fee that could offset some of the cost and perhaps have an incentive to members that come could have lower dues.


Proposals - Percussion Advisory Board


Title: 09-2008 Allow SCGC judges to promote within the circuit

Submitted By: Alan Rice, 2Nd VP SCGC

Referred To: Percussion Advisory Board

Proposal: Allow SCGC judges to promote units to higher classes before WGI

Rational: We are lucky enough to have WGI judges that judge our circuit. They can give our groups a good idea if they should move up a class. Our groups will then have more time to be judged under the new sheets of the class in which they are promoted. The percussion advisory board and SCGC Percussion Judges coordinator would devise a system regarding how this would happen.

Financial Impact: A few more promotion pins to give out.


Title: 10-2008 Eliminate the percussion solo and small ensemble classes.

Submitted By: Gilles Ouellette/ Contest Coordinator

Referred To: Percussion Advisory Board

Proposal: Eliminate the Solo and small ensemble class

Rationale: The classes were put into places 2 years ago and we’ve had no participation so far. Offering the classes also creates potential facility challenges.

Financial Impact: None

SCGC Members in Action