Public-private becomes a territorial debate

From the 10/19/06 Courier-Journal:

Public-private becomes a territorial debate

LEXINGTON, Ky. -- The year-long battle between Kentucky's public and private high schools has been largely out of sight -- but not out of mind -- for several months.

The issue returns to the public arena today at the Kentucky High School Athletic Association's annual meeting in the Lexington Center.

The headline proposal isn't nearly as sweeping as last year's Proposal 20 -- which sought to create separate championship playoffs for public and private schools. During a tense and potentially historic meeting, Proposal 20 passed overwhelmingly. But it eventually withered in the face of opposition by the Kentucky Board of Education and ominous hints from state lawmakers.



And from the 10/19/06 Herald Leader:

KHSAA to address recruiting

The annual meeting of the Kentucky High School Athletic Association's Delegate Assembly never drew much attention until last October when the membership voted to split public and non-public schools into separate post-season championships.

The day after that vote, the KHSAA's Board of Control went against the wishes of the delegates by refusing to endorse the proposal.

Be interesting to follow.

With the defeat of Prop 20, we went from one big battle that would have been done in 1-2 years after legal fights to a mindset that this will be revisited every single October for a long, long time. Every facet will be studied and challenged and researched and proposals made and voted upon.

The best legislation and decisions are not always the ones that are able to be done the quickest. Prop 20 was "knee jerk" and was defeated because it isn't the best solution for the state as a whole. Hopefully some other measures can be instituted that will better serve the entire student body.

It will obviously be a "work in progress".

Originally Posted by EQUUS GREVYI

The best legislation and decisions are not always the ones that are able to be done the quickest. Prop 20 was "knee jerk" and was defeated because it isn't the best solution for the state as a whole. Hopefully some other measures can be instituted that will better serve the entire student body.

It will obviously be a "work in progress".

Prop 20 was definitely not a knee jerk. It may have seemed that way to the public, but there had been other proposals that are now being given serious consideration that had been defeated in past assemblies. It has been a topic of discussion among coaches and thus, the AD's and principals for 6-7 years.

I would not classify that as 'kneejerk.'

It was defeated because of political pressure.

Originally Posted by ladiesbballcoach

Prop 20 was definitely not a knee jerk. It may have seemed that way to the public, but there had been other proposals that are now being given serious consideration that had been defeated in past assemblies. It has been a topic of discussion among coaches and thus, the AD's and principals for 6-7 years.

I would not classify that as 'kneejerk.'

It was defeated because of political pressure.

It was defeated because it was a bad idea. If it had passed it would have gone to court. If this is about illegal activities, pass Prop 8 and really hammer the cheaters. If it isn't about illegal activities and is more about winning, find a better way.

Originally Posted by Trinity alum

It was defeated because it was a bad idea. If it had passed it would have gone to court. If this is about illegal activities, pass Prop 8 and really hammer the cheaters. If it isn't about illegal activities and is more about winning, find a better way.

First sentence, that is a matter of view. 190something educators felt it was not.

Second sentence, absolutely would have as well as any laws the legislature would have came up with. Sure would have put a different spin on state races this November.

I would have no problem with a system that hammers the cheaters. Absolutely none.

Still doesn't put rural and urban schools on the same playing field.

Originally Posted by ladiesbballcoach

First sentence, that is a matter of view. 190something educators felt it was not.

As we have discussed in the past ad anuseum just becaue a lot of people agree with something doesn't make it right. My question remains how many of those people actually voted their conscience rather then the way they were instructed by someone else.

Originally Posted by ladiesbballcoach

Second sentence, absolutely would have as well as any laws the legislature would have came up with. Sure would have put a different spin on state races this November.

I would have no problem with a system that hammers the cheaters. Absolutely none.

I think it will be very interesting to see how many public school people vote for this. Since every private school is a co-sponsor I would assume they will all vote for it. If a large number of public schools vote against it one has to wonder why they would be against stricter enforcement of rules

Originally Posted by ladiesbballcoach

Still doesn't put rural and urban schools on the same playing field[/B].

And they never will be. No system can insure that every school is 100% equal to all others and as I have said numerous times if families think that they are being shortchanged in their educational experience by living in a rural area and it is important enough to them then they need to relocate.

The bottom line is that I truely believe that if the territory restrictions are voted on there is already someone waiting to file suit on behalf of a student going from private to public school. Wilson Sears admitted in the Senate that a sizable percentage of his student body is from outside his "feeder system". There's no way that I believe that he is willing to give that up.

I could see rural public schools supporting it because the feeder thing means nothing to them. 100% of the students in my HS either went to our MS or have moved into the county and would have the proper approval through transfer process.

I would assume that a very large % of the rural schools in the state are the same way. Especially the counties with one school in the county.

It will be interesting to see how this would affect the open enrollment in Kenton and Jefferson Counties. Do they get ALL of the MS's in those counties listed as their feeder schools?

Originally Posted by ladiesbballcoach

It will be interesting to see how this would affect the open enrollment in Kenton and Jefferson Counties. Do they get ALL of the MS's in those counties listed as their feeder schools?

Yes they will.

What I think will be very interesting is how the Jeff. Co. schools will respond to the kids that come to them from parochial schools (it is a good sized number, far bigger the those that go from public to private) that will not be eligible for sports for a year.

Originally Posted by All Tell

Yes they will.

What I think will be very interesting is how the Jeff. Co. schools will respond to the kids that come to them from parochial schools (it is a good sized number, far bigger the those that go from public to private) that will not be eligible for sports for a year.

Well that will help solve the problem. Male gets how many MS's and a Harrison County gets one.

The way Prop 2 is worded, every public middle school in Jefferson County is a feeder to every public high school. The very large number of kids that leave parochial schools after the 8th grade to attend a public high school would be ineligible. The smaller number of kids that leave a public middle school after 8th grade to attend a private school would also be ineligible. The kids from the surrounding county that attend Somerset high would remain eligible, as long as there is an agreement between the two districts. Since there are already a large number of cross district students, I assume that an agreement is in place. Rob Mullin , the President of Trinity, was on WHAS radio this morning. He left me with NO doubt that if this atrocity is implemented, the next stop is court.

Originally Posted by ladiesbballcoach

Well that will help solve the problem. Male gets how many MS's and a Harrison County gets one.

Under the current rules, Harrison County gets as many middle schools as it chooses, just like every other high school in the state.

Originally Posted by Trinity alum

Under the current rules, Harrison County gets as many middle schools as it chooses, just like every other high school in the state.

In theory, yes, in reality no.

Originally Posted by ladiesbballcoach

Male gets how many MS's and a Harrison County gets one.

Male gets 3. Male is also 4A whereas Harrison Co. is 3A. While I understand your point, I think you should be more careful when making comparisons.

Originally Posted by BuddyBW

Male gets 3. Male is also 4A whereas Harrison Co. is 3A. While I understand your point, I think you should be more careful when making comparisons.

You are incorrect. Male will have listed as potential feeder schools every middle school in Jefferson County, as will every other public high school in Jefferson County. If the school board opts to limit them to just accepting students from the three traditional middle schools it will have no effect on this proposal.

The only certainty in all of this mess is that it's going to get very. very ugly.

The schools that operate on an unlevel playing field are the public schools with open enrollment. Prop 2 only tilts the field more in their favor.

How do you interpret territories for non-publics with less than 300 students. For example; Bethlehem High School in Bardstown is a member of the louisville archdiocese but have less than 300 students. Will they be allowed to draw from the entire archdiocese or are they limited to kids that live 20 mile radius from the school.

Originally Posted by BuddyBW

Male gets 3. Male is also 4A whereas Harrison Co. is 3A. While I understand your point, I think you should be more careful when making comparisons.

That is for one sport. And my world does not revolve around football but looking at all of the sports and how this would effect them.

So,.....

In basketball, they compete against each other. Baseball, they compete against each other. Softball, they compete against each other. Volleyball, they compete against each other. Soccer, they compete against each other. Etc, ETc.

Male and Harrison Co. are very different schools with very different circumstances. Is what the proposals want as fair as possible for the diffent schools and different systems? I don't know, and don't know if it is possible.