Here is a different scenario and tell me if this is how things should be handled. Highlands has a kid transferring in from Ryle that will be a part of the football team. My understanding that he was told he could not participate during the summer months until he was actually enrolled in the school. From what I am reading however, he should be allowed to attend summer workouts at the school of his choice?

So are we saying that all kids attending the private schools are paying at least half tuition all the time? Their family is paying the tuition or at least half?? Because I can think of quite of a few examples where I know the family of the students are not able to pay even half the tuition and are attending the private schools.

Here is a different scenario and tell me if this is how things should be handled. Highlands has a kid transferring in from Ryle that will be a part of the football team. My understanding that he was told he could not participate during the summer months until he was actually enrolled in the school. From what I am reading however, he should be allowed to attend summer workouts at the school of his choice?

 

That's what I'm hearing in this discussion, but I know that HHS WILL NOT let any kid participate in any sport until they are 100% sure they are enrolled in the district.

So are we saying that all kids attending the private schools are paying at least half tuition all the time? Their family is paying the tuition or at least half?? Because I can think of quite of a few examples where I know the family of the students are not able to pay even half the tuition and are attending the private schools.

 

 

The 50% limitation is for financial aid in Diocesan schools (I think).

 

Scholarships can be used on top of that but I'm guessing scholarships would impact how much aid they would be approved for.

Here is a different scenario and tell me if this is how things should be handled. Highlands has a kid transferring in from Ryle that will be a part of the football team. My understanding that he was told he could not participate during the summer months until he was actually enrolled in the school. From what I am reading however, he should be allowed to attend summer workouts at the school of his choice?

 

Has he enrolled?

You are a smart person Lawnboy so you know which ones or least can guess.

 

Honestly, I'm stumped!!!!

 

You made the claim, so you should provide the schools that this is happening at.

The 50% limitation is for financial aid in Diocesan schools (I think).

 

Scholarships can be used on top of that but I'm guessing scholarships would impact how much aid they would be approved for.

 

Correct.

RCC9 really knows how to get a thread going, the All A now this. :lol2:

You referenced 16-6-4. Look at the end of that .... "is outside the scope and allowable contact periods contained in bylaw 23." So that tells us there are defined periods.

 

Bylaw 23-1-c defines the the year as either May 31 or the last day of school - whichever comes first.

 

23-16-2 says that once summer starts and through June 24 play is governed at the local level(which seems to back up what the person from the KHSAA told me yesterday).

 

You may very well be right, but I find it very difficult to believe that "governed at the local level" means some of the recruiting rules and especially enrollment rules do not apply. I am not sure how coaching a kid who is not enrolled at your school, as a member of your school team in the summer time would not be impermissible contact per bylaw 16.

The rules about a kid having to be enrolled in your school or a feeder school do not say anything about bylaw 23. Surely the line 4 and line 7 of BL 16-6 do not trump other lines of bylaw 16. Especially the enrollment part.

You may very well be right, but I find it very difficult to believe that "governed at the local level" means some of the recruiting rules and especially enrollment rules do not apply. I am not sure how coaching a kid who is not enrolled at your school, as a member of your school team in the summer time would not be impermissible contact per bylaw 16.

The rules about a kid having to be enrolled in your school or a feeder school do not say anything about bylaw 23. Surely the line 4 and line 7 of BL 16-6 do not trump other lines of bylaw 16. Especially the enrollment part.

 

As I said previously , recruiting rules apply 365 days per year.

 

The bylaws talk about who initiates contact and how a school should handle it. In no way can a coach invite a kid as I read the rules.

As I said previously , recruiting rules apply 365 days per year.

 

The bylaws talk about who initiates contact and how a school should handle it. In no way can a coach invite a kid as I read the rules.

Correct, but who initiated the contact does not change the enrollment rules. The whole bylaw is predicated on where the kid is enrolled. These rules only apply to kids not enrolled in the school or the feeder. Once they are enrolled, the rules do not apply.

Has he enrolled?

 

Based on our dialogue, this shouldn't matter from May 31 - June 24.

I

The 50% limitation is for financial aid in Diocesan schools (I think).

 

Scholarships can be used on top of that but I'm guessing scholarships would impact how much aid they would be approved for.

 

So would that be an advantage a private school has that a public would not. Example, an inner city kid wants out of their district. They could go to, say HC much easier (maybe free) than going to say Beechwood?

RCC9 really knows how to get a thread going, the All A now this. :lol2:

I guess that prom picture of RCC9 should be popping up any time now!

What gets me about this whole this is the consistent denial from catholic school supporters about scholarships or "sponsers( know a kid being sponsored at SHA). Our girls line up and play against whoever is on the other side and compete. Seems to me the parents, as usual, make the excuses for the kids. I wish it where a better system but it is what it is and we deal with it.