I don't know around the state, but it happens all the time between Newport and Holmes. And I mean all the time. It's happening right now! And I'm sure it happens all over the place. The rule is there for good reason, like the example I gave of a family having to pick up and move. But the rule is used all the time for transferring. The reason it's not used more is beacuse everyone assumes that you have to go to the district you transferred in to. That's not the case at all though.

 

To be fair with Newport and Holmes there is a lot more at play with these kids personal lives when moves happen. Sensitive subjects that aren't really comparable to this situation.

I think this is an interesting and fair discussion about the concept of "bonafide change." I didn't take it as questioning Highlands' role in anything. The question posed is simple.

 

Can you live on one street in Edgewood(for example) and then move a few streets away (still in Edgewood) and get the one-year sit rule waived when transferring schools?

 

I get RCC's argument that the Holmes/HC/Newport situation shows that it's allowed but I don't think it's that simple. I think "spirit of the rule" comes into play. We saw that with the Mitchell case and a subsequent change to their wording. In that case the Mitchells still owned their home in Florence and rented in Ft Thomas. By the literal wording of the rule that would seem to be a change of address. KHSAA didn't think so. My guess is that they wouldn't think my Edgewood example or this girl's case would meet the intent either.

 

Good debate.

 

Still owning the home is key here I believe for the Mitchell case. Now my guess is you could still own a home if you are actually trying to sell it. I have to believe people move before their house is sold all the time. But if you were just showing two residents, then I could see that being an issue.

To be fair with Newport and Holmes there is a lot more at play with these kids personal lives when moves happen. Sensitive subjects that aren't really comparable to this situation.

 

Agreed. Not debating that in a lot of cases. And that's probably why no one really makes that much of a stink about it. But that's not the case for all those over the years or even right now. Again, I don't care about it as long as they do it the right way and aren't enticed by the other program to do it.

The situation is pretty much the same as the Mitchell situation the address will change just for the school year. Her true address is in Grant County, the address given now is temporary. I am all for a kid transferring but if its done the right way. I feel for the players at ND that she played with for the past 2 years because with Martin they would be one of the favorites in the 9th. ND still is a contender but there chances would be immensely better with Martin on the floor for them.

I have no problem with the KHSAA coming out to say whether a transfer was accepted or denied but to put the reasons, I think, would be an invasion of privacy for those who are transferring. We don't need to know details. It's none of "your" business why "I" want to transfer as long as the KHSAA gives their blessing.

 

Technically its a public record so privacy really is out the window.

Not sure any of this matters, with no residency requirement by the KHSAA she could move out of state and be eligible.

The situation is pretty much the same as the Mitchell situation the address will change just for the school year. Her true address is in Grant County, the address given now is temporary. I am all for a kid transferring but if its done the right way. I feel for the players at ND that she played with for the past 2 years because with Martin they would be one of the favorites in the 9th. ND still is a contender but there chances would be immensely better with Martin on the floor for them.

 

Are you saying she should never have been eligible at ND? If not and she was eligible at ND shouldn't she be eligible at HHS?

The situation is pretty much the same as the Mitchell situation the address will change just for the school year. Her true address is in Grant County, the address given now is temporary. I am all for a kid transferring but if its done the right way. I feel for the players at ND that she played with for the past 2 years because with Martin they would be one of the favorites in the 9th. ND still is a contender but there chances would be immensely better with Martin on the floor for them.

 

That is not true. I'm not going to go into details, but the address she is at now is not temporary.

Are you saying she should never have been eligible at ND? If not and she was eligible at ND shouldn't she be eligible at HHS?

 

Not sure if it applies the same way as it did when she was at Notre Dame. Some have suggested that the Catholic Private Schools don't have to play by the same rules as with others. Can someone clarify the difference for us.....??? Or is there any?

Still owning the home is key here I believe for the Mitchell case. Now my guess is you could still own a home if you are actually trying to sell it. I have to believe people move before their house is sold all the time. But if you were just showing two residents, then I could see that being an issue.

 

My point in mentioning the Mitchell case is that the wording used does not always mean what it sounds like it might mean.

Not sure if it applies the same way as it did when she was at Notre Dame. Some have suggested that the Catholic Private Schools don't have to play by the same rules as with others. Can someone clarify the difference for us.....??? Or is there any?

 

The KHSAA treats them the same.

That is not true. I'm not going to go into details, but the address she is at now is not temporary.

 

Looks like her last address was temporary? :laugh:

The KHSAA treats them the same.

 

Thanks I wasn't sure.

Since you know who is she living with?

Since you know who is she living with?

 

She lives with her dad. Anything beyond that, you'd need to ask her or her dad.