I like Proposal 8.

 

Proposal 2 looks like restrictions for privates, business as usual for the publics. Not suprised our anything.

Only two of the members of the Board of Conrol represent private schools. Did they support the proposal?

 

I would agree withy Rickyp that Proposal 2 provides business as usual for the publics.

Actually, ladiesbballcoach, I think a better solution would be an addendum to Proposal 8 which would provide for punishment of any school which makes accusations which, after investigation, prove to be baseless. If enforced, this would eventually cut down on the workload of KHSAA.

So punish the whistleblower if the KHSAA cannot substantiate it? Remember, not being able to substantiate it and being innocent is two different things.

 

I would fully support a plan to punish a person/school if they were turning in accusations without any support to them.

 

But you cannot expect a school to have to turn over documents to a rival school so that rival school can research the charges BEFORE they turn it over to the KHSAA. That is ridiculous.

No, ladiesbballcoach, not "ridiculous" at all. I said that the party you call the "whistleblower" should be punished if its allegations prove to be "baseless". That is a far cry from the the accuser having "reasonable cause" to complain.

 

I believe that those who may merely sling manure at an opponent hoping something will stick should be accountable for their actions. Again, if their complaint proves to be nothing more than a "fishing expedition" (baseless), the school should pay a hefty price for its actions. I believe that most complaints are filed for the sole purpose of harming another school. At present, the KHSAA provides no negative consequences for those making frivilous accusations. Holding everyone accountable would certainly curtail much of the whining and lessen the work load on KHSAA. Somehow, I think that is quite reasonable and certainly not "ridiculous".

No, ladiesbballcoach, not "ridiculous" at all. I said that the party you call the "whistleblower" should be punished if its allegations prove to be "baseless". That is a far cry from the the accuser having "reasonable cause" to complain.

 

I believe that those who may merely sling manure at an opponent hoping something will stick should be accountable for their actions. Again, if their complaint proves to be nothing more than a "fishing expedition" (baseless), the school should pay a hefty price for its actions. I believe that most complaints are filed for the sole purpose of harming another school. At present, the KHSAA provides no negative consequences for those making frivilous accusations. Holding everyone accountable would certainly curtail much of the whining and lessen the work load on KHSAA. Somehow, I think that is quite reasonable and certainly not "ridiculous".

Actually, I believe we both missed the point of each other's post. I said I would support what you have stated above. Only question is, who gets to make the call that it has no support? The same organization that presently a good number has no faith in making the call/proving allegations.

The call would be made by the committee proposed in Proposal 8 or a similar committee (assuming that the publics will never vote for Proposal 8). Presently the membership is subject to and bound by the pronouncements of KHSAA. For the organization to work, that cannot change. Many have differences with KHSAA but, in reality, it does a decent job under demanding circumstances.

 

I have confidence that the board of control (particularly with the recent change in membership) could select a committee, probably headed by the very able Pete Karem, that would do an excellent job of separating the wheat from the chaff, investigating and acting accordingly in regard to the wheat, and punishing any meanspirited providers of the chaff.

 

As I said, the result would be less work for the KHSAA because "reporters" would be deterred from making baseless complaints merely to hurt their neighbors and competition.

The call would be made by the committee proposed in Proposal 8 or a similar committee (assuming that the publics will never vote for Proposal 8). Presently the membership is subject to and bound by the pronouncements of KHSAA. For the organization to work, that cannot change. Many have differences with KHSAA but, in reality, it does a decent job under demanding circumstances.

 

I have confidence that the board of control (particularly with the recent change in membership) could select a committee, probably headed by the very able Pete Karem, that would do an excellent job of separating the wheat from the chaff, investigating and acting accordingly in regard to the wheat, and punishing any meanspirited providers of the chaff.

 

As I said, the result would be less work for the KHSAA because "reporters" would be deterred from making baseless complaints merely to hurt their neighbors and competition.

I understand your reasoning and it sounds very logical but the job to decide what is "baseless" and what is "unsubstantiated" seems like it would be very difficult.

Of course it would be difficult and somewhat subjective but, then, most every decision made by KHSAA is subjective to some extent. Anytime human beings make the decision, there is a risk. However, we do this every day in the civil and criminal courts of this land. Although imperfect, it would be an improvement over the present system where accusers are held to no responsibility whatsoever.

Of course it would be difficult and somewhat subjective but, then, most every decision made by KHSAA is subjective to some extent. Anytime human beings make the decision, there is a risk. However, we do this every day in the civil and criminal courts of this land. Although imperfect, it would be an improvement over the present system where accusers are held to no responsibility whatsoever.

I understand your point and argument. Not sure how I feel about it at this point.

 

I do know that schools cannot and should not have the manpower to investigate things before they turn it over to the KHSAA. That is supposed to be the KHSAA's job. I do understand that in a world ran by adults that don't always have the purest of notions, allegations are probably not always on the up and up.

 

But I can very easily seeing a district saying, we believe this has happened, but we can't spend time and resources making sure it happened BEFORE we report it so in case the KHSAA can't prove it, we get fined. Instead they will just drop it.

 

Also, can an individual make a claim rather than the school? Would you fine individuals and how do you enforce that?

 

Not arguing but simply thinking about how this would play out.

Very good questions. It would be unreasonable for any accuser to be required to have absolute and conclusive proof of alleged transgressions. I think that a "good faith" test should be applied as is often used in the law in general. Is there a reasonable basis for the allegation or is it obviously a witch hunt? It leaves the determination up to the panel in charge and that panel would carefully weigh the circumstances and available "proof". If baseless behavior is not clearly indicated, don't punish the accuser. If it is, make an example of the accuser.

 

I think that complaints should be filed by member schools and not by individuals. Accusers must be accountable. Member schools are accountable by the mere fact that they are a part of the organization. Individuals are not. If individuals have a complaint, that complaint should be made to KHSAA by and through a member school. No dealing with individuals. This requirement would also do a lot to deter baseless claims.

 

If the concept of responsibility for your acts is introduced into the equation, the whole system will work better.

Very good questions. It would be unreasonable for any accuser to be required to have absolute proof of alleged transgressions. I think that a "good faith" test should be applied as is often used in the law in general. Is there a reasonable basis for the allegation or is it obviously a witch hunt? It leaves the determination up to the panel in charge and that panel would carefully weigh the circumstancesand available "proof". If baseless behavior is not clearly indicated, don't punish the accuser. If it is, make an example of the accuser.

 

I think that complaints should be filed by member schools and not by individuals. Accusers must be accountable. Member schools are accountable by the mere fact that they are a part of the organization. Individuals are not. If individuals have a complaint, that complaint should be made to KHSAA by and through a member school. No dealing with individuals. This requirement would also do a lot to deter baseless claims.

 

If the concept of responsibility for your acts is introduced into the equation, the whole system will work better.

In the first paragraph, I would have to defer to your knowledge of the law because I have zero experience/knowledge to draw on what you are talking about.

 

I agree that complaints should be filed by schools. I assume that presently they do not have to be because a link has been provided on here numerous times if someone wanted to report an allegation of impropriety.

http://www.bluegrasspreps.com/showthread.php?t=98937

 

Post #11 in this thread about Ben Revere caused Lex Cath to do an investigatioin, since they are on probation from the KHSAA. It was based on a post from BGP! I could imagine that Proposal 8 would be a good thing, as this was a baseless allegation.