An Independent district is a public school district not part of a county system. That is the only distinction. I am not sure why we keep saying Independents can do certain things. IF a student chooses to attend a public school outside the district they must pay tuition. If not then the receiving school is no better than anybody else for not enforcing the rules. An independent district has limited boundaries much morese than the county districts since most county districts get a small piece of area and students who live in the independent cities. See parts of Ft. Thomas and Bellevue where those students belong to the county even though they live in the cities.

 

So are you saying that only County Public School systems are being asked to boycott private schools? If not, what difference does an Independent school district have from a County Public school system?

 

The point is Independent public school districts can advertise (and many do) to attract students that would have ended up at another public school or a private school and that is all well and good and perfectly within their rights. Nothing wrong with having pride and letting people know that your school system does a good job. If you have a product and people want to pay for it, that's great.

 

But now these same schools are suppossed to join a boycott against private schools that do the same?

An Independent district is a public school district not part of a county system. That is the only distinction. I am not sure why we keep saying Independents can do certain things. IF a student chooses to attend a public school outside the district they must pay tuition. If not then the receiving school is no better than anybody else for not enforcing the rules. An independent district has limited boundaries much morese than the county districts since most county districts get a small piece of area and students who live in the independent cities. See parts of Ft. Thomas and Bellevue where those students belong to the county even though they live in the cities.

But I thought that part of the Sears argument was that public schools had rigidly enforced districts?:confused:

This is some real bad info. Independent schools cannot advertise and just take kids; they have boundaries just like county schools. The only schools without boundaries are private schools. The Diocese of Cov. will tell you that they enforce boundaries but if you look at where kids live (and I can show proof but don't want to break the rules) they can't even control one private school from taking kids from another private schools areas.

AllTell I agree. Sear's argument in theory is valid. However.......blaming just private schools is a poor argument. There are way too many public schools doing the same thing. Rather than making this a public vs private it should be everybody play by the same rules. I can tell you there would be a whole lot of schools in trouble private and public alike if they had to define boundaries. Again if you look at my first post the approach is all wrong. Now....how about boycott every school who "recruits" kids from outside the district. In NK you would have several private and at least a handful of public schools to boycott. But not all private schools would be in trouble because they live with the boundaries they are given.

Well now, let's see what we would have if Sears's tantrum succeeds in a boycott.

 

The KHSAA is a "voluntary" organization. Schools in Kentucky are not forced to be a member.

 

However, KHSAA rules state that no member school is allowed to play any instate school that is not a member.

 

Therefore, in order to play in the postseason, the private schools would be required be to a member of the organization, with all its resrtictions and liabilities, but would have no games other than against fellow private schools and out of state schools.

 

Or, the private schools could withdraw from the KHSAA and not be allowed to play in postseason.

 

KHSAA has, in reality, pretty much a "closed shop" setup.

 

The result of all of this would be that the students attending the private schools would be seriously damaged by the intentional acts of those in the public schools. The cause-effect relationship would be obvious.

 

Does anyone else see some real furtile ground for litigation if Sears gets his way?

 

As I said earlier, the public schools need to get rid of Sears and get someone more responsible as its front man.

 

I don't follow you. The public schools refuse to play the private schools. The private schools can only play one another or out of state schools. They don't like it. Are you saying that they would SUE to force a public school to play them? What if all the public schools did was tell them to pound sand? All the kids report sick that week? Will you SUE for a declaration that they are not sick? What if they sit down on the field? Will you SUE to force them to get up?

 

I am sorry to take this to its silly conclusion, but much as I am tired of Sears' banter, I am almost as tired of hearing private school supporters flex their jawbones about what tremendous lawyers they will utilize. Being one myself, and having litigated several KHSaA issues, let me tell you that I am not all that impressed with the high priced legal talent names being bandied about.

Why would anyone think that the results of this one would be any different then the last time? The BOE stopped that one, it never got to the legislature.

 

Actually, the Board of Control stopped that one. It never got to the Board of Education.

 

The Board of Education thinks differently, and is constituted somehwat differently, than it was 6 months ago.

Competition makes us all better. Try a little harder to sell and/or improve the public schools. They have some good selling points, not the least of which is no tuition. For the life of me, I cannot see why a child should be penalized for wanting to better him/herself (at least as it may be perceived to be a betterment). If the privates can attract students, not so much because of a religious affiliation as with dissatisfaction with the local public schools, then shame on the local publics. Why penalize people for wanting to avail themselves of choices? It seems anti-American to curtail freedom of choice and/or association.

The only schools in NKY that strictly enforce a boundary seems to be the Boone County system. Thus, any "boycott" by the other public school districts would be odd to say the least.

I'll stand by my statement that you will not see any boycott in NKY.

I do not see a boycott in NKY happening either. Doesn't mean the coaches don't harbor ill feelings.

By whom?

 

 

So how could any NKY admin. support any kind of boycott when:

 

A) Students do not "belong" to anyone and cannot be "taken away"?

B) Many Students attend public schools that are not in the public school district they reside in?

The state of KY has assigned students to attend a certain school district. Their ADA money is tied to THAT district and cannot be used by any other district or school unless the DISTRICT says so.

 

So in essence, yes, the state of KY has monetarily assigned students to "belonging" to a certain school districts. NOTICE the STATE and not the SCHOOL has made that distinction.

 

My view, their ADA money should be assigned to the parent and could be used for any school of their choosing. Now that will blow a gasket in some of your all's mind sockets. The staunch supporter of public schools that I have been on here who would LOVE to have a voucher system allowing citizens to use tax dollars to attend a private school.

Competition makes us all better. Try a little harder to sell and/or improve the public schools. They have some good selling points, not the least of which is no tuition. For the life of me, I cannot see why a child should be penalized for wanting to better him/herself (at least as it may be perceived to be a betterment). If the privates can attract students, not so much because of a religious affiliation as with dissatisfaction with the local public schools, then shame on the local publics. Why penalize people for wanting to avail themselves of choices? It seems anti-American to curtail freedom of choice and/or association.

Attending a private school is not necessarily a betterment to the child. THAT IS A MYTH!

 

The latest research shows that you take the SAME socio-economic kids that are attending private schools that are attending public schools and they perform at the same level. When you compare apples to apples (as BGP is fond of saying) the privates DO NOT outperform the publics across the board.

 

Now when you throw in the publics oranges (court appointed students, resource students, students with parents who don't care), then they test scores change. The privates do not have the oranges or at least the quantity of oranges that the publics have.

I am sorry to take this to its silly conclusion, but much as I am tired of Sears' banter, I am almost as tired of hearing private school supporters flex their jawbones about what tremendous lawyers they will utilize. Being one myself, and having litigated several KHSaA issues, let me tell you that I am not all that impressed with the high priced legal talent names being bandied about.

I'm having dinner with one of them Saturday night. I'll pass your feelings along. I have no doubt it will spoil his dinner worrying about your opinion. We may have to have an adult beverage to drown our sorrows.:cry: This isn't the first time you have taken a shot at the private school lawyers.

This is some real bad info. Independent schools cannot advertise and just take kids; they have boundaries just like county schools. The only schools without boundaries are private schools. The Diocese of Cov. will tell you that they enforce boundaries but if you look at where kids live (and I can show proof but don't want to break the rules) they can't even control one private school from taking kids from another private schools areas.

 

Yes they can.

 

See the Ludlow Independent School District ad that ran on the KY Post Sports page. It did a very nice job of listing all the good things that the Ludlow schools could provide students (like smaller class sizes) and how to call for more information or tours.

 

The Diocese of Covington does not have boundaries. They have feeder parishes. But there are no restirctions of what parish you can belong to no matter where you live, and you are free to go to any private school from a non-feeder parish if you pay additional tuition. (Strangely similar to an Independant school district.)

 

So, for example, the Listerman boys have every right to attend CovCath with their coach Dad even though they lived in Campbell County and belonged to a parish there.

I'm having dinner with one of them Saturday night. I'll pass your feelings along. I have no doubt it will spoil his dinner worrying about your opinion. We may have to have an adult beverage to drown our sorrows.:cry: This isn't the first time you have taken a shot at the private school lawyers.

 

Its the first time publicly. Of course, I am a private school lawyer, too. And the adult beverage you drink might very well support my local economy, so enjoy your meal!

Attending a private school is not necessarily a betterment to the child. THAT IS A MYTH!

 

.

 

100% correct. Good students are good students at every school.

 

Students that do not want to learn and those that do not have support from home are going to struggle at every school.