Out-of State student proposal rejected by BOE

[All Tell]

Proposal 3 sent back to KHSAA

 

The proposal that would have made out of state students ineligible to play in Kentucky has been sent back to the KHSAA by a unanimous vote of the KBOE.

 

Interesting points in the article:

 

There would be some exceptions, including:

 

Students attending Kentucky schools under a tuition exchange agreement with an out-of-state school system.

 

and

 

One superintendent who opposes the initiative is George Thompson of Bell County, which borders Tennessee and Virginia.

 

"I think it would have a negative impact on our district," he said. "I don't think we should deny students (athletic opportunities) if they meet the eligibility requirements."

 

We all know this is part of the public/private debate. What I find very interesting is that just like in other "compromises" the publics want to place some limitation on private schools (feeder schools, defined attendance areas, out of state students) while granting exceptions to public schools that do the same thing under the cover or "reciprocal agreements". Someone please explain to me how it's a compromise if only one side is giving anything up.

 

I quoted the Bell County super to illustrate how some on the public side may give lip service to wanting change but stop short of supporting a change when they find their own ox being gored.

[ladiesbballcoach]

I assume KY will begin allowing out of state citizens access to the KY government entitlement programs.

[rockmom]

Interesting.

[Covercorner]

The board of education gave a 9-0 endorsement to a measure that would require most seventh- and eighth-graders who "play up" on a high school varsity team to attend that same high school as freshmen or sit out of competition a year. Now, such athletes can change schools and play immediately.

 

I'm wondering if this; a true extension of the Transfer Rule unlike Proposal 2, were enacted and left alone for a year or two, help ease tensions.

[All Tell]

Students that have "played up" and then changed schools for high school certainly was a hot point of contention for some.

 

I personally still think that high school kids should play high school sports and to paraphrase Mr. Story, some surrounding states don't allow middle school students to play high school sports, I don't understand why we are so archaic in our thinking here. (OK, this is just a little jab at the separation supporters who want to base our decision making on what other states do, while ignore other aspects of what other states do)

 

That said I think that if sub-freshmen are going to be allowed to compete as varsity athletes (I wonder if this will apply to students that play sub-varsity, the present transfer rule does not) then this is a good change.

[thsrocks]

I assume KY will begin allowing out of state citizens access to the KY government entitlement programs.

 

It already happens at the collegiate level in the Metro Louisville area.

 

A program called Metroversity allows a student to attend IU Southeast and be treated the same as if they are attending U of L.....

[ladiesbballcoach]

Okay, I am not feeling well and my thinking is slow today but is the position being taken that allowing MSers that live in the county to play up is BAD but allowing players that don't even live in KY play is GOOD?

[AnswertheBell]

Proposal 3 sent back to KHSAA

 

The proposal that would have made out of state students ineligible to play in Kentucky has been sent back to the KHSAA by a unanimous vote of the KBOE.

 

Interesting points in the article:

 

 

 

and

 

 

 

We all know this is part of the public/private debate. What I find very interesting is that just like in other "compromises" the publics want to place some limitation on private schools (feeder schools, defined attendance areas, out of state students) while granting exceptions to public schools that do the same thing under the cover or "reciprocal agreements". Someone please explain to me how it's a compromise if only one side is giving anything up.

 

I quoted the Bell County super to illustrate how some on the public side may give lip service to wanting change but stop short of supporting a change when they find their own ox being gored.

 

 

I will help you understand. At this time NOTHING has been done to even suggest a split will happen in the near future. So with this why would the publics do anything to furthur disadvantage themselves. I can assure you that if there were a split in the near future that this public would also give up this type attitude. So in other words I would like to remind you that when private argue that publics would give up nothing they are mistaken. Also, I do believe that this brings us back to the financial aspect of the arguement. No financial aid for these students. So do we accept outside students, yes. We never stated that we didn't. If you are try to compare us to private, you have to have a lot more than this.

[All Tell]

I understand just fine thanks, I'll try to say this without the condescension that I sensed in your post.

 

Compromise means both sides give, not one. You will never convince me that even if these so called compromises were agreed upon by both sides and adopted that there still wouldn't be a huge cry for seperation so what would have been accomplished? What exactly would the publics have given up had this proposal passed?

 

Why don't you offer finincial aid?

[All Tell]

Okay, I am not feeling well and my thinking is slow today but is the position being taken that allowing MSers that live in the county to play up is BAD but allowing players that don't even live in KY play is GOOD?

 

Out of state students is a minor issue for me. The only reason I oppose changing is becasue it wouldn't be changed across the board. If ALL public schools stop then I have no problem if ALL private schoold have to do the same.

 

I don't think that MS students should play HS sports, I have always felt that way even when I was a public school person.

[AnswertheBell]

There is no comprimise outside of seperation, please don't think that I suggest one. Wether it is called open/ closed , public/ private or whatever they are to different to remain together. Hiding this fact in out of state students is a joke.

 

How can you say that just one side would give something up...it obvious that both would. You clearly state that.

[All Tell]

If it's so obvious maybe you'll explain it for me.

[AnswertheBell]

We too would have more defined boundries and therefore could not accept the out of state students for athletics.

 

That is why I too like the idea of open / closed. It would make the split. We would give this up.

[AnswertheBell]

I really get tired of the KHSAA and others that try to "compromise" with alternative suggestions. What they are doing is trying to deflect the real issues and dodge what really needs to be done. They need to address this and put it to rest, instead they want the state to think about an out-of-state kid taking the place of one of our own. If ours is better, he will play. Just address the real issues in the debate. I don't see where out of state has anything to do with public/private issue.

 

If there is a split then maybe the out of state issue will be address, I just think that they want to put the cart before the horse.

[Covercorner]

We too would have more defined boundries and therefore could not accept the out of state students for athletics.

 

That is why I too like the idea of open / closed. It would make the split. We would give this up.

 

So are you saying that Bell Co. DOES have Out of State Sudents? If so, is there a reciprocal agreement in place, or do those students have to pay tuition?