TexMike
01-23-2010, 12:49 PM
The parents seem more angry that their kids are not getting to play than the fact that UIL rules might be getting broke.
http://www.princetonherald.com/articles/....d=1275&zoneid=4
Athlete recruitement topic of trustee debateDate: Thursday, January 21, 2010
news@princetonherald.com
By Jennifer Fike
Staff Writer
Recruiting high school students to move to a district to play sports is against University Interscholastic League rules, but some Princeton High School parents say that’s exactly what is happening in the district.
During the public input segment of the Jan. 18 Princeton ISD trustees meeting, parent Joe Kohrs took the opportunity to express his concern with what he called “recruiting for athletic purposes.”
During Christmas break, Kohrs alleges that four freshmen from Frisco were approached by a PISD parent to participate in Princeton’s athletic program. Those athletes have since transferred to the district, and are playing on the junior varsity basketball team, Kohrs said.
“My concern is that we’re setting the wrong example for our kids,” he said.
Though trustees are not allowed to respond directly to public comments, they did address the subject when they reached an agenda item about “Inter-District Transfers and UIL Eligibility.” Board members were advised several times to keep the discussion focused on the policy at hand, rather than as an opportunity to delve into specific circumstances or transfer students.
On Tuesday, Jan. 19, Superintendent Phil Anthony said the administrators investigated the parents’ allegations of athletic recruiting by speaking to staff, parents, students and UIL representatives.
“After investigating we don’t see any place where a member of faculty or staff has violated any UIL rules,” he said.
Ultimately, the District’s Executive Committee, which consists of faculty and administration members from each of the schools in Princeton’s UIL district (District 13-3A), determines whether a transfer student is eligible for varsity athletics. If a transfer student’s former school indicates he or she participated in athletics, the committee may suspend the student from varsity sports for no more or less than one calendar year.
During the board meeting, trustee Clinton Lowrance said he had received a lot of complaints from parents who believed students were transferring to the district solely to play sports.
“I have a problem with these transfer students displacing students that live in the district,” Lowrance said.
He said his primary concern was for the local taxpayers, residents who approved the bond package used to build PISD’s top-notch athletic facilities. “It slaps the taxpayer in the face if their kid is replaced by a non-district kid,” he said.
Lowrance asked trustees to consider adopting a two-year probation period for varsity athletes who transfer to the district. He clarified that children of district employees who choose to transfer into Princeton, would be exempt from the probationary period.
Board President Carol Bodwell asked Lowrance why the district’s policy would not cover all extra-curricular activities, instead of solely varsity sports. Why wouldn’t band and UIL participants who transfer be under probation as well? she asked.
Lowrance said since UIL rules only address varsity athletes, and there are no “varsity” bands or other UIL programs, he felt the district’s policy only needed to address athletes.
Trustee Kyle Strickland said he would not agree to limit students who might choose to transfer to PISD.
“When I came to the board, we wanted to develop pride,” Strickland said.
Building outstanding facilities, choosing quality teachers and implementing programs that make students want to stay in PISD are some of the steps the board has taken to develop that pride, he said.
“Why would we consider restricting our district more than any other school?” he asked.
UIL rules mandate a one-year athletic suspension for students who transfer to another district with previous athletic experience.
“It’s somewhat insulting for us to tie our coaches’ hands,” Strickland said, insisting that a two-year probation policy would limit the district unnecessarily.
Strickland said he hopes anyone who visits PISD feels at home, and is impressed by the district’s facilities and programs. “I look around and say, ‘Why would you not want to be here?’” he said.
Superintendent Phil Anthony explained UIL rules and the district’s transfer history.
In the past, Anthony said, the district has always seen more transfers out of district than into PISD. This year, however, there have been 56 students transfer out, while 88 have transferred into Princeton.
While many of those students have athletic experience, it is impossible to know the reasons for the transfers, Anthony said.
When asked about the district’s funding, Anthony said about 60 percent of the district’s bond payments come from state equalization money. The other 40 percent is paid for locally. The state pays approximately 75 percent of the district’s operating budget, he said.
Three years ago Princeton changed its transfer policy, eliminating the fee for transfers. At that time athletic transfers were never addressed, Anthony said. The decision was based on the state’s funding policies which changed, and made it financially beneficial for the district to fill empty seats, he said.
Trustee Chuck Campbell asked Anthony if he believed PISD coaches were recruiting athletes. “We’re not buying cars for people, or paying rent, right?” Campbell asked.
Anthony said, “I do not believe coaches are out recruiting.”
Trustees discussed Lowrance’s motion for almost an hour before voting. Ultimately, the motion died for lack of a second.
http://www.princetonherald.com/articles/....d=1275&zoneid=4
Athlete recruitement topic of trustee debateDate: Thursday, January 21, 2010
news@princetonherald.com
By Jennifer Fike
Staff Writer
Recruiting high school students to move to a district to play sports is against University Interscholastic League rules, but some Princeton High School parents say that’s exactly what is happening in the district.
During the public input segment of the Jan. 18 Princeton ISD trustees meeting, parent Joe Kohrs took the opportunity to express his concern with what he called “recruiting for athletic purposes.”
During Christmas break, Kohrs alleges that four freshmen from Frisco were approached by a PISD parent to participate in Princeton’s athletic program. Those athletes have since transferred to the district, and are playing on the junior varsity basketball team, Kohrs said.
“My concern is that we’re setting the wrong example for our kids,” he said.
Though trustees are not allowed to respond directly to public comments, they did address the subject when they reached an agenda item about “Inter-District Transfers and UIL Eligibility.” Board members were advised several times to keep the discussion focused on the policy at hand, rather than as an opportunity to delve into specific circumstances or transfer students.
On Tuesday, Jan. 19, Superintendent Phil Anthony said the administrators investigated the parents’ allegations of athletic recruiting by speaking to staff, parents, students and UIL representatives.
“After investigating we don’t see any place where a member of faculty or staff has violated any UIL rules,” he said.
Ultimately, the District’s Executive Committee, which consists of faculty and administration members from each of the schools in Princeton’s UIL district (District 13-3A), determines whether a transfer student is eligible for varsity athletics. If a transfer student’s former school indicates he or she participated in athletics, the committee may suspend the student from varsity sports for no more or less than one calendar year.
During the board meeting, trustee Clinton Lowrance said he had received a lot of complaints from parents who believed students were transferring to the district solely to play sports.
“I have a problem with these transfer students displacing students that live in the district,” Lowrance said.
He said his primary concern was for the local taxpayers, residents who approved the bond package used to build PISD’s top-notch athletic facilities. “It slaps the taxpayer in the face if their kid is replaced by a non-district kid,” he said.
Lowrance asked trustees to consider adopting a two-year probation period for varsity athletes who transfer to the district. He clarified that children of district employees who choose to transfer into Princeton, would be exempt from the probationary period.
Board President Carol Bodwell asked Lowrance why the district’s policy would not cover all extra-curricular activities, instead of solely varsity sports. Why wouldn’t band and UIL participants who transfer be under probation as well? she asked.
Lowrance said since UIL rules only address varsity athletes, and there are no “varsity” bands or other UIL programs, he felt the district’s policy only needed to address athletes.
Trustee Kyle Strickland said he would not agree to limit students who might choose to transfer to PISD.
“When I came to the board, we wanted to develop pride,” Strickland said.
Building outstanding facilities, choosing quality teachers and implementing programs that make students want to stay in PISD are some of the steps the board has taken to develop that pride, he said.
“Why would we consider restricting our district more than any other school?” he asked.
UIL rules mandate a one-year athletic suspension for students who transfer to another district with previous athletic experience.
“It’s somewhat insulting for us to tie our coaches’ hands,” Strickland said, insisting that a two-year probation policy would limit the district unnecessarily.
Strickland said he hopes anyone who visits PISD feels at home, and is impressed by the district’s facilities and programs. “I look around and say, ‘Why would you not want to be here?’” he said.
Superintendent Phil Anthony explained UIL rules and the district’s transfer history.
In the past, Anthony said, the district has always seen more transfers out of district than into PISD. This year, however, there have been 56 students transfer out, while 88 have transferred into Princeton.
While many of those students have athletic experience, it is impossible to know the reasons for the transfers, Anthony said.
When asked about the district’s funding, Anthony said about 60 percent of the district’s bond payments come from state equalization money. The other 40 percent is paid for locally. The state pays approximately 75 percent of the district’s operating budget, he said.
Three years ago Princeton changed its transfer policy, eliminating the fee for transfers. At that time athletic transfers were never addressed, Anthony said. The decision was based on the state’s funding policies which changed, and made it financially beneficial for the district to fill empty seats, he said.
Trustee Chuck Campbell asked Anthony if he believed PISD coaches were recruiting athletes. “We’re not buying cars for people, or paying rent, right?” Campbell asked.
Anthony said, “I do not believe coaches are out recruiting.”
Trustees discussed Lowrance’s motion for almost an hour before voting. Ultimately, the motion died for lack of a second.