Hardship issue

[rlh]

I'm pretty sure the sunshine law only applies to public meetings of government officials. TSSAA is not a state or local governing body and I would think it would not be open to the public...can you imagine what a spectacle that would be?

 

The 2001 U.S. Supreme Court ruled 5-4 that TSSAA is a state body. That puts it in a gray zone. That is the only thing $3-10M worth of lawyers accomplished for Brentwood Academy.

[barb]

The 2001 U.S. Supreme Court ruled 5-4 that TSSAA is a state body. That puts it in a gray zone. That is the only thing $3-10M worth of lawyers accomplished for Brentwood Academy.

They ruled that TSSAA is a state actor...meaning they can be held to constitutional standards. This allowed Brentwood to sue TSSAA for violating their right to free speech in preventing them from contacting prospective "student athletes".The court ruled in 2007 that Brentwood agreed to abide by the rules as set forth by TSSAA, ruling "An athletic league's interest in enforcing its rules may warrant curtailing the speech of its voluntary participants." In nutshell, it's easier to sue them, but you agree to the rules so don't cry foul when you fail to follow them.

[rlh]

They ruled that TSSAA is a state actor...meaning they can be held to constitutional standards. This allowed Brentwood to sue TSSAA for violating their right to free speech in preventing them from contacting prospective "student athletes".The court ruled in 2007 that Brentwood agreed to abide by the rules as set forth by TSSAA, ruling "An athletic league's interest in enforcing its rules may warrant curtailing the speech of its voluntary participants." In nutshell, it's easier to sue them, but you agree to the rules so don't cry foul when you fail to follow them.

 

You missed my entire point regarding sunshine rules and that that ruling may put it in the gray zone. Plus, many of the people with the TSSAA are employess of various public schools and dept of education. Not only are they a "state actor," it was also complicate by the make up of the body due to that.

 

The Court issued a divided decision, splitting 5-4 in favor of reversing the Sixth Circuit and finding the actions of the Association as 'state action'.[4]

 

Justice Souter wrote for the five-justice majority, holding that "The nominally private character of the Association is overborne by the pervasive entwinement of public institutions and public officials in its composition and workings, and there is no substantial reason to claim unfairness in applying constitutional standards to it."[5] Part of the basis for this determination were historical statements by the Tennessee Board of Education which had granted regulatory authority to the Association and recognition of its own independent authority. For example, the Board explicitly approved the TSSAA's rules and reserved the right to continuously review them in the future. Further, employees at the Association were given state pensions. Because the Association could essentially "coerce" the member schools to follow its rules,[6] and that the state would back this up, it was utilizing state police power. Therefore, Souter concluded, the restrictions on denial of due process would apply to the Association, and the lawsuit could proceed in the lower courts.

[forgetfulcub]

I think I'z finally figgered all this T$$AA stuff out.

 

I just finished a guvment subsized housin debeliment. It sits right at the intersection of Marian, Sqwachy, and Hamilton County. It's got a adress in each county, dependin on which unit you'z in. Rent's real cheep.

 

Ain't figgered out what to call it yet. Maybe some of you fellers can help me. Suggestions so far is Hemlock on the Hill, Greenville Acres, and T$$AA Towers. I'z open to suggestions though.

 

rent those to your recurited players.might cut down on your so call paperwork errors for your transfers whoops i mean recurits.

Edited October 18, 2011 by forgetfulcub

[forgetfulcub]

You know, the more I think about it, I believe Barb turned us in. She seems to be the most consistant one opposing us and Greenville may have been in our path to a second State Title. Barb, you must really be scared of our Eagles. For someone without a kid on the field you sure seem to have a bunch of pent up hostility towards the Eagles. By the way, what was the score the last time we played Greenville. Oh yeah, thats right, we never have. So what's your Beef? I know we didn't run up the score on you. How were you cheated and why are you so consumed with seeing us punished?

Barb your gona make those buzzard people cry oh i feel so sorry for them they are so delicate and full of hot air. KEEP IT UP

Edited October 18, 2011 by forgetfulcub

[barb]

You missed my entire point regarding sunshine rules and that that ruling may put it in the gray zone. Plus, many of the people with the TSSAA are employess of various public schools and dept of education. Not only are they a "state actor," it was also complicate by the make up of the body due to that.

It would be hard to apply the sunshine law to this since the by-laws are explicit about who may attend BOC meetings and the Tennesse Board of Education has reviewed and agreed to the current by-laws. This may be moot since TSSAA has made no statement on who may or may not attend this appeal hearing.

 

Section 6. Meetings: The Board of Control shall meet in August, November, January, March and June. Other meetings may be called by the President of the Board of Control. The various ex-officio representatives shall be permitted to attend meetings and may provide input on behalf of their constituents but shall have no vote and shall not be or remain present during any meetings held in executive session.

[smokinote]

I found this quesiton to be quite interesting as well. And with the Federal "No Child Left Behind" laws and regulations which allow students from designated underperforming schools to go to other schools, has the TSSAA actually considered he ramifications of a possible federal law decision trumping a TSSAA rule?

He would still have to sit out a year if he had at paricipated in high school sports.

[barb]

He would still have to sit out a year if he had at paricipated in high school sports.

Not if he is granted a hardship waiver citing NCLB as his reason for transfer... TSSAA grants waivers all the time for all kinds of reasons.

[rlh]

It would be hard to apply the sunshine law to this since the by-laws are explicit about who may attend BOC meetings and the Tennesse Board of Education has reviewed and agreed to the current by-laws. This may be moot since TSSAA has made no statement on who may or may not attend this appeal hearing.

 

Section 6. Meetings: The Board of Control shall meet in August, November, January, March and June. Other meetings may be called by the President of the Board of Control. The various ex-officio representatives shall be permitted to attend meetings and may provide input on behalf of their constituents but shall have no vote and shall not be or remain present during any meetings held in executive session.

 

Its not so much about actually attending but the information from the meeting. The only thing that would be protected would be academic records of the student. I would suspect that the Freedom of Information Act could be used. However, it maybe be in the lawyer territory to argue that. While they TSSAA can enforce there rules (i.e. the 2007 Supreme Court Ruling 9-0), they also are subject to scrutiny (2001 ruling).

[MountainTroll]

Not if he is granted a hardship waiver citing NCLB as his reason for transfer... TSSAA grants waivers all the time for all kinds of reasons.

 

Do they really? IDK. It would be interesting to see how many hardship forms the T$$AA actually reviews annually and what the approval/denial rate is. Perhaps T$$AA could share this information with its member schools. I suspect the number of hardship requests is small and the approval rate is low. IDK.

 

I'm still not sure I have seen an official statement from T$$AA regarding NCLB. Comments to a news reporter do not constitute official policy. If they in fact intend to approve all NCLB transfers, why not issue an official policy statement saying that a local school board's reassignment of a student from a high-priority school to a passing school under the NCLB Act and the provision of transportation to that school places the student in the new school's territory for the purposes of establishing athletic eligibility? Seems easier than processing a bunch of hardship forms.

 

As I read Article II, Section 24, it appears that this process is reserved for extreme circumstances and the burden of proof placed upon the school is quite heavy.

 

 

Special Cases Involving Hardship

 

Article II, Section 24.

Except for the eligibility rules in regard to age and to the number of semesters in school, the Executive Director shall have the authority to set aside the effect of any eligibility rule upon an individual student when:

 

a. the circumstances causing the student to fail to satisfy the eligibility rule were

unforeseen

and

unavoidable

;

 

b. application of the rule to the student works an undue hardship in light of the unforeseen and unavoidable circumstances;

 

c. application of the rule would not accomplish the purpose for which the rule was intended; and

 

d. in the case of a change of schools, the change is for reasons unrelated to participation in athletics.

 

The burden of establishing each of these elements to the Executive Director's satisfaction is upon the school at which eligibility is sought.

 

T$$AA Hardship Form

 

Finally, a question that the Board of Control, the Legislative Council, and all member schools might want to consider going forward. Is a student's transfer, sole based upon athletic participation, necessarily bad. Many kids with tremendous athletic and academic ability come from lower socioeconomic neighborhoods, with schools that either cannot or will not be able to allow them to maximize their potential. If a kid's best shot at securing a post-secondary education and funding can be realized by transfering to a different school, should we be placing barriers in their way? We have no problems with a kid, who is a good musician or math whiz, transfering. Why should a good athlete be forced to physically move (often financially impossible) or lose a year of eligibility in order to get into an environment that can better foster their ability? Just some food for thought.

Edited October 18, 2011 by MountainTroll

[rlh]

Do they really? IDK. It would be interesting to see how many hardship forms the T$$AA actually reviews annually and what the approval/denial rate is. Perhaps T$$AA could share this information with its member schools. I suspect the number of hardship requests is small and the approval rate is low. IDK.

 

I'm still not sure I have seen an official statement from T$$AA regarding NCLB. Comments to a news reporter do not constitute official policy. If they in fact intend to approve all NCLB transfers, why not issue an official policy statement saying that a local school board's reassignment of a student from a high-priority school to a passing school under the NCLB Act and the provision of transportation to that school places the student in the new school's territory for the purposes of establishing athletic eligibility? Seems easier than processing a bunch of hardship forms.

 

As I read Article II, Section 24, it appears that this process is reserved for extreme circumstances and the burden of proof placed upon the school is quite heavy.

 

 

Special Cases Involving Hardship

 

Article II, Section 24.

Except for the eligibility rules in regard to age and to the number of semesters in school, the Executive Director shall have the authority to set aside the effect of any eligibility rule upon an individual student when:

 

a. the circumstances causing the student to fail to satisfy the eligibility rule were

unforeseen

and

unavoidable

;

 

b. application of the rule to the student works an undue hardship in light of the unforeseen and unavoidable circumstances;

 

c. application of the rule would not accomplish the purpose for which the rule was intended; and

 

d. in the case of a change of schools, the change is for reasons unrelated to participation in athletics.

 

The burden of establishing each of these elements to the Executive Director's satisfaction is upon the school at which eligibility is sought.

 

T$$AA Hardship Form

 

Finally, a question that the Board of Control, the Legislative Council, and all member schools might want to consider going forward. Is a student's transfer, sole based upon athletic participation, necessarily bad. Many kids with tremendous athletic and academic ability come from lower socioeconomic neighborhoods, with schools that either cannot or will not be able to allow them to maximize their potential. If a kid's best shot at securing a post-secondary education and funding can be realized by transfering to a different school, should we be placing barriers in their way? We have no problems with a kid, who is a good musician or math whiz, transfering. Why should a good athlete be forced to physically move (often financially impossible) or lose a year of eligibility in order to get into an environment that can better foster their ability? Just some food for thought.

 

Childress stated that your situation had nothing to do with NCLB. Are you saying athletets that are struggling academically should be able to go where ever they want to play because "inner" city schools can't compete athletically because they are in a bad part of town? Well, Alcoa got a QB from Austin-East this year and A-E beat them. Granted A-E isn't a good as the were in the days they were playing for AA titles several years in a row. I also Remember Kirkman Tech and Riverside High were perennial basketball powers before they got closed. Howard used to be as well.

 

Here is a thought, why don't they just close down all the high schools in hamilton county and buss them all up the mountain. of course that would make you 7A and there would be no one to play you but SEC teams.

[MountainTroll]

Childress stated that your situation had nothing to do with NCLB. Are you saying athletets that are struggling academically should be able to go where ever they want to play because "inner" city schools can't compete athletically because they are in a bad part of town? Well, Alcoa got a QB from Austin-East this year and A-E beat them. Granted A-E isn't a good as the were in the days they were playing for AA titles several years in a row. I also Remember Kirkman Tech and Riverside High were perennial basketball powers before they got closed. Howard used to be as well.

 

Here is a thought, why don't they just close down all the high schools in hamilton county and buss them all up the mountain. of course that would make you 7A and there would be no one to play you but SEC teams.

 

 

As a self-proclaimed misogynist, I typically don't argue with women. And I'm beginning to think you might be one.

 

That being said, I'm not discussing the current Signal Mountain hearing. (and it's a hearing, not a board appeal)

A high profile case such as this often raises a number of questions. I am simply putting out a couple for discussion.

 

Here is another. If other schools made the same assumption of T$$AA athletic eligibility, based upon a school board decision, will they self-report?