The Portland (ME) school board has proposed that all athletic booster clubs be merged. So now, at the city's two public high schools, there will no longer be booster clubs for individual sports. Each school will have one booster organization and an administrator who supervises the organization, according to the proposal.
The proposed change is due to some questionable accounting practices within booster clubs as well as Title IX concerns over the equitable distribution of funds and treatment of athletes.
Apparently there is already some sharing of booster funds among teams, so the concept is not completely foreign.
But based on the article's public comments section, there is much criticism of this plan. People are basing these critiques on the belief that fundraised monies should not affect Title IX compliance and that the amount of money raised is a direct correlation to the amount of effort put in by parents.
While the latter may be partially true (the former is not, by the way), these arguments fail to consider the different values parents, students, administrators and the general public have regarding different sports. Football boosters raise more money, in part, because high school football in many, many cities and towns is the highest profile sport. If both the football team boosters and the girls soccer team boosters sell concessions at their respective games, who is going to raise more money?
Such an argument just perpetuates the inequities and punishes those student-athletes, and their parents, who may feel just as passionately about their sports as football players and their parents but cannot get others to feel similarly.
Showing posts with label fundraising. Show all posts
Showing posts with label fundraising. Show all posts
Friday, June 24, 2011
Wednesday, June 02, 2010
Community saves sports at Bakersfield
In February we noted that CSU Bakersfield was, due to budget shortfalls, being forced to cut four sports: golf (MW), tennis (W), and wrestling (M).
But community members and donors have rallied in what appears to be two separate campaigns to raise money to keep the sports going for at least another year, maybe even two. The preexisting Roadrunners' Club has raised $500,000 and a new organization simply called Save the Sports has raised $700,000. The combined total gets the university every close to the $1.4 million that is estimated to be needed to keep all four programs supported for two years. But if fundraising stalls or the numbers change, CSU-B president Horace Mitchell reminds us that the state funding is just not available. These sports must remain self-supporting. At least in the near future. But Mitchell is certainly pleased to keep these four sports for a little while longer.
But community members and donors have rallied in what appears to be two separate campaigns to raise money to keep the sports going for at least another year, maybe even two. The preexisting Roadrunners' Club has raised $500,000 and a new organization simply called Save the Sports has raised $700,000. The combined total gets the university every close to the $1.4 million that is estimated to be needed to keep all four programs supported for two years. But if fundraising stalls or the numbers change, CSU-B president Horace Mitchell reminds us that the state funding is just not available. These sports must remain self-supporting. At least in the near future. But Mitchell is certainly pleased to keep these four sports for a little while longer.
Tuesday, February 23, 2010
Parents Make Equal Treatment Claim Against School District
Parents have sued the Coffee County, Tennessee school district in federal court, alleging that Central High School discriminates against their daughters, female soccer players, by failing to provide equal treatment to girls' sports. Specifically, the lawsuit alleges disparities in funding that result in members of the girls' soccer team having to raise funds for the same equipment and supplies that are provided to the boys' team. The lawsuit also alleges that girls' teams have less access to facilities for competition, practice and locker rooms.
Title IX regulations require schools to equitably support male and female athletic programs, including in the allocation of facilities, equipment, locker rooms, and other factors. The regulations do not, however, require equity within a particular sport. Thus, disparities between boys' and girls' soccer do not violate Title IX if girls' teams in other sports receive more favorable treatment. But, if the disparities between boys and girls' soccer programs are indicative of the athletic program as a whole, the district may be liable.
Title IX regulations require schools to equitably support male and female athletic programs, including in the allocation of facilities, equipment, locker rooms, and other factors. The regulations do not, however, require equity within a particular sport. Thus, disparities between boys' and girls' soccer do not violate Title IX if girls' teams in other sports receive more favorable treatment. But, if the disparities between boys and girls' soccer programs are indicative of the athletic program as a whole, the district may be liable.
Thursday, October 01, 2009
Alaskan softball players cite inequities
Can't believe Sarah Palin who, during her vice-presidential campaign, espoused the benefits of Title IX, let her home town get away with inequitable treatment of female student-athletes.
But the Mat-Su School District, which includes the town of Wasilla, is facing a lawsuit brought by two softball players (and their parents). The facts, at this early stage, remain somewhat ambiguous but apparently some of the issues brought up in the filing are ones school officials have heard before. The issue of fields does not appear to the prominent one, or at least as prominent in most of the other cases about softball. Wasilla High School's field underwent renovations this past summer. There is some dispute over whether softball has access to an on-campus practice field like the baseball team does.
It seems that funding is the major issue here with the complainants saying that boys' teams receive greater funding than girls' teams. This is not an automatic violation, of course, but it goes on to say that softball has to pay for its own equipment and supplies. If boys' teams are provided these things by the school there is the potential for some trouble. But my guess after reading about economic woes and booster clubs stepping up, is that boys' team may also have to find their own equipment and supplies but that they have booster clubs that raise the money for them. But as we know by now, successful boys' booster clubs do not negate a school's Title IX responsibilities.
But the Mat-Su School District, which includes the town of Wasilla, is facing a lawsuit brought by two softball players (and their parents). The facts, at this early stage, remain somewhat ambiguous but apparently some of the issues brought up in the filing are ones school officials have heard before. The issue of fields does not appear to the prominent one, or at least as prominent in most of the other cases about softball. Wasilla High School's field underwent renovations this past summer. There is some dispute over whether softball has access to an on-campus practice field like the baseball team does.
It seems that funding is the major issue here with the complainants saying that boys' teams receive greater funding than girls' teams. This is not an automatic violation, of course, but it goes on to say that softball has to pay for its own equipment and supplies. If boys' teams are provided these things by the school there is the potential for some trouble. But my guess after reading about economic woes and booster clubs stepping up, is that boys' team may also have to find their own equipment and supplies but that they have booster clubs that raise the money for them. But as we know by now, successful boys' booster clubs do not negate a school's Title IX responsibilities.
Sunday, November 23, 2008
School District Proposes Unified Booster Club
After a Title IX compliance report prepared for Mercer Island (Washington) School District revealed funding disparities between boys and girls athletics programs, the district's athletic director is proposing a partial solution in the form of a unified booster club.
As we've noted before, schools must provide athletic opportunities of comparable quality to boys and girls, regardless of donations to the school made by booster clubs of individual teams. Disparities can result when popular sports (often football) receive a great deal of parental and community support compared to other less popular sports. When these disparities track gender lines, a school district risks violating Title IX.
Such compliance concerns have prompted Mercer Island officials to propose that a single, school-wide booster club replace the 22 individual booster clubs for respective teams. Not surprisingly, this idea is reportedly unpopular, as some of the more well-organized and effective clubs are reluctant to sacrifice control and submit to profit sharing with other teams. But Mercer Island is right to insist that they do so. If parents and community members do not want to voluntarily support their daughters' teams in the same manner as their sons', the school district has to figure out a way to neutralize the inequality that results, either by matching funds raised by the effective clubs, or forgoing booster club donations altogether. Unified booster clubs are a responsible, fair alternative to both of these expensive and unfavorable extremes.
As we've noted before, schools must provide athletic opportunities of comparable quality to boys and girls, regardless of donations to the school made by booster clubs of individual teams. Disparities can result when popular sports (often football) receive a great deal of parental and community support compared to other less popular sports. When these disparities track gender lines, a school district risks violating Title IX.
Such compliance concerns have prompted Mercer Island officials to propose that a single, school-wide booster club replace the 22 individual booster clubs for respective teams. Not surprisingly, this idea is reportedly unpopular, as some of the more well-organized and effective clubs are reluctant to sacrifice control and submit to profit sharing with other teams. But Mercer Island is right to insist that they do so. If parents and community members do not want to voluntarily support their daughters' teams in the same manner as their sons', the school district has to figure out a way to neutralize the inequality that results, either by matching funds raised by the effective clubs, or forgoing booster club donations altogether. Unified booster clubs are a responsible, fair alternative to both of these expensive and unfavorable extremes.
Tuesday, December 04, 2007
UNH and baseball
This is the type of editorial we usually just let go but given that it's about University of New Hampshire, the alma mater of Ebuz and myself, and that we were actually at UNH and in student government when the cut baseball team came to plead its case (we had no power to change that decision by the way), it probably deserves a posting.
The occasion of the editorial which bemoans the cutting of the baseball team over a decade ago is the installment of a new president who was hired "for one purpose: to raise money." First of all, what university president isn't hired these days to raise money? Second, the criticism that the money he is raising won't go to reinstating baseball seems to be more egregious to the writer than the fact that it is not necessarily earmarked for lowering tuition either--something that would benefit far more students than reinstating baseball.
The writer calls on new president Mark Huddleston to raise private funds for baseball. Let's also note here that the idea of bringing back baseball, which was actually only one of the sports cut that year and there have been several more since, including women's teams, has not even been a serious consideration. Additionally it is very difficult to sustain an athletic team on private donations. Teams are already doing a lot of fundraising. At home football games members of various athletic teams, it's often the ski team which had its budget cut significantly the year baseball was cut, sell raffle tickets in the stands. I had friends on the women's hockey team that had to go to men's hockey games and sell 50/50 tickets. Yet you don't see football players climbing through the stands at women's volleyball games trying to raise money for their very expensive program.
I don't know who asked Huddleston the question about baseball, but his response that it's not in the cards was a lot more diplomatic than my own would have been.
The occasion of the editorial which bemoans the cutting of the baseball team over a decade ago is the installment of a new president who was hired "for one purpose: to raise money." First of all, what university president isn't hired these days to raise money? Second, the criticism that the money he is raising won't go to reinstating baseball seems to be more egregious to the writer than the fact that it is not necessarily earmarked for lowering tuition either--something that would benefit far more students than reinstating baseball.
The writer calls on new president Mark Huddleston to raise private funds for baseball. Let's also note here that the idea of bringing back baseball, which was actually only one of the sports cut that year and there have been several more since, including women's teams, has not even been a serious consideration. Additionally it is very difficult to sustain an athletic team on private donations. Teams are already doing a lot of fundraising. At home football games members of various athletic teams, it's often the ski team which had its budget cut significantly the year baseball was cut, sell raffle tickets in the stands. I had friends on the women's hockey team that had to go to men's hockey games and sell 50/50 tickets. Yet you don't see football players climbing through the stands at women's volleyball games trying to raise money for their very expensive program.
I don't know who asked Huddleston the question about baseball, but his response that it's not in the cards was a lot more diplomatic than my own would have been.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)