 |
||
A
description of the meeting, who was there, action items and the
next meeting date.
The meeting was called to order at 3:30 PM by President Laurie Singer, who welcomed those in attendance. PROFESSIONAL AGENDA 1. Motion made and seconded to approve the minutes of the 2007 annual meeting. 2. President Singer introduced Executive Director Robert Stevens. The Executive Director gave a report on the professional activities of the Association:
3. Motion made and seconded to reaffirm the professional dues structure as follows: 2007-08 $300 $175 $50 $25 4. Motion made and seconded to approve the following slate of officers for 2008-2009: 5. The Executive Director gave a report on the recently completed Legislative session: ACTIVITIES MEETING 1. D. G. Weaver (in the absence of Bill Lawson) gave a report on the work of the Activities Standards Committee for the 2007-2008 year. 2. Bob Johnson gave the report of the Associate Executive Director. 3. Motion by Frank Spencer, seconded by Dan Ryan to approve the VPA Institutional Membership Assessments for 2008-2009 as follows: 4. Discussion on current member-to-member policy: Discussion of Member to Member opened at 4:25 PM. The VPA provides all of the attendees with written materials from Montpelier High School and the VPA describing the member to member proposal. Bob Stevens recognizes Peter Evans to make the presentation on behalf of the school. He emphasized how important it is to be part of a team. The member to member program guidelines have protections against abuse. Frank Spencer spoke. He expressed concern that the proposal would lead to community based teams as opposed to school against school competition. He will vote against this. He also expressed concern that the proposal only applied to cross country and not to all individual sports. He also asked what impact the program would have on divisional alignment. He also noted that another school would lose out because of the participation of students from another school. Bob Hingston: He thinks that schools will be more likely to get students to create a cross country team if this proposal is not approved. With five runners needed for a team, you should be able to get a team. And these are students that one goes to school with every day. Shawn Farrell: The purpose of the program is to help schools keep teams that do not have the numbers for team sports. Also, when they have individual students compete at Middlebury High School, they help them to be part of the team. Sports need to be about more than winning; if this is approved, it will increase the pressure. Lynn Cole: He raises the point of order on whether the process. Marks explained that this is not an appeal, but a policy to be determined by the membership. Mr. Cole said that we need to determine whether cross-country is a team sport. Marks explained that the policy would have to be changed to allow the Montpelier request, because the sports are listed in the policy. Mike Norman asked how many runners are on the team at U32. The U32 athletic director stated that they had seven students. Sue Duprat said that displacement is difficult in cross country. She is concerned that she could be displacing students into a challenge race. Bill Murphy said that in individual sports a couple of students could tip the balance for a state championship. Bob Johnson said that under member to member no more than 20% can come from any school. In cross country, there is no definition of how many students can comprise a team. He is not sure whether a full team is 7 (the number allowed in state championships). Dick Kraemer asked what was the motion. Bob Johnson: The motion is to amend the member to member policy to allow cross country under this policy. Mr. Kraemer said the purpose of the policy was to allow students opportunities that they might not have. In five years, this policy has provided over 100 children to have opportunities that they would not have. There has been no abuse proven in this time period. To approve this would not corrupt sports in Vermont. The VPA should stand on the same principle, and should apply this to all sports. Let the right committees set up the ground rules toprotect against adult abuse. Dan Ryan asked whether it applied to team sports by the terms of the rule, and Marks explained that this was the intent of the rule. Chris Young said that he would like to support this motion, but he is not sure that this is the venue to make this policy change. He would like to support this, but he is not sure. Eric Raymond asked Mr. Evans some questions. Is there money for a program? Peter Evans We do not have money in the budget. We are still trying to promote interest in cross country. Once lacrosse and soccer were introduced, we could not find the students for this program. They still do not have students interested in forming a team. Cynthia Hinrichsen asked whether there was more discussion with U32 to see if U32 would join the request. Mr. Evans said they could compete individually, but the option is not there. Dan Marlowe said that he was concerned that the independent program does not stop students from participating. They can still run as independents with U32. At BFA, they took in kids from Enosburg, including one who won a state championship. They were part of the team, even though they could not score for the team, and it was a positive experience. It bothers Mr. Marlowe that the VPA is keeping students from participating when the reality is that is not occurring. Meg Powden said that Danville is participating in the member to member program. If there was displacement, however, she would have a hard time supporting this. Mr. Evans commented that the rules protect against displacement, and it is the responsibility of the schools to prevent displacement. Tim Crowley said that students may not go out for a team because he or she hears that students may be coming from another school. Displacement can happen before the student even tries out. Frank Spencer asked about procedure. Marks said that there needs to be an up or down vote on the Montpelier resolution, and then other resolutions that would be germane to the member to member program would be allowed. Frank Pecora said the member to member program was designed to save struggling teams. 47 athletic directors voted against this. Both students said they would not run on U32 if there was displacement. Bill Murphy commented that this proposal could jeopardize the student’s ability to run for a state championship. Cynthia Hinrichsen said that the original program was a win-win for students athletes. The original spirit of this program should guide the VPA. The students have also the opportunity to participate in a democratic process. Dan Ryan commented that if you are an independent, it is a different level of member to member. The student must be accepted by the school. The only difference is that you will not score. Laurie Singer commented that this is in the heart of member to member, and we should allow this. Tom Conti commented that an individual can still win an individual championship. Lynn Cole said he would vote in favor of the motion. He is concerned about declining enrollment and tight school budgets. The individual sports represent the life time sports that we are teaching students. DG Weaver made the formal motion: Approve Montpelier HS request to include cross country as a team sport under the VPA member to member policy. Seconded. Votes in favor: 10. Votes opposed: 26. Frank Spencer moved that the ASC review the process in other states for joint school teams and report back to the Association at the May 2009 meeting with a proposal or a report on why they are not making a recommendation. Mr. Spencer explained that this goes beyond member to member to discuss the issue of two schools sponsoring teams. Some states do this, but he would like to see a more detailed examination by a committee. June Sargent commented that it is difficult for her school Proctor to field teams. Motion passed by a vote of 18 to 17. Chris Young made motion to have ASC study the impact of extending member to member program to all individual sports. Seconded by Frank Spencer. Motion fails on a vote of 18 to 17. Peter Evans expressed his appreciation for the open discussion. He moves that number four in the member to member program be amended to allow all sports. Motion seconded. Marks allowed the resolution as germane. Mike Norman said that this proposal was not in the best interest of students. Ms. Hinrechsen commented that this would overturn the AD decision without them being present. Peter from U32 said that he was confused as to why this resolution was before the body. Dan Ryan made a motion to table this motion. Motion to table passes by a vote of 19 to 15. Peter Evans commented that he had great respect for athletic directors. He did not know that athletic directors would be voting on this, and did not have the chance to attend their meeting. Athletics is an integral part of the educational program. Athletics is not autonomous, and must operate in conjunction with all issues in the school. Meeting adjourned at 6:05 PM |
||
|
||
