Page 3 of 3 < 1 2 3
Topic Options
#177954 - 05/27/20 09:01 AM ‘Gamesmanship’: Rock Hill public charter Legion Collegiate official talks SCHSL lawsuit [Re: SharksFutbol]
Kevin Heise Offline

World Cup

Registered: 12/24/01
Posts: 6198
Loc: Cayce
‘Gamesmanship’: Rock Hill public charter Legion Collegiate official talks SCHSL lawsuit
The Herald - 5/27/20

The SCHSL has since moved to have this lawsuit dismissed, public records show. The motion states that “the plaintiffs lack standing to bring this action against the defendants,” or, in other words, the plaintiffs don’t have legal rights to sue or challenge actions by the league over the issues in question.


Top
#177957 - 05/27/20 01:49 PM Re: ‘Gamesmanship’: Rock Hill public charter Legion Collegiate official talks SCHSL lawsuit [Re: Kevin Heise]
Kyle Heise Online   content

World Cup

Registered: 12/24/01
Posts: 8103
Loc: Cayce, SC

Top
#177958 - 05/27/20 03:02 PM Re: ‘Gamesmanship’: Rock Hill public charter Legion Collegiate official talks SCHSL lawsuit [Re: Alister DeLong]
Shamrock Rovers Online   content
Corner Kick

Registered: 12/22/17
Posts: 256
Hearing that should this lawsuit not be dismissed, then current members of SCHSL may commit the nuclear option. That is they may pull out of the SCHSL and then reform a new, private association. A similar process played out in Georgia recently.

In such a scenario, a private organization could exclude the charters and private schools. At least in theory. Probably looking at 2-3 years down the road though.

Top
#178045 - 06/22/20 07:48 PM Re: ‘Gamesmanship’: Rock Hill public charter Legion Collegiate official talks SCHSL lawsuit [Re: Alister DeLong]
Shamrock Rovers Online   content
Corner Kick

Registered: 12/22/17
Posts: 256

Top
#178046 - 06/23/20 07:52 AM Re: ‘Gamesmanship’: Rock Hill public charter Legion Collegiate official talks SCHSL lawsuit [Re: Shamrock Rovers]
eMnAvA Offline
Goal

Registered: 04/01/08
Posts: 410
Originally Posted By: Shamrock Rovers
Hearing that should this lawsuit not be dismissed, then current members of SCHSL may commit the nuclear option. That is they may pull out of the SCHSL and then reform a new, private association. A similar process played out in Georgia recently.

In such a scenario, a private organization could exclude the charters and private schools. At least in theory. Probably looking at 2-3 years down the road though.


While this may be an option, how many schools would actually do this? It might help in the long run but you know how stubborn people can be and how change is seen as a bad thing

Top
#178047 - 06/23/20 08:14 AM Re: ‘Gamesmanship’: Rock Hill public charter Legion Collegiate official talks SCHSL lawsuit [Re: eMnAvA]
Shamrock Rovers Online   content
Corner Kick

Registered: 12/22/17
Posts: 256
Originally Posted By: eMnAvA
Originally Posted By: Shamrock Rovers
Hearing that should this lawsuit not be dismissed, then current members of SCHSL may commit the nuclear option. That is they may pull out of the SCHSL and then reform a new, private association. A similar process played out in Georgia recently.

In such a scenario, a private organization could exclude the charters and private schools. At least in theory. Probably looking at 2-3 years down the road though.


While this may be an option, how many schools would actually do this? It might help in the long run but you know how stubborn people can be and how change is seen as a bad thing


Honestly, probably quite a few. The template for this process has already been laid out in Georgia. The Charters laid out a solid argument, that attendance zones are very inconsistent (some districts have an open attendance zone while others allow free transfers within district to school with unique programs of study. The charters would be at a decided disadvantage if located in those districts under this proposed policy.

I think the traditional public schools are out of options given the legislation in SC that protects Charters. I do not see this as being about right and wrong, but protecting the status quo. We see it with club soccer all the time. Are the adults making these decisions truly putting the interest of kids first, or their own?

Top
#178048 - 06/23/20 01:20 PM Re: ‘Gamesmanship’: Rock Hill public charter Legion Collegiate official talks SCHSL lawsuit [Re: Shamrock Rovers]
Kyle Heise Online   content

World Cup

Registered: 12/24/01
Posts: 8103
Loc: Cayce, SC
Charter schools win court battle against SC High School League. Here’s what that means
Lou Bezjak, The State (Columbia) | Alex Zietlow, The Herald (Rock Hill)

On Monday, a Richland County judge ruled in favor of the private and charter schools in their lawsuit against the South Carolina High School League.

Richland County Common Pleas Judge Jocelyn Newman granted the charter and private schools an injunction that would push back two amendments passed in March regarding school-to-school transfers and athletic eligibility rules.

Private and charter schools that are members of the S.C. High School League said they were unfairly targeted by the amendments.

“Plaintiffs have properly established that they would suffer irreparable harm if the injunction is not granted, that they will likely succeed on the merits of the litigation, and that no adequate remedy at law exists. This Court, having exercised its discretion, finds that injunctive relief is proper,” Newman wrote in her order.

Gray Collegiate principal Brian Newsome called the decision “huge,” a win not just for private and charter schools but for all students across the state.

“It is a great day for all students in South Carolina, private, charter, traditional,” Newsome said. “It is not just big for us. Huge for all districts in South Carolina. Some of the smaller districts were impacted as well. Everyone thought this was just between private and charter schools against everyone. That wasn’t the case.

“We knew we had a good, sound legal team and they did a great job presenting before Judge Newman. We are glad she looked at the true merits of the case.”

The State also reached out to the S.C. High School League for comment on the decision.

Private and charter schools that are members of the High School League sought a temporary injunction that would prevent recent amendments from going into effect for the 2020-21 school year, which begins on July 1. The amendments approved in March by the High School League were related to school-to-school transfers and athletic eligibility rules.

The lawsuit alleged that those amended rules “intentionally and illegally discriminate” against the league’s private and public charter high school members.

The SCHSL will have a chance to appeal if it wants to, but that move would have to be approved by the organization’s executive board. The parties are supposed to meet Tuesday to see what they will want to do.

Under one amendment that was approved in March, most students who transfer from a traditional school to a charter or private school would have to sit out a year before they would be eligible to play any for athletic team.

In previous years, students were allowed to transfer to any high school in the state by the ninth grade and be immediately eligible athletically, even if they lived outside that school’s attendance zone. With March’s amendment, any student who transfers would have to sit out a year before playing junior varsity or varsity athletics.

Such changes “bar most students who choose to attend a public charter or private school from participating in League athletics for a period of one year from enrollment,” the Public Charter School Alliance said in a statement on May 18.

After Monday’s ruling, neither of those amendments will go into effect for this school year.

The case began in the Greenville County system before being moved to Richland County after Judge Perry Gravely ruled June 2 in favor of the SCHSL, which requested a change in venue for the case.

The S.C. High School League has 206 members — that includes traditional public schools as well as 21 public charter schools and four private schools. Private and charter schools make up 12 percent of the membership but have racked up state championships in athletics in recent years, especially in Class A and Class 2A. Private and charter schools won 42 of 57 championships in Class A and 2A from 2017-19.

There were 12 schools named as plaintiffs in the suit, including Gray Collegiate Academy from the Midlands. The four private schools that compete in the S.C. High School League are part of the lawsuit — Bishop England, Southside Christian, Christ Church and St. Joseph’s — as are other charter schools including Greer Middle College, Brashier Middle College, Greenville Technical Charter, Fox Creek, Oceanside Collegiate, Legion Collegiate and Palmetto Scholars.

The Public Charter School Alliance of South Carolina, the membership organization for charter schools within the state, also was named as a plaintiff.

“Of course, this is the first obstacle, the first hurdle,” Legion Collegiate Academy principal Dr. TK Kennedy said. “And I just hope that everyone pretty much uses some common sense with this and does what’s best for kids. ... I’m just happy for the kids. We can allow these kids to play, to participate and not sit them out because of these amendments.”

The SCHSL had argued that the schools didn’t have legal rights to sue or challenge actions by the league over the issues in question.

Newsome said he looks forward to sitting down with the SCHSL to go come up with a permanent solution that would be beneficial for all parties.

South Carolina isn’t the only state in which there is an argument between public schools and non-traditional schools, but other states have come up with solutions to the issue. A poll conducted for the March 2017 issue of High School Today revealed that 21 state associations use a multiplier or other plan to level the playing field among their schools. Among those were Indiana, which uses success in postseason, and Ohio, which uses a competitive balance plan.

The SCHSL in the fall had a committee made of private, public and charter schools from all classes to discuss the issue of competitive balance. The committee discussed factors such as multipliers based on postseason and championship success, but no decision was reached.

Another amendment, which would put private and charter schools in their own playoff bracket, didn’t pass this spring.

Top
#178049 - 06/24/20 05:55 AM Re: public vs. private vs charter vs. magnet [Re: Alister DeLong]
rhhs Offline

Bench

Registered: 03/19/09
Posts: 2
Wasn't the Principal at Rock Hill High School the author of this legislation? If so, I would love to hear his reaction to this ruling.

As a product of the Public School system, but a parent and proponent of Charter Schools and Private School education, I find this sort of 'general rule' entitlement belittling. Just because a school has existed since 1913 does not mean that what goes on inside its' doors is superior to a new concept, such as Legion Collegiate Academy. #LancesUp

Top
#178051 - 06/25/20 02:54 PM Re: public vs. private vs charter vs. magnet [Re: Alister DeLong]
Kyle Heise Online   content

World Cup

Registered: 12/24/01
Posts: 8103
Loc: Cayce, SC
6/25/20
Lou Bezjak, The State

Quote:
▪ Singleton said no decision has been made yet on appealing Monday’s ruling in the league’s lawsuit with the private/charter schools members. Richland County judge Jocelyn Newman ruled in favor of the private and charter schools in their lawsuit against the SCHSL. Newman granted the charter and private schools an injunction that would push back two amendments passed in March regarding school-to-school transfers and athletic eligibility rules.

Top
#178052 - 06/25/20 03:21 PM Re: public vs. private vs charter vs. magnet [Re: Alister DeLong]
Shamrock Rovers Online   content
Corner Kick

Registered: 12/22/17
Posts: 256
SCHSL had an Athletic Directors meeting today, primarily to discuss Fall athletics. The lawsuit was on the agenda for discussion in Executive Session.

Top
Page 3 of 3 < 1 2 3

Moderator:  Kevin Heise, Kyle Heise