Prepared Text for Board Meeting –
Marc A. Schare,
Should the
If you are the parent of
an aspiring baseball or softball player, the answer is obvious. Most other
districts in central
Here’s what I believe. Sports
are an integral and systemic part of public education and few would argue that
all sports should be discontinued, so what we are dealing with is numbers – how
much should
To begin to answer these
questions, I asked the obvious – how much do we spend on sports now? What are
best practices in this area? How much do we spend per kid per sport? How does
this compare to other districts? To my surprise, I learned that my questions was unanswerable. We simply did not have the data
necessary to answer questions about our cocurricular program sports program.
Looking back over my 18
months on the board, every time we as a district face a sports related
question, we punt. What should we do about middle school gymnastics.
We postponed the decision for a year and then the subject never came up again.
What should we do about the weight room tech. We “found” the money last year
and, to my knowledge, we’ll “find” more money again this year. Next year?
Who knows.
Lacking such data, it is
impossible to determine whether the deal on the table for middle school baseball is a good
deal for the
We still have the
question, however, of what to do about this proposal. Here’s one guys opinion.
Without prejudging the results of the study, it seems clear that baseball and
softball, given the support of the Worthington Youth Boosters and the fact that
these are high participation, low cost sports to begin with, and further given
the fact that most surrounding districts have baseball and softball, will do
well in the study and will be a reality in the district, so let’s go ahead,
concurrent with the study, and authorize this pilot program while
simultaneously asking the administration to perform the study. If Middle School
Baseball/Software fares well in the study, it will continue, otherwise, it will
not.
The question then turns to
how to pay for it. I am loathe to ask the administration to divert resources
from academics to pay for a sport before we undertake this study, however,
political reality would seem to be on the other side of that argument,
therefore, I propose a compromise. Rather than use general fund money or the
Pepsi money, we use the interest on the Pepsi money to fund the program for 2
years. We have $269,000 in the Pepsi fund. At 5.25%, this money should be
generating $14122 per year, or 94% of the projected cost of the program during
the pilot. Using the interest on the Pepsi money has the following advantages:
1) It guarantees that the
Pepsi money will not be spent on anything else.
2) It caps the programs
cost at $15,000 while we perform the study.
3) It allows us to
implement the pilot immediately without touching the five year forecast.
4) It honors the original
intent of the Pepsi fund.
In addition to using the
interest on the Pepsi fund, I support the increase in the pay to participate
fee to $125/sport, regardless of the number of sports that an individual participates
in. A comprehensive study on sports will assist us in more accurately setting a
pay to participate fee.
In conclusion, I’d ask my colleagues
to join me in asking the administration to craft a proposal for middle school
baseball and softball along the lines of the current proposal, pay for it using
interest on the Pepsi money and funds from the increase in pay to participate
and couple it with a study, to be completed no later than August, 2008, into
all aspects of our cocurricular sports program. Such a proposal should be
completed within the next two weeks, distributed to the community for comment
and come back to us for a vote on August 13.