December 15, 2008
Overzealous Punishment of a Kid

Perhaps you've read or heard of the events surrounding Tony Wroten, the Garfield High School student and basketball player whose enrollment was recently terminated for alleged eligibility violations.

This avid fan of amateur athletics is a vociferous advocate for serious policing of high school "recruiting" and the fudging of residency to accommodate such antics. Nevertheless, the facts of this case are muddy.

Maybe the kid and his family were cheating on residency, but signs also point rather significantly to a modern-world scenario where Wroten spends time with two parents living in separate homes. As such, the "stakeout" conducted to cast judgment on Wroten seems more than a little inadequate.

Perhaps there's more information than that being made public to justify the actions taken against Wroten. For now, however, Jerry Brewer is right:

this "scandal" is the wackiest one in local high-school sports since the Washington Interscholastic Activities Association forced Archbishop Murphy out of the football playoffs last year because its legendary coach, Terry Ennis, died and forgot to check one of his player's physicals.

Terminating a student's school enrollment, as opposed to the lesser route of declaring the child ineligible to compete in athletics, is a drastic step. It shouldn't be done lightly or with inconclusive evidence. By not adhering to such a standard, the adults in this case look more interested in pounding people with the letter of the law rather than fairly governing the real life in which these student-athletes live. As the kids at Archbishop Murphy will tell you, that's not right.

Posted by Eric Earling at December 15, 2008 08:21 AM | Email This
Comments
1. There is more to this story than is being reported. It wouldn't surprise me that some of Garfield's competitors are involved in this....up to their eyeballs.

Posted by: Saltherring on December 15, 2008 08:19 AM
2. I'm sure you're right Salt.
If people think the political season is about what just passed, try hanging out at school sports events.
Also, the WIAA is a bunch of tyrants too. Idiots that can't do anything other than enforce outdated policy.

Posted by: PC on December 15, 2008 08:43 AM
3. Eric -- I don't think Anthony Wroten's parents are separated. But the accounts in different newspaper stories appear to be different. Regardless, this seems to be a tremendous waste of resources on the part of the Seattle School District. Somehow, I think the district will lose in court, and end up paying a lot of damages and attorney fees to the Wroten. An excellent use of public funds, when government at all levels is in a tremendous financial crisis.

So in your last few weeks in office, why don't you cut off the federal funds to the Seattle School District to deal with this injustice? I would think that their actions against Wroten might violate a number of legal requirements they must follow in order for the district to receive federal funds.

What ever happened to the right of a student to a hearing before being expelled from a public school? Since Wroten is not a threat to anyone, he must be allowed to continue in school, until the hearing process is completed.

On the other hand, both of Wroten's parents are still registered to vote at the Renton home that they own. Although neither of Wroten's parents appear to have voted in the 2008 election, or for the last several years.

Posted by: Richard Pope on December 15, 2008 09:09 AM
4. "Maybe the kid and his family were cheating on residency?" Then the action taken by district was the correct one. Personal responsibility begins earlier than the soph. year of high school.

Forgive me, but who cares? That those involved are indicating that this took place because the kid is black ("Garfield boys basketball coach Ed Haskins addressed the crowd. Calling Wroten's dismissal 'an injustice against an African American,' Haskins said of Wroten,)(Thereby teaching these kids even MORE built-in victimhood then they already have learned... if that's possible.) is all I needed to hear.

He'll live. And so will we. They actually have a basketball program at Renton, too, ya know. And if the concern is his education (which, of course, it what it should be for true conservatives) then basketball is secondary to that, and he would probably be better served out of a Seattle Public School.

So, I'm filing this one under "So what?" and hoping that postings might engage us in the Sound POLITICS part of Sound Politics.

Posted by: Hinton on December 15, 2008 09:10 AM
5. Mr.Pope

Please to explain to all, why anyone should take your legal advice.
(I'm pretty sure Eric won't!)

Your score card isn't looking real good.

Posted by: Medic/Vet on December 15, 2008 09:44 AM
6. To Richard Pope at #3:

Your make the mistake of thinking for a moment that the USDOE or OCR would ever initiate fund withholding from a state or school district for a violation of law. OCR rarely finds against districts in simple complaints, let alone taking the step of withholding federal financial assistance.

If OCR would perform its statutory duty, however, and actually utilize its power to intiate fund withholding, we'd actually start to see some compliance with the law from these schools, instead of their continued efforts to thwart the law.

OCR could start by withholding funds from any district caught not having performed the required Self Evaluation under Section 504 and the ADA -- which NO district has ever complied with. I challenge you to find one school district in WA which actually performed it. Sorry Eric -- OCR does NOT care.

Posted by: School Marm on December 15, 2008 10:36 AM
7. As we learned in the Archbishop Murphy incident, if you are Garfield High and there is a question of eligibility then you best stomp your foot right down or the WIAA will come in and destroy all that the other student-athletes worked for.

I can see if the student's family was cheating on residency to get into a more preferable school, then the district should be going after the kid and kicking him out. It's a very simple procedure to have your child go to a school into another district - approval from both superintendents - if you don't have it, you aren't allowed to attend.

Posted by: Doug on December 15, 2008 10:40 AM
8. Dunno about this. It sounds like the parents are trying to pull a fast one. Doesn't sound like the SPS is trying to pull one. They usually want kids for a higher head count in order to get federal money.

Posted by: John425 on December 15, 2008 11:06 AM
9. I think it's good to see the Seattle School District finally following the law instead of coming up with diversity or cultural excuses for not doing so. I agree with John425.

Posted by: Michael on December 15, 2008 12:01 PM
10. Now if we could only find out why so many kids "transfer" to Bellevue High School to play football...

Posted by: the Duke on December 15, 2008 12:27 PM
11. This has been going on around the country for decades. Moving good players into school districts so they can enhance winning teams serves the underground gambling industry well. We had it happen in the rich Florida town I used to live in and poor but athletic black kids were moved to rich affluent white neighborhoods so they could play for the "right team." One kid's Mother was given a new job as well as a new car so she could get to work to afford their new house. And this was all sanctioned and promoted by upstanding "pillars of the community."

Naturally, those kids can't directly gain from high school or college football (but just about everyone else does from high school football departments to college athletic programs and their overpaid coaches). And if they eventually manage to swim upstream against all odds and get into the NFL, they're already bought and paid for by their sponsors. If these kids get injured or disqualified along the way, they're dropped like nothing more than expendable assets.

This post is just the tip of the iceberg and I doubt if the media is really willing to cover such a story. Let's face it: people don't purchase USA Today for its award-winning bland news coverage. Most guys go straight for the Sports section to check out their winning (or losing) bets. Sports gambling is the working man's stock market.

Posted by: RobertinBellevue on December 15, 2008 01:05 PM
12. I think Doug @7 has it right. After the way the WIAA and Mike Colbrese shat all over the Archbishop Murphy football team, it's hard to argue against what Garfield is doing. It would be a shame to see a great season thrown away because of an ineligible player.

Posted by: Ryan on December 15, 2008 01:31 PM
13. To Pope: Only a disciplined student has a right to an appeal. Disenrolling a student for living outside the district boundaries is not considered student discipline under WAC 392-400. This student should be in school right now in Renton. The fact that he is not attending school is the fault of his parents, not the district. As a school administrator, I will say that this happens somewhat frequently. If we suspect a student is out of district, we'll send an administrator or even the SRO out to check. I've never heard of a stakeout like the Times described, but schools do have at least a minimal duty to verify addresses.

Posted by: Chiech on December 15, 2008 01:37 PM
14. Reason number 873,000 no child of mine will EVER attend a public school.

Posted by: john cocktosin on December 15, 2008 02:17 PM
15. Chiech, there is a form for appeal. It's under the RCW's - should be 28A.225 something. Well, I should say there is a way to appeal if the district turns down his request to attend there. Most of the time a request to attend is granted automatically - unless there is an obvious reason for going there such as a better sports program.

Posted by: Doug on December 15, 2008 02:17 PM
16. If someone is lying about their residency, the school district has an obligation to send the student back to their home school. The home school is where they live, where they receive their mail, where the legal guardian is in residence.

From what I read, the parents aren't separated. They just have a second home across from Garfield. It isn't uncommon to have the SRO stake out the house to see if in fact normal comings and goings are happening, that one would expect from someone who legally resides at the house. Otherwise it is a sham, and the school is within its rights to kick out the student.

I don't know why Garfield chose to do this, but I have to assume that they knew there was a good case to be made that he is ineligible. Other schools can file action, and have the season ruled null and void. It seems more fair to boot the kid back to Renton now, then to have everyone's season ruined by the family misrepresenting their residency.

Posted by: janet s on December 15, 2008 04:22 PM
17. There is a lot to the story that has yet to be reported. My best guess, the rental house was to be used as the "home" turf for mama and little tony. The Renton homestead to become the unofficial other turf for them. One may ask where does little tony work out on the weekends?? Hmmmm?

Posted by: fRed on December 15, 2008 04:27 PM
18. Um, thank goodness my kids weren't star athletes, merely star academic students. My children went to schools in a different district than we lived because of where I worked and its' reference to after school care (they came to my business after school). NEVER was there a problem with the approval of the transfer. Indeed, as long as there is room, they could not be turned down if they were in good academic and disciplinary standing. To say that an 'A" student can go - essentially - anywhere they want, but a football/basketball player cannot is ridiculous. (I might add that part of our reason for the school district change for us was that our close to home schools were much worse.) So, if I understand this correctly, transferring schools to improve your academic value is fine, but to improve your athletic value is...bad? Pshaw.

Posted by: Cliff on December 15, 2008 09:21 PM
19. It's just basketball, let the kid go to school where he likes. If it were football, baseball or track, I could see getting worked up about it. Who really cares about basketball? Let him get his education, and play basketball, ping pong, or whatever he wishes.

Posted by: FarFarRight on December 15, 2008 09:57 PM
20. FFR, the problem is that the school in question is first, Garfield and second, a Seattle Public School.

Those two factors practically guarantee that while this kid may hit the 17ft fade-away jumper like theaters punch out movie tickets, "education" ain't on the agenda.

Posted by: Hinton on December 15, 2008 11:47 PM
21. Cliff, you are absolutely right - it is preferred to allow students to transfer to other districts if the other district offers a superior academic education. It is not preferred to allow a student to transfer to an inferior academic or social environment in order to take advantage of a superior athletic environment. The Supt. of Public Instruction would never grant an appeal in such a case.

However, there are students each year who play sports for one school while attending another. If one district doesn't offer a particular athletic program, then a student may continue the academic program in their school while attending after school sports in another.

Posted by: Doug on December 16, 2008 09:02 AM
22. Back in the day, I lived in a town of 15,000 in Kansas that won more state Basketball titles than any other school, even the much larger Wichita and Kansas City schools.
The Santa Fe Railroad, the town's biggest employer, was known to transfer families with promising basketball stars from throughout its terrirory to our town. So much for eligibility rules.

Posted by: Mr Conservative on December 18, 2008 08:15 AM
Post a comment
Name:


Email Address:


URL:


Comments:


Remember info?