Frank and Doreen Wallace are the parents of Jonathan Wallace, a student who transferred from Gateway High School (Quad-A) to Vincentian Academy (Single-A) at the end of June 1997. Jonathan’s transfer was for academic purposes, and although he played both basketball and football at Gateway High School, upon transfer to Vincentian he intended to play only basketball. Jonathan Wallace sought permission to participate in interscholastic athletics through the Vincentian Academy’s Athletic Director’s formal request in writing. The WPIAL Hearing Panel convened a hearing on November 10, 1997 to resolve the request. On November 11, 1997, the Board issued a letter denying Jonathan Wallace’s request to participate.

Subsequently, Vincentian appealed the decision and a hearing was conducted on November 18, 1997 before the PIAA Board of Appeal. On November 24, 1997, Brad Cashman, Executive Director of the PIAA, informed Vincentian Academy that the PIAA Board of Appeal voted 3-2 to sustain the decision of the PIAA District VII/WPIAL Committee’s decision of ineligibility.

Mr. and Mrs. Wallace filed a petition for a preliminary injunction before the Court of Common Pleas of Allegheny County. Judge Robert C. Gallo issued his denial of the injunction in January 1998.

The main issue involves the lack of due process for athletes and their parents who appeal PIAA decisions. Specifically:

• On appeal at both the WPIAL and PIAA level, Jonathan was found ineligible to play interscholastic sports, since both hearing boards ruled that he transferred for athletic purposes even though Gateway officials initially told the Wallaces’ that they would not contest the transfer based upon the PIAA’s one transfer rule.
• The time interval between when the Wallaces’ filed for a hearing with WPIAL (August) and when the hearing was scheduled (November) was lengthy. It should be noted that the WPIAL hearing took place one day before the beginning of basketball practice.
• Representatives from the WPIAL, who had voted at the initial hearing, were present at the PIAA hearing in Mechanicsburg.
• The Wallaces’ did not learn the outcome on the same day of either of the hearings--the WPIAL released the results of its vote the next day, and the PIAA five days after the hearing.
• At the PIAA hearing, the Gateway High School representatives presented written testimony from two witnesses not present at the actual hearing. Neither the Wallaces’ nor their attorney knew such testimony was going to be presented.

Among other issues of concern, both Mr. Bernauer and Mr. McCurry were involved with the case of Jason Wilkerson, who was deemed ineligible to participate in interscholastic athletics at North Hills High School. Jason was found ineligible under the PIAA rule allowing each student eight semesters of interscholastic eligibility beyond the 8^th grade, regardless of whether the student actually participated in athletics.

In September 1994, Jason Wilkerson enrolled at North Hills High School after moving to the area during the summer with his family. Jason was deemed a sophomore academically, even though he had attended Pottstown High School as a sophomore the previous year. As such, Jason had to repeat his 10^th grade year of school. During his first year at North Hills (1994-95), he did not play football, although he did participate in track in the spring. Jason participated in both football and track during his junior year at North Hills (1995-96). Prior to moving to North Hills, Jason had not participated in any interscholastic sports during his high school years.

Jason’s academic problems stemmed from a debilitating home-life before moving to North Hills which included, among other problems, an abusive, drug-addicted stepfather. After Jason moved to North Hills and began participating in sports, his academic performance improved offering hopes of a possible college scholarship. As such, the North Hills School District attempted to obtain an additional year of eligibility for Jason arguing that he had no control over his debilitating family conditions, which had an impact similar to that of an illness or injury.

In June of 1996, the District VII/WPIAL Committee denied North Hills’ request and declared Jason Wilkerson ineligible to participate in the interscholastic athletic program at North Hills High School for the 1996-97 school year. North Hills High School appealed the decision. On August 20, 1996, a PIAA Board of Appeal voted 4-1 to sustain the decision of the PIAA District VII/WPIAL Committee. The Allegheny County Court of Common Pleas upheld the PIAA decision.

• PIAA displays an inconsistent and arbitrary decision-making process, which extends "favoritism" to some students and stunts opportunity for other students.
• Financial unaccountability of the PIAA and the individual districts.
• North Hills High School was denied the opportunity to participate in the Kaylee Bowl Classic in Florida by both the WPIAL and the PIAA Board of Control. Other schools in Pennsylvania have participated in this classic, which has resulted in concern over how schools operating under the same rules and regulations can be treated differently.
• Cases of students being denied eligibility and comparisons between the cases revealing no "case law" or consistent ruling by the district committee or the PIAA Board of Control.
• During 1996-97, approximately $1.25 million was generated by the performance of students belonging to member schools in PIAA District 7 (WPIAL). Mr. McCurry raised the concern of an expenditure of $65,000 for committee expenses, which he did bring to the attention of WPIAL officials. Mr. McCurry never received a response.
• The election process in local districts was questioned. It was asserted that the election process is designed to limit participation and to prohibit persons with diverging opinion from the opportunity to be elected to the local districts or PIAA Board of Control.
• It is possible for a local district appeal board to contain a member of a competing school, which raises the concern of whether impartial decisions are being made.

Attorney John J. Minora, of Scranton, PA, represents the Bouselli family in an eligibility case against the PIAA. David Bouselli was an athlete at Dunmore High School (Lackawanna County) who was diagnosed with Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD). Bouselli repeated his freshman year at Dunmore due to poor academic performance, thus using the PIAA maximum eight semesters of eligibility by the end of his junior year. At that time, his family petitioned both District 2 and the PIAA for two additional semesters of eligibility based upon his medical condition. Both District 2 and the PIAA denied the request. The Bouselli’s attorney, John Minora, successfully obtained an injunction against the PIAA decision from the Lackawanna County Court of Common Pleas, during which David continued to participate on the school’s varsity baseball team. This despite a threat from the PIAA to force Dunmore’s baseball team to forfeit its games should Bouselli eventually be deemed ineligible to participate. At the second hearing, Senator Mellow informed the committee that the PIAA reversed itself on the forfeiture sanction.

POINTS/ISSUES OF IMPORTANCE

• The main issue involves the lack of due process for those who choose to appeal PIAA eligibility decisions. Attorney Minora testified that the PIAA By-Laws (Article VII, Section 6), provide for a waiver to the eight-semester rule "in cases of a long-confining illness or injury which…necessitates repeating a grade or semester." Despite medical testimony supporting the ADHD condition present in David Bouselli, the PIAA declared him ineligible for the waiver to the eight-semester rule.
• A second issue was that PIAA needs to be held accountable. Minora testified that the PIAA needs to have some type of oversight to prevent it from acting as a "virtual monopoly."

Mr. John Wilsbach is the General Manager/Advisor to Middletown High School student radio station, WMSS. WMSS is owned by the Middletown School District, and has been in existence for twenty years as a non-profit, non-commercial station (one of approximately four in the Commonwealth) that airs as part of its programming high school football and basketball games. Mr. Wilsbach believes that since WMSS is a student-run, educational tool, that it should receive a waiver from the PIAA for all or part of the normal broadcasting fees it charges to commercial stations to broadcast playoff games. Mr. Wilsbach has formally requested such a waiver on two separate occasions; the first letter received a negative response from the PIAA, while the second went unanswered. At its April 3-4, 1998 meeting, the PIAA Board of Control accepted the recommendation of the Budget Committee to discount broadcasting and telecasting rights fees for any member school-owned radio/television station for any inter-district contests. This change became effective July 1, 1998.

POINTS/ISSUES OF IMPORTANCE

• Over the past three years, WMSS (annual budget of approximately $30,000) has paid in excess of $5,000 to the PIAA for the rights to broadcast football and basketball playoff games for high schools located within its broadcast range. These fees are the same as those charged to commercial stations. This figure does not include fees paid to District 3 for rights to their playoff games.
• Twice in the recent past, WMSS has requested that PIAA waive or lower the fees charged since WMSS is a member school owned station with a direct educational mission. The first letter received a negative response, while the second remains unanswered.

In past years, radio reporters not paying rights fees to broadcast a game could attend the PIAA wrestling/basketball playoffs and championships free of charge. The PIAA arbitrarily changed this policy and began refusing free radio news credentials. This refusal did not apply to newspaper reporters. The PIAA also refuses free credentials to radio stations if the PIAA determines the event is not in that station’s "listening audience’s interest." Free or complimentary credentials to media personnel are not addressed in the PIAA Rules or Regulations.

After several radio reporters had been denied free media credentials and were told to purchase tickets for each event of upcoming wrestling and basketball playoffs and championships, Richard Wyckoff contacted Elliot Hopkins, Assistant Executive Director of the PIAA. Mr. Hopkins informed Mr. Wyckoff that the change in policy had been instituted to "correct alleged abuses" in the past when credentials were given to nonmedia. Reporters from daily newspapers continue to be given free credentials, while broadcast reporters are required to pay for entrance.

The new policy used by the PIAA allows only one reporter per station if a written request is sent to the PIAA, on station letterhead, and signed by the General Manager, Program Director, or Sales Manager. The PIAA can also refuse free credentials to a radio station if the PIAA determines the event is not in that station’s "listening audience’s interest." As an example, an Erie station could be denied credentials for a basketball championship game between Coatesville and Harrisburg.

The PIAA prohibits the media from talking to any coach or player after the state playoff games for 15 minutes. The PIAA doesn’t want coaches or players, in the emotionalism of the event, to say something against the PIAA, the officials, or the school. The fact is that during the regular season, through the playoffs and district playoffs, the media can talk to coaches or players and there is no 15-minute rule. There never has been a problem, yet the PIAA insists on the 15-minute rule for the state playoffs in both football and basketball. The 15-minute rule is seen as a hindrance for those who are trying to promote a PIAA event.

Fees should be uniform and not dependent on the classification of the event. Mr. Lewandoski doesn’t believe that a student at a Quad-A school is worth more than one at a Class A school, yet the PIAA sets the telecast/broadcast fees depending on the classification of the event. Quad-A, Triple-A, Double-A, and Single-A all have different fees for radio or television broadcast rights.

Even though stations have to pay broadcast rights fees, they are still prohibited from producing their own broadcast. The PIAA chooses a station or production facility to handle the technical aspect of broadcasting. The selected station doing the production then provides a generic feed via satellite to those stations paying broadcast rights fees. This arrangement prevents the stations from featuring local athletes and producing the event in a manner that would interest local viewers.

• Television rights fees for high school basketball games at the state level are more expensive than fees to cover a national NCAA basketball championship or a pre-season professional football game.
• Print media personnel are given credentials with no hassle, however the broadcast media have, in the past, been arbitrarily refused credentials.
• The PIAA prohibits the media from talking to any coach or player after the state playoff games for 15 minutes.
• Broadcast fee amounts vary according to the classification of the event being played.
• The PIAA chooses a station or production facility to handle the technical and production aspect of broadcasting. The selected station doing the production then provides a generic feed via satellite to those stations paying broadcast rights fees.

In 1996, an employee of WJET-TV was told by Comcast Cable Company (Comcast) that Comcast had the rights to telecast a PIAA playoff. The WJET-TV employee gave Comcast the satellite coordinates so that Comcast could receive the satellite feed from the event location. Comcast would normally have to pay WITF-TV (WITF supplies the production and technical staff to telecast PIAA playoffs) a fee of $2200 for its services. Comcast did not pay the $2200. WJET-TV was not involved in the telecast of this event. The only involvement by WJET-TV was that one of its employees erroneously gave the satellite coordinates to Comcast. Prior to January 5, 1998, WJET-TV was under local ownership and had no ownership association with Comcast.

On March 18, 1998, Mr. Gattozzi of WJET-TV spoke with Mr. Gary Saltzgiver of WITF to discuss the possibility of WJET televising a Girls’ High School Basketball Championship game. Mr. Saltzgiver informed Mr. Gattozzi that there might be a problem because of the 1996 Comcast situation. Mr. Gattozzi was not an employee of WJET in 1996. WJET was bought by Nexstar Broadcasting Inc. in January 1998. Mr. Gattozzi was hired at that time. Mr. Gattozzi contacted Mr. Elliot Hopkins, Assistant Executive Director of the PIAA, and was informed by Mr. Hopkins that WJET could submit a bid on the telecast, and the money owed by Comcast would be handled at a later date. A bid was submitted but the telecast rights were awarded to another TV station. During an ensuing telephone conversation with Mr. Hopkins, Mr. Gattozzi was informed that even if WJET submitted the highest bid, WJET would not have been awarded the telecast rights because of the money that is owed by Comcast Cable to WITF-TV. Mr. Gattozzi feels that WJET is being shut out of the opportunity to telecast playoff events even though it is Comcast who owes money to WITF, not WJET.

• PIAA Rules and Regulations do not specifically address the process for awarding of bids for the telecasting of playoffs.
• WJET-TV was told they could bid on telecast rights and only after rights were awarded to another station was WJET told by the PIAA that WJET would not have been awarded the bid under any circumstances.

Gorden Blain, editor of SPORTSfever Magazine, has been unable to get the PIAA to let him bid on rights to provide programs for the state football and state basketball championship finals. SPORTSfever magazine is acknowledged by many people involved in scholastic sports to be a quality magazine providing in-depth coverage of district programs. SPORTSfever is the official publisher of District 1 and 3 championship programs and has worked with various PIAA district committees to provide profit-making programs for district playoffs. Mr. Blain has offered to produce a program for both football and basketball state championship finals at no cost to the PIAA. The PIAA has refused Mr. Blain’s services and has banned the sale of his magazine at any PIAA venue even when no other program was available. The PIAA provides no programs for the PIAA playoff rounds leading up to the state championship, yet the PIAA refuses to allow Mr. Blain to make his publication available or even to discuss a program contract in which the PIAA would benefit financially from the sale of the program during the playoff rounds.

Mr. Blain testified that the PIAA, rather than pursue the production of state championship programs either through Mr. Blain or some other publisher within the state, has instead decided to contract the publication of its state championship football and basketball program with an Illinois publisher.

• PIAA has no bidding procedures in place for the publication of tournament programs.
• Provides no program for the state basketball playoff games in the first, second, quarterfinal and semifinal rounds, yet refuses offers of state tournament programs at no cost to the PIAA and with a guaranteed share of program sales.
• Mr. Blain testified that PIAA contracted with an out-of-state publishing company from Illinois to produce a program for the state championship finals in Hershey.
• Contacted a sponsor advertising in SPORTSfever Magazine and issued verbal threats to their representative.
• PIAA arbitrarily decided to ban SPORTSfever and its editorial staff from PIAA championship events.

Coach Quinn claims the manner in which the state basketball playoff berths are assigned geographically does not reflect the true number, or classification, of teams in each of the districts. He also believes that the classification of teams (A, AA, AAA, AAAA) according to the size of the school needs adjustment because of smaller schools being forced to compete with schools that have three- to four-times more students.

The PIAA uses a 32-team bracket for the state basketball playoffs. The state is divided for playoff purposes between east and west, with each area assigned 16 playoff spots which must be divided proportionately among the districts in the area. The problem is that the east has 104 AAAA teams while the west has only 51 AAAA teams. The result is that when the playoff spots are assigned proportionately within the two areas, a district such as District 11 (Allentown/Bethlehem/Easton areas) gets two berths for its 15 AAAA teams, while in the west, Districts 6, 8, 9, and 10 have a combined 16 AAAA teams but are assured eight state playoff berths. Other classes of competition (A, AA, AAA) have similar problems.

Coach Quinn believes the classification of teams is unfair to some schools, particularly in the AAAA classification. At this time, a school that has 397 or more boys in senior high school is considered an AAAA school for basketball. The result is that a school with 400 boys in senior high school is forced to compete with other schools that may have 1,200 senior high boys. Coach Quinn believes that another class should be added to remove the discrepancy that now exists in the AAAA classification.

Another area that needs revision, according to Coach Quinn, is the classification of private schools, which include Catholic and reform schools. Private schools are not bound by the established boundaries that restrict public schools, and in the case of reform schools, there is no boundary. As a result, even though private schools make up about 13 percent of all PIAA schools, they have accounted for more than 35 percent of the semifinalists in state boy’s basketball tournaments in the past three years. Coach Quinn believes private schools should be made to play in the next higher classification because of boundary advantages for the private schools.

• The east/west division for state PIAA basketball playoffs does not result in an equal distribution of AAAA teams in each division.
• There is no basketball coaches association or coaches representative on the PIAA Board of Control.
• The AAAA classification in boy’s high school basketball allows schools with as few as 400 boys to have to compete with schools that may have as many as 1200 boys.

Peter White is a retired head basketball coach of Williamsport High School. Mr. White, along with his son Peter White Jr., operates Keystone State Camps in Williamsport, PA.

Both Peter White Sr. (Coach White) and his son Peter White Jr., as former Varsity and Junior Varsity basketball coaches at Williamsport High School, have had several hearings before the PIAA Board of Control. Coach White claims that due process violations by the PIAA make it impossible for a coach or student to receive a fair and unbiased hearing.

Coach White’s problems with the PIAA date back to 1988. Coach White conducted basketball instruction classes for underprivileged youths in the local community center. Coach White had been conducting the classes free-of-charge for eight years. In November of 1988, the PIAA received an anonymous letter accusing Coach White of conducting illegal practice for his high school basketball team. PIAA observers visited the instruction classes and could find no violations of PIAA rules or regulations. Despite this finding, the PIAA decided to hold a hearing on the matter in April 1989.

Because Coach White was aware of the manner in which the PIAA conducted its hearings, Coach White hired a lawyer and requested an injunction from the courts. The injunction was refused, however the judge who made the ruling set specific conditions for the PIAA hearing. Those conditions were:

• A court appointed stenographer would record the proceedings.
• Coach White had appeal rights of charges made against him and of the conduct of the hearing.
• Anonymous letters were not admissible as evidence.
• The coach must be considered a party to the hearing.

The hearing was conducted and the coach was found innocent of any wrongdoing. Coach White had attorney expenses of $2,000 for this hearing. Coach White claims the PIAA has been antagonistic to him ever since.

Another incident that resulted in a hearing by the PIAA occurred in 1996. Coach Peter White Jr., Junior Varsity basketball coach at that time, received two technical fouls, which mean an automatic ejection from the game. The fouls were for standing during play (coaches are not allowed to stand at the bench) and for allegedly kicking the bench after receiving the first technical. Both Coach White Sr. and Coach White Jr. vehemently argued the technical fouls prior to leaving the floor. The game referee wrote a letter of complaint about the coaches’ conduct. Also, as a result of the ejection, Williamsport High School reprimanded Coach White Jr. by placing a letter in his personnel file and notifying him that a second incident would mean suspension. Undaunted by the school’s action, the PIAA then notified the school and both coaches that a hearing would be held by the PIAA because of the coaches’ conduct.

Coach White Sr. and Jr. had the following complaints about the hearing:

• The hearing was called despite the lack of complaints by either member-school involved in the incident.
• The reason for the hearing was the letter from the referee who called the technical fouls, not from the member schools.
• The referee who called the fouls did not bother to appear at the hearing.
• There was no stenographer to record the proceedings; the hearing was taped using a small portable recorder.
• Objections by Coach White to charges or procedure were completely ignored by the PIAA.
• Facts presented consisted only of unsworn testimony, i.e., the letter written by the absent referee.

The result of the hearing was that the PIAA would sanction Williamsport High School by suspending it from sanctioned sports events unless the coach was further reprimanded. The reprimand consisted of:

• Attending coaching classes.
• Game referees would submit coaching evaluation forms to the PIAA after each event coached by the Whites.
• Suspension of the coach for two games.
• Public censure of the coach.

In addition, the school was put on probation for one year.

Coach White asked the PIAA for a copy of the taped proceedings and forwarded the required $50.00 fee. The PIAA then said the tape could not be copied because of background noise and poor quality of the recording.

• The PIAA violates its own constitution concerning the process in calling for hearings.
• Hearings are called giving as little as a week’s notice to the parties to the hearing.
• Students and coaches are not parties to the hearing, only school districts.
• The PIAA does not have a stenographer present to record testimony.
• There is no independent person to rule on objections. The PIAA is prosecutor, judge and jury.
• Non-voting members of the PIAA participate in questioning.
• Witness for the PIAA hear all testimony, but other witnesses are sequestered.
• The PIAA does not require its witnesses to attend hearings, therefore they cannot be cross-examined.
• Unsworn testimony and anonymous letters are used as evidence.
• Students and coaches are punished by the PIAA threatening schools with sanctions if the schools do not carry out the PIAA decisions.
• The PIAA can censure individuals and schools.

Dennis Nemes is the principal of Northwestern Lehigh High School and also serves on the PIAA Board of Control as the representative of the Pennsylvania Association of Secondary School Principals (PASSP). Mr. Nemes proposed, at the April PIAA Board of Control meeting, that the PIAA disclose its business dealings, including bidding procedures to the public since the member schools of the PIAA are subject to such disclosure.

The PIAA Board of Control at its April and May meetings discussed Mr. Nemes’ disclosure proposal. All three paid full-time PIAA executives (Mr. Cashman, Mr. Lombardi, and Mr. Hopkins) have opposed the measure stating that disclosing bids would be bad business because it would prevent the PIAA from getting good deals and cost more money in the long run.

Mr. Nemes’ disclosure proposal was tabled at the May PIAA Board of Control meeting. Mr. Nemes commented that one area of concern regarding total disclosure is the privacy of student athletes involved in eligibility issues.

• Membership in the PIAA consists of approximately 1,300 schools and of that amount about 150 are private schools. According to Mr. Nemes, 250,000 student-athletes participate in interscholastic athletics under the PIAA governance.
• The PIAA Constitution principally establishes the governing structure of the PIAA and the powers and responsibilities of its components. The Constitution is adopted and amended by vote of the member schools. The Bylaws, which consist primarily of rules applying to competition, are adopted and amended by PIAA’s Board of Control.
• The PIAA Board of Control has six meetings each year. Any member of the board may place an item on the meeting agenda by informing the executive director, and any school principal may place an item on the agenda by informing either the executive director or his/her district chairman. The six Board of Control meetings are "publicized" in the PIAA calendars distributed each year to the member schools. However, the Board of Control does not advertise its meetings to the general public.
• The district committee members and members of the Board of Control are voluntary positions. Each person receives a per diem of $35 per day on PIAA business.
• Mr. Nemes is elected as the PASSP’s representative, the PASSP makes the determination as to who will represent them on the PIAA Board of Control. Mr. Nemes has been a member of the PIAA Board of Control representing PASSP since 1985.
• In an attempt to portray the PIAA as an open organization, Mr. Nemes pointed out that the PIAA publishes a 500-page handbook that is distributed to member schools. The PIAA publishes a newsletter six times a year, which is sent out to principals, athletic directors, superintendents, school board presidents and secretaries of each district, each member of the General Assembly, and sports editors of both the print and electronic media. This newsletter is written after PIAA Board of Control meetings and includes a description of issues deliberated on by the Board.
• Since 1989, upon the request of the Senate Education Committee, the PIAA has prepared an annual report containing a brief introduction to the PIAA, identifying major Board of Control policy directives for the year, and discussing the PIAA operations for the year. This annual report is submitted to both the Senate and House Education Committees.
• Mr. Nemes asserts that that the PIAA executive director and executive staff keep the PIAA Board of Control "well informed." Basically, the Board members receive a mailing twice weekly from the executive staff. This mailing may contain sensitive personal information about students for whom schools are requesting eligibility decisions. At this point in the testimony, Mr. Nemes cited the Family Right to Privacy Act, and stated that as a Board of Control member and the representative of the PASSP, he has concerns about safeguarding students’ rights to privacy relative to their records.
• At the May PIAA Board of Control meeting, the Board concluded that its executive staff and legal counsel should review what types of information are to be made public, and provide the Board of Control with a recommendation as to disclosure of such information.
• It was pointed out that coaches, as a group, are not represented at either the district level or the Board of Control level. As an addendum to Mr. Nemes’ testimony, in August, Senator Rhoades was informed that several prominent interscholastic coaches have organized the Pennsylvania Interscholastic Coaches Association (PICA). The mission of PICA will be to promote the betterment of student-athletes, coaches, and interscholastic athletics in Pennsylvania.

Mr. Northrop appeared before the Senate Special Committee as a journalist and member of PNPA. PNPA has been a vocal supporter of revising the Pennsylvania Sunshine Act. Mr. Northrop served as Sub-Committee Chair for PNPA’s Government Affairs Committee, which issued the position paper, entitled Operation Open Government. In regard to the PIAA’s meetings, PNPA’s position is that the PIAA receives public monies via the public schools and should be subject to the open meetings law. As it now stands, the PIAA operates as a non-profit, incorporated entity, and is not subject to the open meetings law.

• Mr. Northrop reviewed the Pennsylvania Sunshine Act, which requires that all public agencies take official actions and conduct all deliberations leading up to those official actions at public meetings.
• There are certain requirements that make a body subject to the Sunshine Act. First, it must be an agency as defined in the Act. Second, it must have a meeting about agency business. There are certain exceptions listed in the Act which would exempt an agency from holding a public meeting, such as personnel decisions, collective bargaining negotiations, or a litigation strategy session with the agency’s lawyers.
• Of particular interest is the fact that some bodies, which appear on the surface not to be governed by the Sunshine Act, are deemed covered. Such is the case in Harristown Development Corporation v. Commonwealth, Department of General Services. The court held that this economic development corporation was an agency because an agency is whatever the legislature says it is. The General Assembly enacted a law making the nonprofit corporation, which leased rental property to the Commonwealth subject to the Sunshine Act. It was pointed out that the General Assembly took such action, because it wanted to scrutinize the spending of taxpayer monies.
• The PIAA is a body that receives a "large" portion of its budget from dues. As defined in its Constitution, dues are based on the total enrollment of boys and girls in grades nine through eleven in the senior high school. As such, these dues are more than likely coming from school budgets as opposed to other sources (fundraisers, etc.), and in turn school budgets are taxpayer dollars. The argument can thus be made that taxpayer monies largely support the PIAA.
• During PIAA meetings, such things as policy, contracts, duties, and responsibilities governing public school students and public school employees (coaches, teachers, and principals) is decided. This could be interpreted as attempting to direct the behavior of individuals who are educated and/or paid with public taxpayer monies.
• The PIAA is making decisions that are public in nature, effect the lives of school children, expend tax dollars, and direct the conduct of public employees. It appears that the PIAA plays a central role in schools and should be subject to the Sunshine Act.

John Monsell, of Lewistown, PA, is the Athletic Director at Indian Valley High School. In 1995, at the request of the Pennsylvania Athletic Director’s Association, Mr. Monsell organized and chaired a committee of seven athletic directors from across the state to form a list of recommendations for the Association (presumably to be presented to the PIAA) on subjects such as: the classification system, student transfers, and non-resident participation in interscholastic athletics. On June 14, 1995, the report of the committee was submitted to the A.D.’s Association, with the presumption that their president (a member of the PIAA Board of Control) would pass the results on to the PIAA. To date, it remains unclear as to whether the report was ever presented to the PIAA.

POINTS/ISSUES OF IMPORTANCE

• Surveys were sent to every school district in Pennsylvania, with a 45% response rate.
• The survey results clearly showed that Pennsylvania needs to re-evaluate the current classification system for all sports due to the enrollment disparities existing between those schools at the "low" end of the highest classifications compared to those at the "high" end. Consensus was also reached in areas dealing with private school enrollment determinations and non-resident eligibility.
• While the PIAA should continue to serve as the organizing body for interscholastic athletics, it must be more receptive to the input of its member schools, and Athletic Directors, as those individuals most closely in touch with sports, must have greater say in the process.

Dr. Stephens is a teacher and the head track and field coach at Quakertown Community High School. He obtained his doctoral degree from Temple University, where his thesis dealt with academic eligibility requirements for extracurricular activities at the secondary level in Pennsylvania. Dr. Stephens supports "what the PIAA can and should be." His concern deals with the PIAA’s ruling that underclass student-athletes may not participate in national championship events, despite the strong recommendation to the contrary by the Pennsylvania Track and Field Coaches Association.

• PIAA By-Laws, Article VII, Section 4, states that, "Students who participate in all-star contests or in national high school/interscholastic championships shall be ineligible for interscholastic athletics in the involved sport for a period of one year from the date of such participation." This rule effectively prevents any underclassmen from participating in national championship events or tournaments.
• Stephens feels that legislative control of the issues and policies governing interscholastic athletics would be, "a mistake," pointing to similar cases in California and Texas which have proven less than successful.

Mr. Bradley, as Director of Public Relations at Altoona Area High School, has been responsible for the successful proposals to have the state football finals played at Mansion Park Stadium in Altoona from 1992 through 1997. Working in cooperation with Cheryl Ebersole of the Allegheny Mountains Convention and Visitors Bureau, Mr. Bradley has served as on-site coordinator and promoter to make "Pennsylvania High School Super Bowl Weekend" a community affair which has earned countless compliments from players, coaches, parents, fans, media, and the PIAA Board of Control and executive staff.

Highlights of the efforts put forth by Altoona Area School District (AASD) and the Allegheny Mountains Convention and Visitors Bureau (AMCVB) to continually improve the state football finals include the following:

• Since 1993, the Altoona school board has allocated more than a half million dollars for Mansion Park improvements specifically to enhance its ability to host the football championships. Improvements included an enlarged press box and a new parking area.
• Corporate sponsors were obtained to help defray many of the costs to the PIAA. The sponsors contributed more than $130,000 over six years. Half of those dollars, used to purchase game tickets, helped the PIAA to cover many of its costs before the stadium gates were opened.
• Credentials for media and press box spaces were always reserved, communication lines were always in place and stadium employees assisted media whenever possible.
• The Visitors Bureau sent informational packets to each participating school and worked with athletic directors and others to arrange lodging, meals, and other necessities.
• Each team was assigned individual hosts.
• Individuals stayed with print media in the press box well past game time until every story was written.
• "Armed Forces Moms" (a local volunteer group with family members in the armed forces) provided free homemade soups, sandwiches and desserts for the media.

During his testimony, Mr. Bradley reviewed the chronology of events surrounding the submission of proposals to host the football championships after 1997. This chronology covered the period of time from the 1996 championship game to the time at which the site selection was made in favor of Hershey Stadium. Mr. Bradley detailed all of the events including several delays by the PIAA in sending out proposal forms and the addendum requested one month prior to the proposal deadline. The addendum requested complete weather data from previous years, and a list of municipalities of at least 10,000 people, which are within a one-hour drive of the stadium.

Senator Rhoades asked Mr. Bradley to comment on many of the twenty-four criteria used in the site selection process. Several items were described in detail including the stadium playing surface and funding for it, the renovation of press boxes, and the corporate sponsorship for advanced ticket sales. It was pointed out that the PIAA received $12,000 per year from the corporate sponsorship money. Mr. Bradley and Ms. Ebersole also gave figures on economic impact to the community ($1 million per year) during the football championships.

• In February 1997, the Pennsylvania Association of Secondary School Principals unanimously endorsed Altoona as the site of all future PIAA Football Championships. Despite the unanimous vote, no consideration was given to the secondary school principals desire to have the games remain at Altoona.
• Mr. Cashman, who was responsible for determining site selection, never called Mr. Bradley to inform him of the decision to play the games at Hershey, despite the courtesy extended to the Executive Staff and Board of Control by the Altoona School District when hosting the games from 1992 through 1997. Associate Director Elliot Hopkins called Mr. Bradley when the decision was made.

Mr. Schmidt is the Associate Athletic Director at Penn State University. His responsibilities include coordination of events held at the Bryce Jordan Center.

His testimony describes past experiences in dealing with the PIAA concerning the scheduling of various championship events at the University, most notably, basketball and wrestling. Mr. Schmidt has spent over 30 years coordinating championship events at Penn State with the PIAA.

From 1992 through the completion of the Bryce Jordan Center in January 1995, Penn State undertook an earnest effort to secure both the Pennsylvania State basketball and wrestling tournaments at Bryce Jordan. To date, after several attempts and a site visit by Mr. Cashman, Penn State has been unsuccessful in obtaining these events. In each case, the contracts have been awarded to the Hersheypark Arena.

• As far back as 1992, Penn State’s Athletic Department has maintained official contact with the PIAA expressing its desire to host both the PIAA basketball and wrestling tournaments.
• At no time has the PIAA ever informed Penn State that hosting these events was open for bidding. Additionally, Mr. Schmidt has never been informed as to the content of any contracts signed with Hersheypark Arena or the length of these contracts.
• Penn State feels that its facilities and location are superior to those available at Hersheypark Arena for both sports.

Mr. Palovcsik was a wrestling coach on the high school and collegiate level and served as a PIAA registered wrestling official for over 12 years. He is the author of a book entitled "The History of the PIAA Wrestling State Championships" and has, for the past 17 years, published the Pennsylvania Wrestling Round-Up newspaper.

Mr. Palovcsik gave a brief review of the history of the wrestling championships from 1938, when the PIAA first sponsored the wrestling tournament, to the present. It was pointed out that Hershey Park Arena has been the site of the wrestling championships since 1979. At that time, there were a total of 384 matches. In 1999, the total number of matches will be 780. Mr. Palovcsik commented on the following facts:

• floor space limits the number of mats to four, thus causing matches to start very early and end very late;
• there are no locker facilities at the Arena and the athletes are forced to either dress at their hotels and travel to the site, or use one of the antiquated dressing rooms with hooks on the wall for hanging clothes;
• with the constant removal of wrestlers, coaches, and fans after each session, athletes are often forced to stand and wait outside the facility until the evacuation is complete; and
• there is no actual workout area for athletes to warm up prior to their championship in the Arena.

Considering the time constraints that the wrestlers are expected to conform to, and the inadequate facilities to prepare for the competitions, Mr. Palovcsik believes such conditions could possibly have an impact on who wins a championship. He also contends that the structure of the championship, having separate AA and AAA tournaments, lends itself to making money. In Mr. Palovcsik's opinion, fiscal considerations should not override the sense of importance in providing a quality and suitable site for the championships.

Mr. Palovcsik believes the tournament has outgrown the Hershey Park Arena which causes a hardship for everyone, especially the athletes. The tournament needs a facility that would allow room for six to eight mats and be able to host more than 12,000 fans. The PIAA has claimed that the Bryce Jordan Center is not being used because of a lack of housing in the State College area and a lack of desire by Penn State officials to host the wrestling championship. However, in 1999, the Bryce Jordan Center will host the NCAA wrestling championships for all three days of competition.

In 1994, prior to the Jordan Center being opened, Mr. Palovcsik sent a letter to all 501 school districts asking them a series of questions having to do with the site of the PIAA State Wrestling Championships. Approximately 264 schools responded and were resounding in their opinion that they would choose to move back to the central Pennsylvania area for the championships. The PIAA commented that there were too few responses to make it a valid survey.

• The State Wrestling Championships have outgrown Hershey Park Arena. The lack of space for wrestling matches and for athletes to dress and do their warm-up and stretching exercises makes continued use of Hershey Park Arena unfair to athletes, coaches, and fans.
• The PIAA has chosen to ignore the recommendations of many of the schools to move the wrestling championships to a different site.

Carol Sprague, Senior Associate Athletic Director, The University of Pittsburgh

Timothy M. Curley serves as Director of Athletics for Penn State University. Carol Sprague is a Senior Athletic Director at the University of Pittsburgh and serves as a member of the NCAA Management Council Administrative Committee.

Mr. Curley’s testimony began with a follow-up to the Senate Special Committee’s questioning of a previous witness, Mr. Herb Schmidt. Addressing the Committee’s questions regarding Penn State’s interest in hosting both the PIAA championships in basketball and wrestling, Mr. Curley stated that Penn State had made an attempt to secure these events, but was told by Mr. Cashman that State College did not have sufficient accommodations for the numbers of fans and athletes which would participate in or attend these events. As a result, the multi-year contracts for these championships was awarded to Hersheypark Arena with the understanding that Penn State would have another chance to bid upon the contracts expiration in 2000. Mr. Curley also discussed the recent restructuring of the NCAA.

Ms. Sprague’s remarks included the University of Pittsburgh’s desire to host PIAA championship events, pending the completion of new facilities on campus. She did state, however, that the University is currently prepared and interested in hosting the PIAA state football championships. Ms. Sprague also explained in greater detail the operations of the NCAA under its newly reorganized structure.

• Within the past year, the NCAA has implemented a major restructuring of its governance organization. A detailed chart describing the organizational structure of the NCAA was submitted for the record. It is important to note that the NCAA is governed by an executive committee. The executive committee is comprised of presidents and chancellors of NCAA member institutions. While presidents and chancellors preside over the NCAA, athletic directors, university faculty and coaches are also each afforded an opportunity to serve or to provide input through several layers of administrative committees which make all types of rules and policy recommendations to the executive committee (academics/eligibility, championship/competition, strategic planning, business/finance). NCAA staff is hired by and works solely for the membership. As Ms. Sprague stated, " …I think its important to remember that the membership makes the rules…many people seem to think that there is some ogre in Kansas City that’s the NCAA. We are the NCAA and the member institutions make up these rules."
• An example of how this system functions can be seen in the championship site selection process. Bids are received and studied by the support committees specific to the sport in question. The individual support committees forward their recommendations to the championship cabinet. The championship cabinet’s recommendations next go to the management council that makes a final recommendation to the division’s board of directors for a final vote.
• Members at the NCAA cabinet level are appointed by each conference within the particular division following specific guidelines, assuring both gender and ethnic diversity.
• Both Mr. Curley and Ms. Sprague state that as yet it is too early to say that the newly restructured NCAA is performing to expectations, however both agree that the organization is structured so as to provide for ample input from all concerned.

Mr. Bem has been an educator for 31 years, and 20 of those years have been spent as a school principal. He has been involved in high school athletics as a coach, an official, and an athletic administrator. This past May, Mr. Bem was re-elected by the Board of Control to serve as President of the PIAA for the current year.

Although the hearing was held regarding the site selection process, several other issues were discussed and questions asked of Mr. Bem by the Special Senate Committee members. The issues are separated under subtitles for clarity and convenience.

• The PIAA Board of Control grants the executive director, via contract, the authority to determine the sites of all interdistrict and championship games and events conducted by the PIAA. Such authority has been a part of Mr. Cashman’s contract since becoming the PIAA Executive Director.
• Interestingly, Mr. Bem stated that the granting of this authority to Mr. Cashman and past executive directors occurred prior to the memory of any of the current Board of Control members. However, he stated that on December 29, 1936, the Board of Control gave the executive director complete charge of regional and state championship basketball games. The current Board of Control determined this date by an interpretation printed in the PIAA Handbook. The documentation granting the authority is no longer available. Since 1936, it has been a continuous and accepted practice, and the Board of Control decided (date not given) to specifically designate the authority in the executive director’s contract.
• Mr. Bem pointed out that the selection of interdistrict playoff sites prior to the championships could not reasonably be completed by a group as large and geographically separated as the Board of Control. Excluding championships, the site for a given round is determined according to the outcome of the prior round. The site is chosen based on the location of the contesting teams, with primary consideration given to geography and the availability of appropriate facilities for those schools. Mr. Bem stated that "selecting those sites in advance would be unfair to the student-athletes who play those games."
• At the executive session of the PIAA Board of Control in January 1998, it was announced that the executive staff had determined that the 1998 and 1999 PIAA Football Championships would be at Hershey. The PIAA received proposals for the site of the 1998 and 1999 PIAA Football Championship (Final) Games from Altoona School District (Mansion Park Stadium), HERCO (Hersheypark Stadium), and the Greater Pittsburgh Convention and Visitors Bureau (Three Rivers Stadium).
• Mr. Bem opposed the transfer of the playoffs from Altoona to Hershey. He cited two reasons for his support of Altoona as the site for the PIAA Football Championships, which are: (1) Altoona had done an excellent job of hosting the championships for the past six years; and (2) Mr. Bem felt that because of the strong possibility of adverse weather conditions in Pennsylvania during the second week of December, the playing surface at Hershey Stadium would not be conducive for multiple championship games.
• According to Mr. Bem, he used the "only legislative means available" to relay his strong support for Altoona. At the executive session, Mr. Bem relinquished his chairmanship to the vice-president in order to second a motion to suspend the authority of the PIAA Executive Director to determine the site of the PIAA Football Championship (Final) games and to extend the contract with Altoona for another two years. The "Bem" motion failed by a vote of 11 to 3.

• In April, the Board of Control approved a five-year contract (which included a substantial salary increase as well as "continued" site selection authority) for Bradley Cashman, Executive Director of the PIAA and the two other executive staff. Concern was expressed by the Special Senate Committee members that the contract was renewed during the Senate investigation and heightened public scrutiny of the PIAA.
• As explained by Mr. Bem, in May of 1997, the Board of Control voted to approve the contract of Bradley Cashman. However, beginning in July of 1997, various administrative committees were formed including the Salary and Employees Benefit Committee. The members of this committee were responsible for reviewing the PIAA contracts, reviewing other states’ association’s contracts and making recommendations to the Board of Control based on their findings. In October of 1997, a report was submitted containing recommendations for the salaries, which were then sent to the Budget Committee. The Budget Committee met in January of 1998 and placed the recommended amount into the budget. Basically, the majority of the contract is standard, but the main purpose of the committees is to review and recommend the salary. The Board of Control approved the formalized contract on April 3, 1998. There is a clause contained in the contract that allows the PIAA to terminate the executive director’s contract for failure to perform his/her duties satisfactorily.

• The same law firm that represents the PIAA also represents HERCO. Concern was raised over conflict of interest when the law firm would have been giving Mr. Cashman advice, reviewing his contract, and, at the same time, advising HERCO.
• The issue of legal fee reimbursement by member schools to the PIAA was discussed. Under questioning, Mr. Bem conceded that the amendment to the Constitution was instituted because of concerns over legal fees, which were becoming "very substantial with the variety of different court cases going on." However, Mr. Bem clarified that only the member schools, if involved in the case, are responsible for the reimbursement to the PIAA. Mr. Bem also pointed out that member schools voted to approve this amendment to the PIAA Constitution.
• Under questioning, it was disclosed that the PIAA does not have any rules/regulations/guidelines regarding the acceptance of gifts, tickets, travel, etc., from vendors or those who have a contractual relationship with the PIAA.
• Cablecasting/telecasting rules and regulations prohibit criticism of game officials or their decisions and participating schools and their representatives. Criticism of the PIAA, PIAA policies, and PIAA representatives is also prohibited. In response, Mr. Bem stated the reason for the rule is the involvement of "amateur athletes within an educational situation. To be critical over the air when no one can respond to it, I think is one-sided."

Mr. Weston has a sports talk show on WRTA radio in Altoona. In the past, he has experienced problems with the PIAA denying his credentials for admittance to sports events he was trying to cover. He also is concerned with the amount of money that broadcasters pay and the lack of information received to adequately cover the events. From Mr. Weston’s testimony, it appears that WRTA may not be broadcasting at Hershey because fewer press credentials are being issued to cover the state finals.

Broadcasting of PIAA sports events are governed by the Broadcasting Rules and Regulations contained in the PIAA Handbook.

• According to Mr. Weston, many times the media has to make arrangements for phone lines to be installed, obtain information from the teams (although rosters are available at some games—but not guaranteed), and maintain their own stats and scoring. The media does not receive designated parking spaces in order to more easily transport equipment to the broadcasting site.
• The PIAA has alleged that the media coverage has affected the gate receipts. However, Mr. Weston was not aware of any type of study done to defend such a claim. Mr. Weston feels that the media has actually helped promote the games and may have even aided in generating better attendance through its coverage of games, playoffs, championships, etc.

Mr. Strittmatter has been associated with the WPIHL (Western Pennsylvania Interscholastic Hockey League) since 1984, and is currently serving his third term as its president. The WPIHL is not sanctioned by the PIAA, but operates under its own set of rules and regulations. Since 1984, the WPIHL has grown from 25 to 48 high school clubs (over 2200 students currently participate). Based upon the League’s growth and prosperity, Mr. Strittmatter feels that the WPIHL’s methods of operation (which includes a Board of Governors, a constitution and by-laws) can serve as a model for improving the performance of the PIAA. Ultimately, Mr. Strittmatter would like to see the PIAA recognize hockey as a sanctioned sport in Pennsylvania, as it was until the early 1970’s.

• The WPIHL requires all participating student/athletes to be sanctioned and approved by their high school, including meeting all eligibility and academic requirements during the season.
• Schools are encouraged to become involved in the WPIHL, and some provide partial funding, hire coaches, provide transportation, etc.
• Teams and their booster organizations are required to have an organized structure, to provide a team representative to the Board of Governors, and to develop fundraising plans. Each player is required to provide his/her own equipment as well as to pay between $300 and $1200 each season to participate. Team budgets range from $20,000 to $100,000 annually.
• The WPIHL has tried several times during Mr. Strittmatter’s tenure as president to establish a dialogue with the PIAA toward gaining recognition of hockey as a sanctioned sport, however these attempts have proven unsuccessful.

This case involves the eligibility of Justin Schilling to participate in interscholastic athletics at Bishop Carroll High School for a period of one-year following his transfer from Blacklick Valley High School. The District VI Committee ruled Justin ineligible under Article VI, Section 11 of the PIAA By-Laws which prohibits transfers solely or in part for athletic purposes. The Committee had received oral communication from both the sending and receiving schools stating that the transfer was in no part for athletic reasons. The Committee denied the eligibility waiver because the principals had not given written statements to the Committee. An eventual appeal to the PIAA Board of Control was successful in overturning the District VI ruling; however the Schillings feel that they were subjected to unreasonable stress throughout the process. By the time the PIAA overturned the District VI decision, Justin had already missed the Track and Field season at Bishop Carroll.

POINTS/ISSUES OF IMPORTANCE

• Despite receiving oral statements from both schools eliminating any accusations of transfer based on athletic purposes, the District VI Committee ruled Justin Schilling ineligible because the principals had not given written statements.
• During their appeal hearing before the PIAA Board of Control, the Schillings were subjected to needless questioning which was no longer pertinent to the case based upon the existing oral and written statements from both schools.
• The Schillings spent approximately $1,400 to retain the services of legal counsel for the appeal hearing in Mechanicsburg.
• At no point were Justin’s rights, as spelled out in the PIAA Constitution and By-Laws, ever explained to him by officials at either school.

Joe Bonazza, a student at Deer Lakes High School, attended an exhibition baseball game between St. Joseph's and Quigley High Schools. As Joe was leaving the area, the St. Joseph's coach asked Joe if he wanted to play in a pick-up game between St. Joseph's and Quigley. Joe was told that the other coach and athletic directors gave their approval to his participation, so Joe agreed to participate.

On May 12, 1998, the principal of Deer Lakes High School contacted Larry Hanley, Executive Director of the WPIAL, after hearing of Joe's participation in the April 11^th pick-up game. Larry Hanley (WPIAL District 7) told the principal, Dr. Butchco, that Joe could not play in any more Deer Lakes games and letters would have to be sent to the WPIAL by everybody involved.

Joe Bonazza's parents were contacted by Dr. Butchco on May 12^th and advised of the following:

• Joe should not come to school because they feared for his safety if Deer Lakes would lose first place because of Joe's participation in the St. Joe's/Quigley game.
• The Bonazzas would be informed on how Joe would be home schooled.
• The WPIAL would notify them when a hearing would be held.

A WPIAL hearing was held on June 19, 1998. Prior to the meeting, the Bonazzas tried repeatedly to obtain letters sent to the WPIAL so that they could defend any charges against their son. Correspondence between parties involved was released to the Bonazzas only at the beginning of the meeting. The only communications the Bonazzas received was through the Deer Lakes Principal. The hearing confirmed the sequence of events as Joe Bonazza reported them:

• Joe went to this event to watch his friend play ball.
• Joe was asked to play while walking to his car after the first game and was not informed he would be playing under another person's name.
• All coaches and athletic directors approved Joe's participation.
• The game in which Joe participated was originally to be a true exhibition game, but was canceled on April 7, 1998.
• Joe was not aware of his name not being used in the score book until later that evening.
• The uniform was given to Joe by the St. Joseph's coach and was never used by Joe before.
• Joe pitched three innings, was not permitted to bat, and then left.

The Bonazzas were told a decision would be made that afternoon and given verbally to the Deer Lakes Principal on Monday, June 22^nd. The Bonazzas received no call from the WPIAL and had to call them for information. Joe was informed that he was not being suspended from playing, was absolved of any wrongdoing, and that other information would be released the next day. On Thursday, after repeated calls to the WPIAL, a letter was released to Deer Lakes saying Joe was not being reprimanded, but Deer Lakes was going to lose first place. Larry Hanley's explanation of the action was "Joe should have known better."

Joe Bonazza also questioned why Mars, the team given first place after Deer Lakes lost it, had displayed in front of the school a sign congratulating its baseball team for taking first place. The sign appeared on or about May 15, 1998, more than a month before the WPIAL even held a hearing.

• Deer Lakes High School lost it's first place standing in baseball even though Joe Bonazza was absolved of any wrongdoing, and no Deer Lakes school official was present, or had anything to do with, the pick-up baseball game.
• The St. Joe's baseball coach and athletic director each received a one-year suspension; the Quigley coach received no punishment.
• The principal of Deer Lakes high school did not appeal the ruling of the WPIAL to the PIAA because of past experiences in dealing with the PIAA.
• Mr. Bonazza was unable to obtain copies of the letters that were sent by the principals involved, the athletic directors, and the WPIAL.
• There was no follow-up to the promise of the school to provide home schooling. Joe Bonazza received no home schooling, nor was there any work sent home.

The Kaszer family moved from the Riverside School District to the Ellwood City School District in May of 1997. The principal of Riverside High School, Dr. Dennis Barto, protested the move to the WPIAL and Ryan Kaszer was ruled ineligible for athletics for the 1997/1998 school year. The situation was appealed to the PIAA and the PIAA upheld the ineligible ruling.

Mr. Kaszer was a spokesperson for a group of parents who felt that the Riverside School District neglected to address complaints and problems presented to the District by parents. Mr. Kaszer felt that because of his activities, his son Ryan was being harassed and he was concerned for his well being. At this time, the Kaszer family lived in a trailer and had been looking for an affordable house for several years. The Kaszer family found a house in Ellwood City that accommodated their needs. As an added bonus, the Kaszers believed the school district would also benefit Ryan academically because it offered honors classes.

The principal of Riverside protested the move to the WPIAL. A hearing was held by the WPIAL in August 1997. Riverside presented its case, relating problems between Mr. Kaszer and the coach of Riverside. In response, the Kaszers explained the reason for their move was Ryan's academic opportunities and the opportunity of the family to move into a house in Ellwood City. The Kaszer's had an attorney at the WPIAL hearing, but when the attorney asked questions of Riverside, he was told that it was an informal hearing and that Riverside was not on trial. Ellwood City Principal Frank Aloi was notified that evening by telephone that Ryan was ineligible. The Kaszers filed an appeal with the PIAA the next day, August 19, 1997.

At the PIAA hearing, the Kaszers explained the problems between Mr. Kaszer and the school district. Despite the PIAA's assertion that they wanted to get to the bottom of the complaints, the PIAA very quickly voted 5-0 against eligibility and did nothing to investigate or verify the complaints.

The Kaszers filed an injunction and a complaint against the WPIAL and PIAA in the Lawrence County Court of Common Pleas. The day before a hearing was to be held the PIAA filed to have the case moved to Federal court. In a phone conversation with Mrs. Kaszer, the PIAA Executive Director stated that the PIAA wanted the case moved because it always gets "hammered" by Judge Pratt of Lawrence County. The Federal judge ruled that the case was not a matter for the Federal court and remanded the case back to Lawrence County court.

At this point, the Kaszers had spent over $5,000, not including lost wages, pursuing due process. The family was faced with additional legal expenses to continue the case and was notified by the PIAA that they would also have to pay the PIAA legal expenses if the court upheld the ineligibility ruling. The Kaszer family felt as if they were backed into a corner because if Ryan played through the injunction and eventually lost, any games in which he participated would have to be forfeited. If Ryan Kaszer waited until the case proceeded through the courts, his year of eligibility would have already been served by the delays and stall tactics of the PIAA.

On February 16, 1998, the Kaszer family withdrew the complaint against the WPIAL and PIAA. Legal costs, and additional lost wages because of attendance at the hearings, made continuation of the case impossible financially. Additionally, the delay tactics of the PIAA negated the real purpose of the appeal, i.e., to give Ryan the opportunity to participate in extra-curricular activities in his junior year in a setting that would enhance his overall development.

• Due process procedures were never explained to the Kaszers. The Kaszers were told the WPIAL hearing was an informal hearing, however Ryan Kaszer was determined to be athletically ineligible as a result of this hearing.
• The Kaszer family moved to Ellwood City in May of 1997, however the principal of Riverside did not protest the move until July of 1997 which corresponded with a July 1997 amendment to PIAA rules to declare an athlete ineligible if a transfer is caused when "The student, or a parent or guardian, or an adult with whom the student resides, has a problem with a coach at either a personal or professional level."
• Rather than comply with a Court of Common Pleas scheduled hearing September 4, 1997, the PIAA filed to have the case moved to Federal Court the day before the hearing was scheduled to take place. Brad Cashman told Mrs. Kaszer that the move was made because the PIAA always gets hammered by Judge Pratt, who was due to preside over the hearing at the Court of Common Pleas.

Ms. Bolyard is a 20-year PIAA basketball official and junior high coach. She is concerned with the "preferential" treatment given to male officials during the assignment of sporting events. She believes that women officials don’t get to officiate at play-off games even though they may be equally or better qualified than those who are chosen. Fewer women are becoming officials and more women are leaving officiating because the "Good Old Boys Club" controls the power. Ms. Bolyard also had concerns regarding the $50 tournament fee and the imposition of a $25 late fee.

• There is no uniform rating system in place for PIAA officials.
• Officials are afraid to speak out because of the fear of retribution.
• It is difficult to recruit female officials when female officials continue to be passed over for varsity level and state playoff events.
• The tournament application fee has doubled to $50 and most schools face having to pay the $25 late fee because it is difficult to schedule events 20 working days prior to the tournament.

Mr. Byham, a former member of the PIAA District 10 Committee, is concerned that athletes are not being treated fairly due to the recruiting advantage of non-public schools. Non-public schools, that are members of the PIAA, compete against public schools in local, district, and state playoff games even though "unfair" recruiting advantages are allowed to continue. He also believes that state playoff games should be at a centralized location in order to be fair to the athletes and fans that live and travel from the western part of the state. State playoffs for football, basketball, and wrestling are held in the Hershey area.

• Public schools are prohibited from recruiting under PIAA guidelines, and many times it is difficult to distinguish whether an athlete moved to a district strictly for athletic reasons. At the current time, non-public schools participating in the PIAA can recruit with unlimited boundaries, including players who live in another city or state.
• Mr. Byham questioned how playoff workers are chosen. Based on his District 10 experience, a limited few are always asked to work the games.

Mr. Ridenbaugh, who is the Principal of the West Middlesex Junior-Senior High School, wrote to Senator Robbins in April 1998. Previously, Mr. Ridenbaugh coached football for 19 years, and was a head baseball coach. In his letter, he outlined concerns about PIAA decisions that overrule district committee decisions, particularly on eligibility issues. Additional concerns include the PIAA’s choice of play-off sites and unfairness in the classification system.

In a letter to Senator Robbins, which Mr. Ridenbaugh used for the basis of his testimony, he makes the following points:

• Mr. Ridenbaugh states the PIAA is considering charging a fee to school districts based upon the number of coaches on staff. As Mr. Ridenbaugh points out, if this requirement is adopted, it may prove to be an additional strain on small district budgets.
• According to Mr. Ridenbaugh, unfairness exists in the classification process. The West Middlesex Area School Board recently passed a resolution requesting that the PIAA review the current guidelines governing enrollment categories for athletic classification.
• Many private schools can recruit athletes to improve the school’s athletic programs. Also, it is asserted that some public schools even utilize halfway houses or similar facilities within the school district to enroll skilled athletes when these athletes would not normally reside within the geographic boundaries of the school district.
• Of additional concern is the classification system that uses enrollment figures as the only yardstick for classification. As an example, Mr. Ridenbaugh refers to the list of state championships and the athletes selected to the all-state teams. In his opinion, an inordinate number of private schools are competing on this level due to their ability to attract certain athletes.
• Also, concern was raised that at the time of classification, West Middlesex was over by two students and was then classified as a double-A school. In reality, West Middlesex is five under, making the school a legitimate single-A school.
• The exorbitant amount for playoff tickets was mentioned, and the fact that schools are not compensated very well even with the high ticket prices. Also, this can be a financial burden for family and friends of the athletes attending the games.

Mr. Bassett has been a PIAA football official in the Harrisburg area since 1983. He is also a NCAA Division II and III football official and this year has been given the opportunity to officiate a game in the Big Ten Conference. He also played football both at the collegiate and professional levels.

Mr. Bassett believes the PIAA does not give its sports officials the support and recognition that they deserve. Officials contribute approximately three times the dues that member schools do. Officials also greatly outnumber school members. Despite the contribution of the officials, only one voting member represents them on the PIAA Board of Control.

Even with a membership of nearly 8,000 officials and a dues contribution to the PIAA of approximately $350,000, the PIAA treats sports officials as an "after thought." When the officials’ representative requested that the board be expanded to include a female officials' representative, the request was voted down. The district officials’ representatives then elected the present officials' representative, who is a woman.

Officials pay $22.50 in dues per sport to the PIAA annually. (They also pay dues to a local officials' chapter which is a mandatory membership.) In return for their annual dues, the PIAA contributes a portion of the dues to the National Federation, which supplies a quarterly newsletter. At one time, the PIAA also provided liability insurance for the officials. That insurance has since been dropped for reasons that are unknown to Mr. Bassett. The local officials' chapters conduct all recruitment, education and training of officials at their own expense. The PIAA contributes nothing to make sure that the best officials are recruited and trained.

The PIAA provides no support to its officials when criticism is directed at them either by coaches or other school officials. For example, after incidents in which coaches have criticized PIAA officials in local newspapers (and despite a local chapter demanding an apology and sanctions against the coach), the PIAA sat idly by and did not intervene.

Mr. Bassett stated that every state surrounding Pennsylvania has an officials’ organization separate from its state athletic association. Mr. Bassett believes it is time that Pennsylvania also had a separate association for officials. He believes such an organization would assist in turning around the eroding membership of the past decade.

• Although each local officials' chapter submits the names of two crews of officials, the associate executive director of the PIAA has the exclusive discretion of appointing officials for the state playoffs, the Eastern finals, Eastern semifinals, and the state championship games.
• The PIAA certifies officials through a multiple choice question test without any kind of practical or clinical testing to determine an individuals ability to make judgment calls under pressure.
• Mr. Bassett believes that if an official criticizes the PIAA's assignments, he or she would not get another state game.
• Mr. Bassett acknowledged that officiating sometimes differs from region-to-region because of a lack of a statewide organization. Mr. Bassett believes such an organization would standardize rules interpretations, and the education and training that would be given to every official.
• The rating of officials is done only at the local chapter level. There is no statewide rating system employed by the PIAA.

Mr. Schirf is a high school educator and former baseball coach. He has been a girls’ softball official for ten years and presently serves as the president of the Blair County Keystone Chapter of PIAA Girls Softball and as the District VI Director of the Pennsylvania Association of Student Councils.

Mr. Schirf believes qualified officials are not being given the opportunity to advance beyond the district level to officiate inter-district or state final games. When Mr. Schirf asked a chapter official how he could be assigned to a game beyond the district level, he was told that unless he knew the person who schedules the games, he would probably not receive an assignment. Although certain local chapters have a system of rating, the PIAA has no rating system to ensure high school athletes, coaches and fans receive the best qualified officials at the district level and beyond.

In ten years of officiating, Mr. Schirf has never been rated. It is common knowledge among officials that some individuals who receive low rating scores from local chapters move on to districts and state finals, and certain officials are assigned playoff games year after year because of a power structure in which a select one or two individuals are making these decisions. In many cases, officials do not speak out because they are afraid of eliminating any chances they may have of advancing beyond the district level.

As an example of the questionable selection of officials, four officials were selected from one local chapter in District VI to umpire a girls’ softball state final. The Keystone chapter, of which Mr. Schirf is president, has highly qualified officials, including a few nationally-certified officials, yet they never received any consideration. It is Mr. Schirf’s contention that the game did not have the best officials available.

Mr. Schirf believes committees should be established at the local, district, and state levels to determine who should be officiating playoff games. In addition, he believes that coaches should rate officials after each regular season game. This information could then be used in the rating process. The NCAA uses a similar process. Neutral, qualified individuals could then observe and rate officials at the other levels of playoff competition.

Finally, Mr. Schirf believes the PIAA needs to improve its public relations with officials in all sports by having district and state newsletters sent on a quarterly basis to officials and school representatives. The newsletter should explain how decisions are reached by the PIAA and how officials are rated and selected.

• Softball officials are assigned either through the local officials’ chapter or by an athletic director as an independent contractor. Athletic directors sometimes find it easier to contract with the same officials all the time, resulting in other officials never getting an assignment in their local area.
• There is no structure of any kind that provides officials the chance to share in the opportunity to officiate beyond the district level.
• Officials are afraid to speak out because of the fear of being dismissed by either local or state leaders from any chance of advancing to the district level and beyond.
• Officials’ chapters receive no guidelines or other communications from the PIAA.

Prior to retiring, Mr. Schwering was a teacher for 27 years, and has been a certified PIAA official for 33 years. After officiating at the track and field championships for 33 years, the PIAA informed Mr. Schwering that he would not be extended a contract to officiate the 1997 Track and Field Championships. Mr. Schwering only learned of his dismissal after not receiving his yearly contract. In response, he called PIAA headquarters and was told that they no longer needed his services. The PIAA claimed that his dismissal resulted from the elimination of the position of meet scorer and finish line recorder, and the reduction in the number of assistant finish judges and assistant timers (See: NOTATIONS).

• Mr. Schwering claims that prior to not being extended a contract, a member of the PIAA executive staff made discriminatory statements about older officials. As a result, Mr. Schwering believes that he was not extended a contract due to his age.
• Mr. Schwering questioned what criteria are used to select officials for the games. In his 33 years of serving as a certified PIAA official, he has never seen any criteria or guidelines used in the selection process. In his opinion, certain officials are favored by the PIAA.
• According to Mr. Schwering, officials pay $22.50 per sport officiated. In return, officials receive a rulebook, a quarterly magazine from the National High School Federation, and a card. Mr. Schwering raised concern over the amount of the dues and what officials receive in return for paying dues. (Mr. Schwering made no recommendations to accompany his concerns.)

• After learning of his dismissal from officiating for the 1997 Field and Track Championships, Mr. Schwering sent a letter to Brad Cashman dated April 30, 1997. In June 1998, Mr. Schwering communicated with Elliot Hopkins, PIAA Assistant Executive Director, via electronic mail as to why he had not received a response from the PIAA. At that time, Mr. Hopkins claimed that Mr. Cashman never received the letter. In response, Mr. Schwering sent the letter a second time. He did not receive a written response until September 2, 1998. The letter was from Brad Cashman claiming that Mr. Schwering did not receive a written response because he did not request one. Please note that the PIAA written response was sent approximately 1-1/2 years after Mr. Schwering first sent his letter.

Ms. Bell is the General Manager and Mr. Capasso is the Sports Director of Blue Ridge Cable TV 13, a station that serves an area encompassing 18 school districts in northeastern Pennsylvania. They are concerned over the current PIAA fee structure for the television rights to high school playoff events at the state level, in addition to the fee structure for District 11 championship events. Both Ms. Bell and Mr. Capasso feel that if the PIAA and District 11 had the best interests of the high school student-athlete in mind, it would lower the fees charged to cover sporting events, thereby allowing Channel 13 to cover a broader range of playoff contests.

Blue Ridge Cable contends that due to the high fees charged for the delayed-broadcasting rights, Blue Ridge is limited in the number of events it can cover during the various playoff seasons, despite its desire to offer a full slate of playoff programming. The PIAA District 11 contract for exclusive rights to all playoff sporting events is with RCN Cable. This cable company also has the right to last refusal and therefore can match any other offer. These individuals argue that this is an unfair advantage. The fees being charged by RCN Cable to cover District 11 playoff games can cost more than some state play-off games. It should also be noted that RCN Cable covers less than half of District 11.

The broadcasting fees being imposed and collected by the PIAA do not appear to be based on any specific guidelines on the district or state level. The amount being charged for coverage is determined differently from district to district. The system appears to be based on who can afford to pay rather than on providing the best coverage of our high school athletes. Using the one-hour delay option, it would cost almost $12,000 just in rights fees to follow one team through districts and on to the state finals. Because of the high costs, the number of teams that can be covered and the amount of airtime for athletes are limited.

The PIAA also employs an unfair practice of excluding reporters from covering the state finals if a local team does not reach the state final. Blue Ridge Cable believes that the state finals are of interest to the entire state and therefore broadcasters should not be excluded.

• District 11 does not publicly advertise for bids for the exclusive rights to televise all District 11 championship sporting events. There are no notices of when a current contract expires or what the criteria are for proposals. In addition, the current contract holder, RCN Cable, has the right to match any contract offer.
• Because the contract dollar amount to District 11 from RCN Cable for the exclusive rights contract is not known, Chairman Rhoades suggested that district operations might have to be audited.
• In response to questions concerning the legal ramifications of the telecasting fees and whether or not it was worthwhile to challenge them in court, it was stated by Mr. Capasso that the PIAA could probably rescind the stations rights to telecast because of the rules which prohibit criticism of the PIAA or it's policies.

Mr. Shaak is the Director of Programming for Time Warner Cable's Eastern Pennsylvania Division serving subscribers in Berks, Lancaster, Lebanon, and Schuylkill Counties.

Mr. Shaak, in his professional capacity with Time Warner Cable, has experienced several problems with the PIAA relating to cable coverage of state basketball playoff contests. The area of most concern is that the PIAA fee structure charges cable companies the same rates as it charges broadcast television companies to cover athletic events. Mr. Shaak contends that broadcast television pays one fee which entitles it to broadcast games to a large audience, while cable must pay the same fee for each regional outlet to broadcast the same game to much smaller markets. Situations exist in which a cable company pays two separate fees for two regional outlets while broadcast television is required to pay only one fee for broadcast to many more households in the same viewing area. The PIAA fee structure is the only aspect of the broadcasting or cable business in which rights fees are fixed without regard to the number of broadcast households or the number of subscribers in a cable system.

Mr. Shaak also testified to an incident which suggests that the PIAA does not feel they need to account for their actions to the businesses that pay them for "rights" that belong just as much to the participating schools as to the PIAA. In 1995, Lebanon Valley Cable (owned by Time Warner) was granted exclusive rights by the PIAA to cover a girls’ single-A and a boy's double-A championship game on a 24-hour tape delay telecast. The standard fees were charged by the PIAA. Arrangements were made with WITF (the exclusive production company) to pick up their feed and a fee of $3400 was charged by WITF. On the morning of the games, Mr. Shaak discovered that WITF had received last-minute approval to televise the same games live on Channel 33, which effectively made Time Warner's delayed coverage a costly redundancy. A letter of complaint was sent to Brad Cashman, but no response was ever received from Mr. Cashman or anyone at the PIAA.

• The current fee structure for media coverage is unfair to cable systems versus broadcast television because of the advantage broadcast television has in obtaining better advertising because of the larger broadcast area.
• During Mr. Shaak's testimony, it was inferred that instead of having a competitive bid process for media coverage (which prevents many of the smaller cable and broadcast companies from carrying some of the championship events), a reasonable charge should be established so that anybody who wanted to broadcast local games of interest would be able to do so. It was agreed that more exposure to the various events would actually generate a greater interest, and attendance, in sports at the local level in the regular season.

Superintendent Malarbi wants to protect the due process rights of student athletes; allow a school district or a student athlete to challenge the PIAA without fear of having to reimburse the PIAA for its legal fees if the school or student is not successful in their challenge; and ensure small schools receive fair and equitable treatment by the PIAA.

On December 8, 1997, an incident occurred between the girl’s basketball teams of Monessen and West Greene High School. A West Greene player, Victoria Martin, claimed that Nicole Naccarato, a Monessen player, had bitten her on the arm while pursuing a loose ball. A game official did not see this act take place and the West Greene player received no treatment for a bite wound and continued playing in the remainder of the game. After the game, the West Greene player sought treatment at the Greene County Hospital Emergency Room and consulted with her family physician several days later. Nicole Niccarato claimed that any contact between her and the West Greene player was incidental to the struggle for the loose basketball. Ms. Martin’s parents contacted the Pennsylvania State Police and a summary citation for the offense of harassment was issued against Nicole Naccarato. A hearing was held on January 27, 1998 and Ms. Naccarato was found guilty by a district justice. An appeal was filed and a trial de novo was scheduled before the Court of Common Pleas on March 26, 1998.

On February 17, 1998, Nicole Naccarato and the Monessen School District received notice from the Western Pennsylvania Interscholastic Athletic League (WPIAL) that the alleged biting incident would be the subject of a hearing by its Board of Control on February 23, 1998. Mr. Malarbi alleges that the WPIAL violated it’s own incident reporting policy since the policy provides that a "hearing shall be held at the next regularly scheduled meeting of the Board of Control unless the WPIAL Executive Committee considers it necessary to schedule the hearing at a special meeting on an earlier date." The Board of Control notified the Monessen School District that Nicole Naccarato was suspended from play for the school’s next game, and directed that the two participating schools submit to the WPIAL Board of Control by March 10^th, proposals for future contests. On February 24, 1998, the Monessen School District requested an appeal before the PIAA Board of Control and that hearing was scheduled for March 3, 1998.

The Monessen Girl’s Basketball Team was a semi-finalist in the WPIAL Girl’s Basketball tournament. The semi-final game was scheduled for February 25, 1998, and Monessen requested that the WPIAL stay the imposition of the one game suspension of Ms. Naccarato until the PIAA Board of Control heard Monessen’s appeal. That request was denied. Mr. Malarbi contends that this refusal caused the denial of Ms. Naccarato’s right of due process. The Monessen School District then filed for a preliminary injunction against WPIAL’s ruling, but the court denied the request. The court’s opinion stated that this was a matter for non-judicial interference and there was no showing of an invasion of property, or pecuniary right, or capricious or arbitrary determination by the WPIAL. The Monessen School District believes this was an incorrect conclusion.

The Monessen School District did not appeal the WPIAL decision to PIAA because Ms. Naccarato served her penalty by sitting out the February 25^th basketball game. On March 26, 1998, the Court of Common Pleas upheld the finding of the District Justice.

In a letter dated April 27, 1998, Mr. Brad Cashman of the PIAA informed the Monessen School District that pursuant to Article VII, Section 1K of the PIAA Constitution, it was required to reimburse the PIAA for its legal fees and expenses incurred in successfully defending the case of Nicole Naccarato and the Monessen City School District v. The Western Pennsylvania Interscholastic Athletic League. Mr. Cashman further clarified that WPIAL has no separate legal existence and therefore any suit brought against the WPIAL is a suit against the PIAA. The Monessen School District believes that the school district was not "ultimately unsuccessful" in its suit against the WPIAL but rather, the trial judge denied Nicole Naccarato’s preliminary injunction request, not on the merits of the case, but on the conclusion that the court did not have the authority to issue the preliminary injunction. The Monessen School District further alleges that this reimbursement requirement is an undue and oppressive burden. The Monessen School District had a fund balance of $36,000 in the 1997-98 school year, while the annual fund balance of the WPIAL is in excess of one million dollars.

Mr. Malarbi also believes that the Monessen School District was punished for challenging the WPIAL with the realignment of the sections for varsity basketball for both the boy’s and girl’s teams. This will involve more travel, resulting in greater expense to the school district and a negative impact on the students’ performance in the classroom.

Superintendent Malarbi sent a letter to Mr. Brad Cashman on July 29, 1998 stating that the Monessen School District is not inclined to make any such reimbursement of payment to the PIAA for the legal fees and expenses that have been submitted regarding the Nicole Naccarato incident.

• The PIAA denial to stay the imposition of the one game suspension occurred despite the fact that Ms. Naccarato and the Monessen School district alleged that:

1. Monessen (school) would lose the opportunity to compete fairly for the WPIAL championship if a starting player would be prevented from playing and the appeal to the PIAA would have ultimately been upheld by the PIAA Board of Control.
2. Nicole Naccarato (student-athlete) would lose the opportunity to compete with her team for the WPIAL championship if she was prevented by the WPIAL from competing in the semifinal game and her appeal was upheld on March 3, 1998, by the PIAA Board of Control.
3. The WPIAL’s ruling, less than 48 hours before the semifinal game, unfairly prevented Monessen’s team from adequately preparing for the loss of a starting player.
4. WPIAL’s ruling would prevent Nicole Naccarato from competing in the WPIAL semifinal and possibly the championship game, which would deny exposure to Ms. Naccarato in her efforts to secure a college athletic scholarship.

• According to Messrs. Malarbi and Marino, the PIAA would not have been harmed if the imposed sanction had been delayed for less than one week. Further, the WPIAL violated its own incident reporting policy during this process in that the policy provides that: "Hearing shall be held at the next regularly scheduled meeting of the Board of Control unless the WPIAL Executive Committee considers it necessary to schedule the hearing at a special meeting on an earlier date." Both testifiers held that the WPIAL decision was "uniquely oppressive."
• The hearing before the Board of Control which was held while the criminal appeal hearing was pending, caused Ms. Naccarato to choose between compliance with the request of the WPIAL to appear at a hearing on the incident in order to preserve her status as a player, and the rights afforded a criminal defendant not to incriminate herself. Ms. Naccarato was denied equal protection before the appeal had been heard because of the timing and the sanction imposed, thus the assertion of WPIAL’s and the PIAA’s arbitrary and capricious procedures.
• In addressing the reimbursement of legal fees to the PIAA, the testifiers stated that this section of the PIAA’s Constitution creates an undue and oppressive burden upon school districts. Even if the school district believes it is being treated unfairly and even unconstitutionally, it must make a financial decision as to whether or not it can afford to pursue legal action against the PIAA.