- East Bay Prep Corner
Is “Pay to play” the new way?
By Jimmy Durkin
Tuesday, August 10th, 2010 at 7:57 pm in Uncategorized.
I wanted to pass along a blog post from Oakland Tribune education reporter Katy Murphy, who mused about some recent discoveries of schools utilizing a “pay to play” structure, which is illegal in the state of California. Check out Katy’s post here and she’s asked that if anyone might have information about schools looking to charge athletes for sports or other extracurricular activities to shoot her an e-mail at kmurphy@bayareanewsgroup.com. She may be following up with a story.
[You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.]
August 10th, 2010 at 8:10 pm
With the budget crunch in the Bay Area, most Bay Area High Schools will soon have to ‘Pay-to-Play.’
The transportation is the biggest issue.
Either teams have to ‘Pay-to-Play’ or schools will have to cut sports.
Which do people want?
August 10th, 2010 at 10:36 pm
the msusd has a pay to play “voluntary” donation. they stress voluntary so its not illegal, but they badger these kids and parents to blur the line of voluntary and mandatory.
Top district execs even saying coaches should possibly not play guys who dont pay the money . “you cant cut them, but it doesnt mean they have to play in the game, not everyone plays in a game anyway”
Ive heard of a lot of high school teams charging everyone money to join the team. Richer areas, check into the las lomas, acalanes, miramonte, campo area
August 10th, 2010 at 11:23 pm
Katy Murphy is barking up the wrong tree. Pay to play is the correct manner to proceed with high school sports, otherwise high school sports will whither away, and private companies will own the market. This is already the case in basketball with AAU. Pay to play is the most efficient and economic manner to handle high school sport participation.
August 11th, 2010 at 3:36 pm
my nephew pays at least $400. to play football and my son is also required to pay a fee to play basketball at his high school. My nephew goes to a public school, my son goes to a private school and it wasn’t a shock for us because like Mick Fishner says, that’s the way it already is for AAU. I don’t agree with any schools that don’t allow a kid who hasn’t paid to play. I think honestly, the money has to come from somewhere. Oh and by the way, we still have to do fundraisers in addition to that, but it’s worth it.
August 11th, 2010 at 5:07 pm
Rex, I think that says it all. This article is stupid. Everybody sees the news where they threaten sports what else are you suppose to do.
August 11th, 2010 at 5:50 pm
Fundraisers and old fashion hard work are the answers. Washing cars, selling candy, advertising to merchants, yard sales, etc. The schools need to establish booster clubs like the old days. Something is better than nothing.
The professional sports teams of the Bay Area have bailed out sports programs in certain districts in the past.
I for one beleive it has come down to paying for some expenses. Public school is FREE. Private school parent(s) pay state taxes for public schools, pay tuiton, pay books and pay sports fees. Many of the parents are making a lot less and working 2 jobs to do this. The Berkeley school district has lots of parents from those Berkeley hills with lots of money, Accanles, LaMorinda and San Ramon districts have the highest income in the EastBay. Parents in other districts might have to make sacifices if the kids want to play, no Raider or Warrior tickets, cut back on excessive spending, etc.