Community Based Youth Hockey Threatened

[Community Based]

Here's the proposed change. A couple of thoughts.

Very slippery slope. Could change our admired community based model forever.

This includes the current rule that has had some loopholes exposed. And a new rule that has even more loopholes. Where is the third version written as it should have been which is easy to understand and doesn't have loopholes. Play where you live, then comes high school.

And, what's the real purpose of this change? What is someone planning to do to take advantage of this proposed change should it pass? The only quick example I can think of is so kids that live in the Bloomington Kennedy neighborhood can "open enroll" in the Jefferson Youth Hockey program even though they're still in 5th grade. Maybe the Johnson and Como families bailing to a near by suburb. Give me a few more scenarios because I must be missing something someone has dreamed up. I believe "open enrolling" should remain a high school rule and not be extended down to the youth hockey level. This change is designed to assist a few selfish families at the detriment of our entire history of community based hockey.

District Directors, and others involved in the vote. Please preserve our community based model through youth hockey ages.

Residency Rule Change On Minnesota Hockey Meeting Agenda

Minnesota Hockey is ready to consider changes to its Residency Rule, a keystone of their community-based philosophy. The changes, if approved, could take effect as early as the 2009-2010 season.

The proposed rule changes were crafted based on recent meetings of the Discernment and Rules Committees. Although the basic rule will still state that "you play where you live," there is general agreement on the criteria where waivers to another affiliate would be granted. These include co-op teams, school attendance, and agreement of the releasing and accepting affiliate presidents. The rule also contains a provision that would allow affiliates to establish policies regarding participation conditions for players that waive into their affiliate.

The Committees' intent is that that the rule should be clear, leaving very little for interpretation or judgment. To promote state-wide uniformity in the application of the rule, individual District waiver policies should not be necessary or permitted.

The proposal to modify MH's Residency Rule will be on the agenda for their April meeting.

If you have comments on this initiative, please contact your District Director or e-mail us at info@minnesotahockey.org.

IV. RESIDENCY (current rule)
A. RESIDENCY POLICY
MH is a community-based amateur hockey program. Players are to participate on teams from their local association based on the residence of their parent(s) or legal guardian(s) and the established MH affiliate boundaries.
B. RESIDENCY RULE
1. Youth Hockey players must play within the affiliate boundaries as defined by MH. If a player desires to play on a team outside of the player's affiliate boundary, the player must obtain written permission (waiver) from the president of governing body of both the releasing and receiving organization and receive the approval of the cognizant district director(s). A player that participates without a necessary waiver is considered an ineligible player. Refer to the Section entitled Eligibility Provisions. A waiver must be obtained before a player can participate outside their affiliate boundary. A player that registers or participates with their affiliate cannot participate with any other affiliate without a waiver. The Minnesota Department of Education Open Enrollment program does not in any way affect interpretation of this rule.
2. A player may appeal in writing to the cognizant District Director who, after investigation, will issue a ruling. The decision of the District Director is final. Also see Section entitled Eligibility Provisions.
3. Players having dual citizenship, one being the United States, must also conform to the residency rule.

IV. RESIDENCY (proposed rule)
A. RESIDENCY POLICY
MH is a community-based amateur hockey program. It is intended that players participate on teams from their local affiliate based on the residence of their parent(s) or legal guardian(s) and the established MH affiliate boundaries as defined in the Affiliate Agreements. In some circumstances players may participate in another affiliate by waiver.
B. RESIDENCY RULE
1. Youth Hockey players must register and play within their resident affiliate boundaries as defined by MH. If a player desires to play on a team outside of the player's affiliate boundary, the player must obtain a waiver.
a. All waiver requests must be submitted on the official multiple-copy MH Waiver Form.
b. Any conditions that apply to a waiver must be indicated on the Waiver Form.
c Waiver Forms must be signed by the releasing and receiving affiliate presidents before being submitted to the District Director(s) for approval.
2. Waivers will be granted in any of the following circumstances, in accordance with B-1 above:
a. The presidents of the releasing and receiving MH affiliates support a waiver.
b. A player is participating on a combined team of two or more affiliates by the affiliates' agreement.
c. A player wishes to participate in the MH affiliate where the school in which the player is enrolled and attending is located. This type of waiver is conditional in that attendance must continue through the season.
3. Affiliates may establish policies regarding participation conditions for players that waive into their affiliate.
4. A player that participates without a necessary waiver is considered an ineligible player. Refer to the Section entitled Eligibility Provisions. A waiver must be obtained before a player can participate outside their home affiliate boundary. A player that registers or participates with their home affiliate cannot participate with any other affiliate without a waiver.
5. A player who is denied a waiver by his/her home affiliate may appeal in writing to the responsible District Director who, after investigation, will issue a ruling. The decision of the District Director is final. Also see Section entitled Eligibility Provisions.
6. Players having dual citizenship, one being the United States, must also conform to the residency rule.

[play4fun]

Paragraph B.3. reads "Affiliates may establish policies regarding participation conditions for players that waive into their affiliate." That language could definitely have a chilling affect on player movement. Does this mean that associations could, for example, limit waived-in players to C level teams?

What is meant by "participation conditions?" Elliot or others in the know -- any insight?

Otherwise, the rest of the proposed rule looks like an improvement over the current rule (in my opinion).

And on a personal note, Community Based, as someone who has tried without success to sell a home in the current market for over two years (to be able to move closer to a new job, and to take advantage of better schools for my children) I hardly consider myself, or others in my position, to be a "selfish family [that's a] detriment [to] our entire history of community based hockey." You paint proponents of changing the current rule with a very, very broad brush.

[Community Based]

OK. Sorry.

What is the reason for the change?
Who wants the change?
How will they benefit by the change?

What I've said in earlier posts is that people are less willing today to roll up their sleeves and work hard to improve their current situation. Is there an out they can explore instead of all that hard work? I believe that's where this potential rule change was born. Someone is looking to benefit themselves, and their personal situation, with little consideration for the majority and their geographic community.

Any examples of reasons people have heard for this proposed change?

[DMom]

Paragraph B.3. reads "Affiliates may establish policies regarding participation conditions for players that waive into their affiliate." That language could definitely have a chilling affect on player movement. Does this mean that associations could, for example, limit waived-in players to C level teams?

What is meant by "participation conditions?" Elliot or others in the know -- any insight?

Otherwise, the rest of the proposed rule looks like an improvement over the current rule (in my opinion).

And on a personal note, Community Based, as someone who has tried without success to sell a home in the current market for over two years (to be able to move closer to a new job, and to take advantage of better schools for my children) I hardly consider myself, or others in my position, to be a "selfish family [that's a] detriment [to] our entire history of community based hockey." You paint proponents of changing the current rule with a very, very broad brush.

I believe, many associations have participation conditions that state that a waivered player may not tryout for A and B teams but will be placed on a C team so as not to displace current association members.

At the rink last week I heard rumors of parents saying they wanted a certain coach or they would open enroll and waiver out. Not my home association, so I have no idea if it's a factual rumor but the possibilities are endless.

[Road Rage]

Paragraph B.3. reads "Affiliates may establish policies regarding participation conditions for players that waive into their affiliate." That language could definitely have a chilling affect on player movement. Does this mean that associations could, for example, limit waived-in players to C level teams?

Absolutely. Ours does. Non-resident/waived-in players cannot play on a travel team in our association.

[lxhockey]

Road Rage,
I know for a fact of at least one association that has that language in its policies and/or bylaws but has promoted several waived in players to A teams. This particular association does not have a numbers problem and has teams at all levels. PM me for details if you desire.

IMO I would think that MH should strengthen its position on community based hockey instead of giving more latitude to the affiliates which has opened the door to this problem in the first place.

[Community Based]

From lxhockey,

"I would think that MH should strengthen its position on community based hockey instead of giving more latitude to the affiliates which has opened the door to this problem in the first place."

Exactly