warriors41 wrote:Ok, so if the parents would have paid the $6,600 or whatever it costs for the cost of tuition would the people who reported the case still be mad? Yeah they would. They would have still complained and gone to the papers about it because it lost their kid a spot on the team. The residency issued is not what prompted the Moorhead parents to get mad. It's the fact that their child wasn't as good as the athlete in question.
And yes, if it does matter they should have reported it before this year. It shouldn't matter if he is a "star" this year or not.
You just don't get it do you? It doesn't matter WHO reported it....just the facts alone will attest to that.
This is not an open enrollment issue. The parents exploited a loop hole in the law, gave up their parental rights, and when questioned, either lied, deflected the questions to their 21 year old daughter or hid behind their lawyer.
THAT is the issue.
If this kid lived in Detroit Lakes and wanted to open enroll in Moorhead, that's fine. But it appears they have stretched and bent the rules to fit their situation all because of hockey. Imagine that, they gave up their legal rights as parents all because they wanted their kid to play hockey at a different school at the taxpayers expense.
If the parents truly feel good about this and don't feel like they didn't anything wrong, why won't they just tell the truth and quit hiding behind their lawyer???
The residency issued is not what prompted the Moorhead parents to get mad. It's the fact that their child wasn't as good as the athlete in question.
Can you point this out in the article? I don't see that anywhere...I've read it now a couple of times, and I don't see this fact anywhere.