New participation rule

puckfan · Post by **puckfan** » Fri Jul 17, 2009 9:38 am

It seems that the only thing that is going to make people happy is absolute freedom to play where "their kids friends are".......funny they currently call that summer AAA! No waivers, no appeals (that one really made me laugh) just play where you want.

vikes40for60 · Post by **vikes40for60** » Fri Jul 17, 2009 9:57 am

HockeyDad41 wrote: Can you give an example of a request that was granted and requests that were denied? I'm just curious about why a family would get a waiver vs a family that was denied.

- 6 year old 1st year player and 9 year old girl. Family lives in our district, open enrolls to neighboring district. Waiver denied. We have a quality Mite program and a place for daughter to play. Ap

- At peewees we had 4 teams and 9 goalies. Family approached board and requested a waiver. Waiver granted to ensure a place to play for this familiy.

- 2nd year bantam given waiver because he had illegally registered in neighboring association for the previous 5 years of traveling career. New registrar double checked addresses and informed us of his status. Family approached board and we agreed to wa waiver as it was not fair to him to play whole career in one association and then moved his last.

- Family had disagreement with coach and the level coordinator about team placement previous year. Asked or waiver to play in neighboring association. Waiver denied.

These are just a few and note - all waivers are review by board and set a precedent for future requests. My guess is that any given year an association our size would get request of 50+ for waivers. Our policy while you may not be in favor provides clarification and simplicity. That being said, we are NOT unreasonable.....we do provide waivers for legitimate reasons.....

greybeard58 · Post by **greybeard58** » Fri Jul 17, 2009 10:28 am

For those talking appeals maybe read Article 6 in the Mn Hockey handbook. As for a panel appointed be careful what you ask for. By the way you vote through the association for the District Director when his term is up. That is the only person elected by the associations and there are 12 that represent 43,000+ players and over 8700 coaches out of 27 possible votes, and before you ask who else votes read the Mn Hockey Handbook and you will see.

My_Kid_Loves_Hockey · Fri Jul 17, 2009 10:31 am

Can somebody please shed some light on the whole play with their school buddies thing?

I live in STMA and here is a breakdown of my sons team from last year:
15 players (14 skaters and 1 goalie)
we have 3 elementary schools (BW, STME, and FS ) and 1 Jr High

BW=8 players
FS= 4 players
STME=2 players
JR high=1 player

These kids are all spread out between 4 schools.

How does it breakdown in EP, Osseo/MG, Edina, Wayzata, B'Ville, Lakeville etc where there are 2 to 4 times the number of schools and some private schools too?

I really can't see that these associations have more than maybe 1-3 kids on a team that go to the same school? Smaller associations probably have 5-10 that attend school together. I think most of the "defections" will be to larger (better? ) associations................. all to be able to play with their "school buddies"

glovesareoff · Post by **glovesareoff** » Fri Jul 17, 2009 10:58 am

I'm still kinda confused on this new rule. My question is this, If a first year mite lives in city X & plays hockey in city X, but goes to school in city Y, can they use their 1 time exemption for their youth career to stay in city X without having to play for city Y when they get to squirts?

a1puck · Post by **a1puck** » Fri Jul 17, 2009 11:10 am

HockeyDad41 wrote:
a1puck wrote:
HockeyDad41 wrote: I like it. Could there be appeals? If so how would they be handled?
Appeals? Are you for real?
Yes I am for real. Thanks for checking.

Sorry about that, it just seems so involved for a kids game.

Do you think an appeals process is required or should the decision be final?

InigoMontoya · Post by **InigoMontoya** » Fri Jul 17, 2009 11:20 am

I'm still kinda confused on this new rule. My question is this, If a first year mite lives in city X & plays hockey in city X, but goes to school in city Y, can they use their 1 time exemption for their youth career to stay in city X without having to play for city Y when they get to squirts?

No.

hockey_is_a_choice · Post by **hockey_is_a_choice** » Fri Jul 17, 2009 11:28 am

Let's put the appeal issue to bed. Under article 6 of the MH by-laws, an appeal process exists. In a nutshell, you must exhaust all of the administrative appeal requiremets in this article before resorting to the courts. This policy is acceptable and legal.

Assuming someone were to exhaust MH's procedural requirements and appeal a denial of a waiver to a higher body, i.e., a district court judge, a judge will NOT reverse a denial of a waiver request, unless the protestor can show that fraud, favoritism or improvidence affected the decision to deny a waiver request. In other words, unless you can prove that someone bribed the decision maker or that the decision maker's decision to deny the waiver request was arbitrary and capricious, there will be NO reversal of a request to deny a waiver by any tribunal, including the Minnesota Supreme Court.

spin-o-rama · Post by **spin-o-rama** » Fri Jul 17, 2009 11:46 am

InigoMontoya wrote:
I'm still kinda confused on this new rule. My question is this, If a first year mite lives in city X & plays hockey in city X, but goes to school in city Y, can they use their 1 time exemption for their youth career to stay in city X without having to play for city Y when they get to squirts?

No.

You need to replace "city" with "association." If the kid played for x in 08-09 then yes, otherwise no.

InigoMontoya · Post by **InigoMontoya** » Fri Jul 17, 2009 12:05 pm

Yes, association not city.

Sorry, I was assuming that a first year mite didn't play anywhere in 08-09. But even so, I think the answer is still 'no'. If he's a mite this year and chooses to play where he lives, he still has to go play where he goes to school when he becomes a squirt. The grandfather clause only pertains to this year's squirts, peewees and bantams.

JoltDelivered · Post by **JoltDelivered** » Fri Jul 17, 2009 12:42 pm

Yo Choice - I love Seinfeld too!

One of my favorite quotes came from the Seinfeld episode where Kramer had started Kramerica industires and he hired an NYU intern for the summer. Here's the dialouge...

The episode when Kramer takes on an intern for 'Kramerica Industries' and he is called to the NYU Deans' office:

Dean Jones: As far as I can tell your entire enterprise is nothing more than a solitary man with a messy apartment which may or may not contain a chicken.

Kramer: And with Darren’s help, we’ll get that chicken.

Dean Jones: I’m sorry, but we can’t allow Darren to continue working with you.

Kramer: Well, I have to say this seems capricious and arbitrary.

Dean Jones: Your fly is open.[/u]

spin-o-rama · Post by **spin-o-rama** » Fri Jul 17, 2009 1:03 pm

Inigo - I agree with you only if the kid didn't play for "x" last year. If last year was the 1st year mite year then rule 2D gives them the choice.

2D: For the 2009-2010 Season, players that participated in their Affiliate of Residence for the 2008?2009 Season but attended school elsewhere will be given a one-time choice to continue participation in their Affiliate of Residence. This alternate participation determination will continue through that player's Youth or Girls' Hockey career unless the player moves outside of their Affiliate of Residence geographical boundary, at which time school attendance will be used to determine Affiliate participation.

Now here's a tricky part. Could they also use the mite clause to play for their school located association until their mite career is over and still be resident association eligible for squirt and on? Technically I think they could.

SWPrez · Post by **SWPrez** » Fri Jul 17, 2009 1:19 pm

As mentioned, the drafters of this rule did not take into consideration associations with high private/parochial memberships.

At minimum, I ask MN Hockey to amend this rule to require geographic registration rather than school location. Players then are allowed to waive to where they go to school if they choose. I am already fielding numerous calls from families and all of the confusion in the final draft. Register at home (which USA Hockey wants geographic information anyways), and then file for your waiver to the association where you go to school.

The drafters changed this from the original drafts that were reviewed by Presidents and they did it without consultation. Clearly someone from a large association that didn't want the hassle of even dealing with these waivers flipped things around for their convenience.

Please amend before registration.....Please!

N. Pike · Post by **N. Pike** » Fri Jul 17, 2009 2:17 pm

If there is not enough time to revisit the issue fully, delaying the effective date for at least one year would seem to make sense under the circumstances. That would at least give associations and parents an opportunity to plan for this change.

spin-o-rama · Post by **spin-o-rama** » Fri Jul 17, 2009 2:37 pm

N. Pike wrote:If there is not enough time to revisit the issue fully, delaying the effective date for at least one year would seem to make sense under the circumstances. That would at least give associations and parents an opportunity to plan for this change.

I'm sure this was as well thought out as USA hockey's HPC clubs.

council member retired · Fri Jul 17, 2009 9:23 pm

Elliott or another whom can answer

How does MH expect to enforce this at each local association level?
Registration starts in 2 weeks for some, how does the local association know if a child is not enrolled in the local hockey association school district?

Their current software or checklist is a map / address using the local school district: enter the home address , sorry your kennedy, your good your jefferson. How do they determine a child living in Kennedy hockey association side, but is attending St Richards 6th grade in Richfield.

Isn't there something better MH board can do to increase participation in MH?

HockeyDad41 · Post by **HockeyDad41** » Fri Jul 17, 2009 9:33 pm

HockeyDad41 · Post by **HockeyDad41** » Fri Jul 17, 2009 9:44 pm

trippedovertheblueline · Fri Jul 17, 2009 9:54 pm

HockeyDad41 wrote:
council member retired wrote:Elliott or another whom can answer

How does MH expect to enforce this at each local association level?
Registration starts in 2 weeks for some, how does the local association know if a child is not enrolled in the local hockey association school district?

Their current software or checklist is a map / address using the local school district: enter the home address , sorry your kennedy, your good your jefferson. How do they determine a child living in Kennedy hockey association side, but is attending St Richards 6th grade in Richfield.

Isn't there something better you can do to increase participation in MH?
Registrar: "Sir, what is your address?"
Hockeydad41: "12345 Hockey Ave, Kennedy, 11223"
Registrar: "Great, that's in Kennedy's Hockey Association." "Say, where does little Johnny go to school?"
Hockeydad41: "Why he attends school St. Richards, he is in the 6th grade there."
Registrar: "Sir, St. Richards school is in the Richfield Hockey Association. Did you know that you have a choice of registering little Johnny there?"

a choice or they are supposed to register there... but if they want to play with whom they always have they need a waiver. Also is it right that MH policy is now dependent on a parent to say where their child attends school... come on fella, the policy is to be fool proof, your opening the obvious flaw in the ruling. MH should be ashamed that they have not thought outside the box, even a little. One other thing, has MH trained all the associations where ST Richards or the equivalent falls under what hockey association, I say No. If they intend to enforce this policy this season, they should get on the phone with each registrar before August 1st.

frederick61 · Post by **frederick61** » Fri Jul 17, 2009 10:17 pm

HockeyDad41 wrote:
council member retired wrote:Elliott or another whom can answer

How does MH expect to enforce this at each local association level?
Registration starts in 2 weeks for some, how does the local association know if a child is not enrolled in the local hockey association school district?

Their current software or checklist is a map / address using the local school district: enter the home address , sorry your kennedy, your good your jefferson. How do they determine a child living in Kennedy hockey association side, but is attending St Richards 6th grade in Richfield.

Isn't there something better you can do to increase participation in MH?
Registrar: "Sir, what is your address?"
Hockeydad41: "12345 Hockey Ave, Kennedy, 11223"
Registrar: "Great, that's in Kennedy's Hockey Association." "Say, where does little Johnny go to school?"
Hockeydad41: "Why he attends school St. Richards, he is in the 6th grade there."
Registrar: "Sir, St. Richards school is in the Richfield Hockey Association. Did you know that you have a choice of registering little Johnny there?"

So tell the people on the forum, why does Richfield have to accept Johnny?

SWPrez · Post by **SWPrez** » Fri Jul 17, 2009 11:41 pm

frederick,
you bring up a great point. Why should an association accept a kid judt because they go to school there?

Take a community like Saint Louis Park. They run a pulltab organization and other fundraising to make hockey less expensive for members of their community.

Now, let's say 35 Benilde students from Wayzata, Minneapolis, Minnetonka, etc. suddenly register in SLP.

Two things happen. 1- a financial burden is shifted to another association, and 2- the local association is in violation of local laws that require gambling funds be used on members of the community.

This issue never crossed the thoughts of those drafting, but it has the potential to be a huge hit to making hockey affordable.

HockeyDad41 · Post by **HockeyDad41** » Fri Jul 17, 2009 11:42 pm

HockeyDad41 · Post by **HockeyDad41** » Fri Jul 17, 2009 11:46 pm

SWPrez · Post by **SWPrez** » Fri Jul 17, 2009 11:52 pm

[quote="HockeyDad41]

Why? What is the advantage to adding another step to the registration process.[/quote]

hockeydad,
you clearly aren't intimately involved in current registration processess.

Under this current policy, my members have to register elsewhere and get a waiver to play where they want to play in the first place (our association). It's ridiculous. 100 + of my members will have to get waivers to play in what they consider their geographic or "home" association.

MN Hockey, please amend this policy now to save our volunteers hassle and work by having parents register geographically first and then requesting waivers for schools. This will also quell parental confusion over this policy.

glovesareoff · Post by **glovesareoff** » Sat Jul 18, 2009 8:15 am

Inigo - I agree with you only if the kid didn't play for "x" last year. If last year was the 1st year mite year then rule 2D gives them the choice. Quote:
2D: For the 2009-2010 Season, players that participated in their Affiliate of Residence for the 2008?2009 Season but attended school elsewhere will be given a one-time choice to continue participation in their Affiliate of Residence. This alternate participation determination will continue through that player's Youth or Girls' Hockey career unless the player moves outside of their Affiliate of Residence geographical boundary, at which time school attendance will be used to determine Affiliate participation.

Now here's a tricky part. Could they also use the mite clause to play for their school located association until their mite career is over and still be resident association eligible for squirt and on? Technically I think they could.

The mite in question did play for city/assoc X, has now for 3 years. The mite attends a private school in city Y that only goes to 6th grade. City X's middle schools starts in 6th grade, so we have planned on leaving the private school after the 5th grade. Figure it would be easier for the kid to meet new friends(more than the hockey friends he already has) when everybody is learning their new school. The problem i have, is that he will be penalized (not be able to make an "A" team) just because we switched schools and not houses. Obvisously this is only if he has to play with City/assoc Y. Bottom line is we want to stay with city/assoc X because in the end that is where he will finish up school. Sounds like its gonna come down to how the DD interpets the rule. I would be more than willing to declare my exemption this year(2009-2010) for the "youth career" rule, if it applies to us.