Saline MI
11-15-2024 1:23am

During Tense Meeting, Saline Board Approves Independent Review of Athletic Department

By a 4-3 vote, the Saline Board of Education approved an independent third-party review of the Athletic Department.

Background

This fall the school district discovered that a player on the Saline High School varsity football team no longer lived in the district, which makes him ineligible to play for the team. The player had appeared in the team's first games, which had all been won by Saline. The Athletic Department reported the issue to the MHSAA. The MHSAA determined Saline must forfeit those games. Saline went 6-3 instead of 9-0, causing Saline to lose the SEC Red title and costing Saline at least two home football games. Saline's season ended Nov. 8 in a loss at Belleville.

The Athletic Department has come under fire for two reasons. Some say they should have caught the residency issue before the season started. Others say they shouldn't have reported the issue to the state. At the request of football players and their parents, the district appealed the forfeits but the MHSAA denied the appeal.

Since then, the Athletic Department, under the mentorship of longtime Chelsea Superintendent Wayne Welton, has been reviewing practices and procedutres.

Parents from other sports have had issues. The Saline Girls Lacrosse coach recently resigned after complaints from parents. Issues with parents and coaches have dogged the Saline athletic department (and every athletic department) for years.

Football Players

Members of the Saline High School football team once again spoke during the first public comment segment of Tuesday's Board of Education meeting. Speakers included Cruz Hanson, Ayden Burton, Jack Bersuder, Isaac Furlong, Coleman Ross and James Rush. Many spoke of the need for accountablity. Rush noted that Athlectic Director Ashley Mantha hs not addressed the team.

"We as student athletes have had to take the burden upon ourselves and no adult has been held accountability," Rush said.

Leah Mueller, drum major for the Saline High School marching band, said the impact went behond football. She said that other students who perform at football games were also deprived of opportunites to perform at home games.

"It it also impacted more than 200 kids from the marching band, color guard and the dance team. All of us spent several hours practicing each week and football games are where perform and we only get to go to the home games," Mueller said.

Parents Had Filed a Complaint Against Laatsch, Mantha

In October, about 75 parents signed a complaint against Superintendent Steve Laatsch and AD Mantha. Most of the "facts" in the complaint had been stated in public previously. There were two basic complaints.

One complaint alleges Laatsch retaliated against the mother of the ineligble football player. It says on the dayy he learned of the mother's complaint against him, he had AD Mantha self-report to the MHSAA after a six-day investigation. The act of self-reporting impacted the ineligble player, the team and coaching staff.

The second complaint claims it was reckless and/or grossly negligent to hire Mantha in the first place. It claims Mantha was not qualified to manage an athletic department like Saline's. Mantha is criticized for failing to support student-athletes, failing to advocate for them, not understanding MHSAA guidelines, ignoring requests to meet with teams and not taking accountability.

The letter asked the Board of Education to order and independent inquiry into the allegations and into the AD's handling of the matters.

"We do not feel comfortable with AD Mantha remaining in her current role, as all trust has been lost," the letter states. "In addition, we request that there be an investigation into how Superintendent Laatsch
handled this situation and timing of the report to the MHSAA. Further, we ask that both
of these investigations are handled by third parties with no involvement by anyone in the
district, including legal counsel for SAS. If the Board of Education deems it appropriate
to ensure a full and unbiased investigation be completed, we ask that any and all
actions, such as Superintendent Laatsch and/or AD Mantha being put on administrative
leave while this investigation is pending, be considered."

Discussion on Open Discussion

Originally the board planned to discuss the issue in closed session. Trustee Tim Austin moved to make a motion asking for the board direct an independent, third-party review of the Athletic Department. That led to a 45-minute discussion.

Austin's orginal motion, seconded by Board VP Jennifer Steben, received applause from the audience.

There was clearly tension between board members throughout the discussion. When it appeared Board President Michael McVey was potentially working to keep the issue in closed session, Austin said, "This is a board of seven, not a board of one, so I think we need to vote on this."

McVey said the board's responsibility is the superintendent, not the athletic department.

Secretary Jennifer Miller said she thought a public discussion was out of order. She said wanted to protect employees from having privact violated and putting the board at risk of litigation. She said there would be nothing stopping the board from discussing the motion in closed session and then discussing and voting in public.

Steben said she understands what issues may be discussed publicly and privately.

"My intention is not to discuss an HR issue. It is a process discussion, any HR issues should be addressed in closed session and I see that we have that on the agenda for tonight," Steben said.

She also reminded the board that at its last meeting it voted for a third-party review of eligibility and the enrollment process.

Austin's motion got bogged down in arguments about process. He brought it back to the motion. 

"I am asking that we as a district, we need to improve," Austin said. He recalled a 2018 report on the district.

McVey said he thought this issue target in this case was a complaint against Laatsch and his management and supervision of the athletic department.

The Board voted 5-2 to put the motion on the agenda.

Laatsch Opens Discussion on Review

McVey suggested Laatsch open the discussion on the Auston-Steben mption. He voiced support for the athletic department. He said a third-party review was not warranted.

"We already have an 18-year, retired, well-respected former athletic airector (Welton) providing mentorship for the athletic department. He is reporting back to me on a regular basis and giving me reports about processes and procedures," Laatsch said. "The latest report was excellent process and procedures within the athletic department - many of which I would use if I wasn't retired."

Laatsch said a third-party review sends the message that the message the athletic department has committed some gross miscounduct, "which is not the case."

Laatsch reiterated Miller's concerns about violating privacy laws. He said the department has room for improvement but said it can happen during the normal process of improvment and professional development,

Laatsch said accountability can be achieved during his evaluation on Nov. 18.

"I do not support in any capacity an independent review," Laatsch said.

Austin described a holistic review of the entire athletic department, not just one person or team. He also said third-party reviews aren't new to the district, once again calling attention to the Huckabee review of the entire district in 2018 and the 2004 Beekman review of the Athletic Department. Austin said he didn't want the report done by lawyers who might produce a report shielded by FOIA laws.

"It's going to be transparent," Austin said.

He said he hoped for an affordable process - but noted that since schools get all their funding from parents, they owe it to parents to spend a little money to find better ways to do things.

"This is waht will make us better going forward and I'm frustrated that we want to drill this down to being after a single person, because that is not what this is about," Austin said.

Trustee Lauren Gold raised a few questions. She said she didn't understand why hairing out outside person who has expertise in the athletics field is not considered an independet review. Gold said she understood that football players are upset, but she noted there were concerns with the lacrosse program, she's heard about swastikas in the district and the bulling of LGBTQ kids.

"There are so many issues that have been quite actionable that we worth through the process on. I'm just do not entirely understand whether this rises to the level of an independent review," Gold said. "I didn't see anywhere in that list of questions whether or not there's an investigation of why one teammate would racially harass other teammates."

Steben said an independent review provides the district with a chance for accountability.

"If we get a report and we have continuous improvement items, as a board, let's follow up and make sure we're doing the things suggested as areas for improvement," Steben said.

Steben said the district is known for its athletics and it needs an athletic department that operates like the number one school for athletics.

Miller said by having a third-party review, the board isn't giving processses underway a chance to work.

She also said a third party process is a "no confidence" vote in the athletic director and superintendent.

"That is opening us up to a lot of negativity moving forward, in terms of who might want to associate with us," Miller said.

Miller said similar complaints happened in other sports programs, and that the process worked.

"I cannot believe that a union representative has not become involved in this. I think that this is grievable," Miller said. "This is going to create, and it already has, concern with our staff."

Trustee Susan Estep said if the board is going to be transparent and accountable, "We should be comfortable letting his happen."

Gerbe said he would be in favor of an independent review if the processes in place didn't work.

"We haven't even given ourselves a chance or to go through the entirety of the Improvement process," Gerbe said. "And so, for me, this is simply too soon for that."

McVey called the vote, which passed by a 4-3 vote. Austin, Steben, Estep and Gold voted yes. Miller, McVey and Gerbe voted no.

McVey on the Process

At McVey's suggestion, the board voted 7-0 to direct McVey to create an ad-hoc committee to research the paramaters, such as legalities, privacy, cost, of the third-party review.

Closed Session

It's not clear what the board discussed in closed session, but there was no related action when the open session resumed.

More News from Saline
I'm interested
I disagree with this
This is unverified
Spam
Offensive