Hundreds of people showed up to pay their respects to a slain Iowa high school football coach. The line extended nearly six city blocks. Mourners waited nearly three-and-a-half hours on Sunday to attend the visitation for Aplington-Parkersburg High School football coach Ed Thomas, who was shot to death last week. Authorities have charged one of Thomas’ former players, 24-year-old Mark Becker, with first-degree murder in the fatal shooting, which occurred Wednesday in the school’s weight room. Among the mourners who paid their respects at the visitation were Iowa Senator Charles Grassley and many of Thomas’ rival coaches. The funeral for Thomas takes place at 10:30 this morning at First Congregational Church in Parkersburg.
Hundreds turn out at visitation for A-P coach, funeral today
June 29, 2009 By
Four Iowa Congressmen support Bonus Tax Bill
March 19, 2009 By
Four of Iowa’s five congressmen voted in favor of a measure in the U.S. House Thursday that would heavily tax employee bonuses at companies that receive more than $5 billion in government bailouts. Democrat Bruce Braley says the bill would only apply to executives paid an annual salary of more than $250,000. Those executives would face a 90% tax rate on their bonuses. Braley says the tax would not apply to executives who voluntarily return their bonuses to the company.
The legislative action follows news that insurance giant AIG paid executives about $165 million in retention bonuses after receiving nearly $180 billion in government bailouts. Representative Steve King, a Republican from Kiron, was the only Iowan to vote against the measure which passed the House on a vote of 328-93.
Braley, who’s from Waterloo, says some are questioning if the legislation approved would survive court challenges. "We will probably be taking up another bill next week, out of the Judiciary Committee, to address (that)," Braley said.
AIG Chief Executive Edward Liddy defended the bonuses this week by saying the payouts were necessary to retain top employees with specialized knowledge. Liddy told Congress that some of the executives have returned their full bonuses.
Education Department rules out some school fees
August 13, 2008 By
A recent ruling by the Iowa Department of Education says school districts cannot charge fees to students for some activities and supplies. Department lawyer Carol Gretta says the ruling was prompted by the Ames School District, which requested clarification on some 20 fees.
Gretta says she’s had the most questions on fees for buses used for sports and other activities. "The ruling says that districts may not charge for extracurricular transportation, nor may they charge for fees associated with field trips, admission costs or transportation, when those are during the instructional day," Gretta says.
Some districts have been charging students who participate in sports a fee to help pay for the buses to and from the contests — but Gretta says this is the first time that type of fee has been questioned. Gretta says it’s an area where there’s really been a split of opinion among attorneys who practice education law, and the Department has never had an opportunity before to give a definitive ruling on the issue.
The ruling could mean the loss of thousands of dollars in fees for districts. Gretta says booster clubs will likely be asked to make up some of the money. She says the department is merely interpreting the law passed by the legislature, and it’s likely school districts might go together and try to get the law changed to allow them to charge some of the fees.
Urbandale is one school that charged an activity fee, and the activities director says the district had anticipated collecting fees of $75,000 this year for transportation. If you’ve paid the fee four your student in the past, don’t expect a refund.
Gretta says the order does not entitle anyone to a refund, as she says up until the order was issued August 4th, it was the first time the schools had clarity on some of these items. The ruling did list seven areas where districts can charge fees, including charges for textbooks and school supplies.
Gretta says, " I think it’s important to note that Iowa is in a minority of states in which districts are allowed to charge any type of rentals for textbooks or school supplies." The ruling says districts can charge for eye and ear protection for use in certain classes, for summer classes, driver education classes, and transportation for students who do not live beyond set district boundary limits.
See the Education Department ruling in the link below.
State Board of Education approves modifications to athletic eligibilty rules
April 3, 2008 By
The State Board of Education gave final approval today to some changes in the eligibility rules for athletes. The board approved a change two years ago that requires athletes to pass all their classes to stay eligible. Today’s changes tweak the way the rule is administered based on the input from administrators.
Department Attorney, Carol Greta, says the board modified the time of suspension to make it uniform. Greta says right now an athlete who fails to pass all their classes has to sit out 20 "school" days, but that has been changed to requiring the athlete to sit out 30 calendar days beginning next school year.
Greta says they also tried to clear up any confusion about what it means to be suspended. She says when you sit out, you can’t be in full uniform, sit on the bench, and look like a regular member of the team. The athlete also cannot participate in warmups. Greta says there was a case where a football player who was ineligible still dressed and got into the game by mistake.
The board also removed the requirement that the athlete had serve the suspension in a sport they had previously competed in. There was a public hearing in February on the proposed changes, and it drew few comments. Greta says there have been few comments because the board made the changes based on input after schools saw how the rule worked.
Greta says two years ago there was the big peak in interest in the rule because the standard drastically changed from passing four courses to requiring students to pass all courses, and everyone is now accustomed to that. More information on the eligibility rules is available on the Iowa Department of Education’s website .
Changes in athletic eligibility rules set to move forward
February 6, 2008 By
The 20-day public comment period on proposed changes to the state Board of Education’s athletic eligibility rules ended Tuesday with a public hearing that drew just a couple of comments. None of the comments were negative. Board attorney Carol Gretta wasn’t surprised that the changes raised few comments.
Gretta says two years ago the big change was made from requiring athletes to pass just four classes to requiring them to pass all classes, and changing the penalty from one full semester to 20 school days. "All we’re doing now is just making some minor changes to the penalty part of it," Gretta explains.
The changes would make an athlete sit out 30 calendar days for failing to pass a class, and would drop a requirement that they have to serve the suspension in a sport they have played before.
Gretta says the changes were sought by the schools, which is another reason for the lack of comments. Gretta says two years ago at this time when the first change was proposed, she got over 100 written comments, and saw several people at the public hearing. While this time she received just one written comment on the proposed changes, and there were less than one dozen people who were at the remote sites for the public hearing. There were 30 public sites on the Iowa Communications Network for people who wanted to participate.
At the site in Des Moines, reporters outnumbered the people who came to speak at the hearing. One of those to speak up was Des Moines East athletic director Ric Powell, who praised the change. Powell says it has been a learning experience for the Des Moines schools as they were impacted in the first semester because they had some planned in-service days that could not be counted as school days for suspensions. Powell says that caused the football players on his team to sit five games to meet the 20 school day penalty period, while schools that didn’t have in-service days had players who only had to sit out four games.
Powell likes changing the penalty period to a standard 30 calendar days. Powell says it will be easier for the parents to understand and for athletic directors to explain to parents the exact period when athletes would have to sit out. Powell also likes the change that does away with requiring athletes to serve their penalty time in a sport where they were a "bonafide contestant."
Powell says the "bonafide contestant" rule meant the player had to have played the sport previously to serve their penalty in that season, and if they skipped a year playing, they lost their status in that sport. He says freshmen who were playing for the first time could serve a penalty in any sport, since they hadn’t played any sports yet, while sophomores, juniors and seniors had to adhere to the rule, which he says was really confusing.
Without the "bonafide competitor" rule, an athlete could be found ineligible in one sport, and go out for another sport just to serve their penalty. Powell says that is a concern, but the player has to complete the penalty season in "good standing," which means they have to come to practice, follow team rules and complete the season. "So I think the coaches, as long as it is stated that it has to be done in good standing (serving the penalty), they are okay with that and ready to move along with the rule," Powell says.
Powell believes the rule change has made an impact on the athletes. "I think it’s brought a new importance to education, I think more and more kids are concerned about passing every class, are concerned about grade point averages, and that only helps them prepare for the future, getting into colleges, that sort of thing," Powell explains. He says the changes will improve the rule and make it easier to understand and explain.
The Board of Education is expected to take a vote on the final approval of the new rules at its meeting in April and they would go into effect for the 2008-2009 sports season.
Hearing today is another step in modifying athletic eligibility rules
February 5, 2008 By
The state Board of Education takes the next step in the process of modifying the high school athletic eligibility rules with a public hearing this afternoon. The board voted two years ago to require athletes to pass all their classes to remain eligible to play sports, and said an athlete would have to sit out 20 school days as the penalty for a failed grade.
The board reviewed the rule at its December meeting and agreed to a couple of changes suggested by attorney Carol Gretta. One would change the consequences of a failing grade from 20 "school days" to 30 "calendar days", which Gretta says would make the rule easier to administer. Another change would put fewer restrictions on when the suspension is served.
Gretta says the board will also look at getting rid of the rule that requires a student to sit out their time in a sport where they have been a "bonafide competitor." She says students would instead be able to go out for the next sport and serve their suspension in that sport, even if they hadn’t participated in the sport in the past.
Today’s hearing is from 2-4 p.m. at the Board of Education’s office in the Grimes building in Des Moines. The hearing will also be available at other sites in the state via the Iowa Communication Network.
Board of Education moves ahead with changes to athletic eligibility rules
December 14, 2007 By
The state Board of Education voted Thursday to move ahead with some changes to the athletic eligibility rules. The board changed the rule requiring an athlete who fails a class to sit out 20 school days before becoming eligible again — to require they sit out 30 calendar days. The board also got rid of the rule that requires a student to sit out their time in a sport where they have been a "bonafide competitor."
Boardmember Mary Jean Montgomery of Spencer was on the subcommittee that recommended the changes. Montgomery says the "bonafide competitor" rule was very subjective and the board believed they could trust the judgment of the school districts on that. She says the 20 school days requirement became an "administrative nightmare," as schools had different schedules with snow days and in-service days, while everyone has the same calendar days.
Montgomery says these were minor changes to make administration of the rule easier. Montgomery says the real point of it all is student achievement and ensuring that all kids are successful learners. Montgomery says there were some other concerns brought up about the rule, such as kids might take courses that weren’t as tough so they could stay in sports. She says the board will do more research on those issues.
Montgomery says they don’t have any reliable data on the issues, as she says they believe kids are taking more rigorous courses, not less. Some says the rules hurt freshmen, but Montgomery says they need more data on that too and whether they need help in the transition. She says they want to look at drop out rates and the number of kids engaged in extracurricular activities. The state athletic directors association is gathering some more data on the issue that the board will consider.
Montgomery says these rules are simply guidelines. Montgomery says these are minimum standards, "these aren’t high expectations" as she says they hope school districts will make tougher guidelines. There will be a hearing on the proposed rule changes in February before they will move forward.
