House bill draws refunds, mixed reactions from schools

Pay-for-play fees are common in many public school districts in today’s tough economic times, but a recent Ohio House Bill has some schools refunding the fee to their marching band participants. Nick Shook reports on the mixed reaction from area schools as they decide whether to return the fees to their participants. Sean Barie takes a closer look at the marching band students at Waterloo High School, which is one of the first programs to decide to refund the fees.

 

[rpavideo caption=”The Waterloo High School Marching Band is one of the few bands in the area that will be refunded its pay-to-play fee. TV2-KSU’s Sean Barie reports on the impact of the refund.”]RPA_Barie_Shook_Waterloo_PKG[/rpavideo]

 

Portage County schools weigh returning payments

By Nick Shook

PORTAGIn today’s unsettling economic times, pay-to-play fee systems are common across extracurricular activities in many public schools.

But unlike shelling out hundreds of dollars in exchange for the right to play football, marching band members at various schools pay fees to participate in the band, and many also receive a grade.

This fact, combined with the recent passing of House Bill 59, caused the Waterloo Local School District to refund each of its band members’ $200 participation fee.

“It basically says that the school can no longer charge for courses that get a grade,” Waterloo band director Adam Mendenhall said. “Because marching band is tied into the day as curriculum in a class where they receive a grade, they decided that they would have to return the pay-to-play money.”

[pullquote]”Honestly, once a kid gets out one year, just from a common-sense standpoint, they find other activities to participate in. It’s almost like the damage is done.”
-Phillip D. Butto[/pullquote]

The band at Waterloo is down about 15 members this season, which Montgomery attributed at least in part to the fee. He expects the numbers to increase again after the recent refund decision, but Ravenna School District Board of Education treasurer Phillip D. Butto thinks that once a member is lost due to financial issues, they’re gone for good.

“Honestly, once a kid gets out one year, just from a common-sense standpoint, they find other activities to participate in,” Butto said. “It’s almost like the damage is done.”

Butto’s district does not charge a participation fee for extracurricular activities, explaining many of the district’s students come from “deficient socioeconomic backgrounds” and if a fee is imposed, they will likely lose many members. His district has been fortunate enough to avoid the fee thanks to the Ravenna community, which has approved many school levies to keep them afloat. That’s not always the case in other districts, though.

“Basically, it usually ends up in most school districts becoming a desperation measure,” Butto said. “When they can’t get a levy passed, they find any and every way to cut costs and bring in addition revenue. Pay-to-play is just another way to do that.”

Crestwood Local School District superintendent David Toth is another leader fortunate to be able to return the fees, totaling $200 per person, to his Red Devils’ marching band.

“Every school is different in how they run their program,” Toth said. “It’s a decision based on House Bill 59 and look at and reviewing how we run our marching band and reviewing it moving forward.”

Another program that is mulling the decision but has yet to announce how it will interpret the bill is Field Local Schools, which charges $300 per member and is feeling the effects, as TV2-KSU’s Nicole Septaric reported earlier this month. In a situation very similar to that of Waterloo, the Falcons’ band very likely could be the next to receive refunds and see the results in the coming years.

The bill’s impact is left up to school administrators on a case-by-case basis, but as districts address the potential of a refund for band members, programs such as Waterloo and Crestwood could be leaders into a new era in pay-to-play.