Colfax board draws fire for practice decision

People had varied reactions to the Colfax school board’s Nov. 23 decision to continue to prohibit football practices on Thanksgiving and Christmas.

“They [the board] had a knee jerk reaction. They are micromanaging,” said Steve Teade, parent of quarterback Alex Teade.

Teade criticized the board for not discussing why they made their decision during the meeting.

A 26-strong crowd showed up at the board meeting to protest the cancellation of practice on Thanksgiving, claiming it is a tradition in Colfax that should be preserved. Alumni traditionally give football players words of encouragement at the practice when the Colfax football season advances this far in the playoffs.

Teade read a letter at the meeting which asked the board to consider holding football practice on Thanksgiving. The board declined.

Last year, the board directed Supt. Michael Morgan to end any extracurricular activities on Thanksgiving or Christmas, after receiving complaints from parents about a Thanksgiving football practice last year.

Dr. Kim Mellor, father of two players on the Colfax team, said he came to the meeting to support both the board and the coaches.

“We were perfectly happy to spend Thanksgiving not playing football if that’s what they chose to do,” he said.

Mellor said he came to the board meeting because Colfax coaches have a lengthy history of being sensitive to his children’s needs and he wanted to support them.

He added he would have liked to see the board let the team practice on the holiday, but was content when they didn’t.

“My only comment about the thing is the school did what they thought was right and they are reasonable people and they did a good job,” he said. He added he would have liked to hear the board’s reasoning.

One stepfather, Keith Miller, is discontent because he feels the board should have openly discussed its decision at the meeting. Instead, he said, the board discussed the matter in an executive session that was closed to the public.

“As someone who voted for these people, they should make their feelings known,” Miller said. “That’s where my frustration is. Regardless of whether you like the policy or don’t like the policy, let us know. That way, next election, we know where you stand.”

Miller was particularly concerned that the board appear to make its decision in an executive session.

In response to Miller’s point, Supt. Morgan told the Gazette Tuesday that the board was not trying to hide its discussion.

In a public work session before the meeting, Morgan told board members (who were aware parents and athletes were planning to attend the meeting) that if they made any choice to rescind their decision, they should do so under the “items from the board” agenda item the end of the council meeting.

Before the board moved into an executive session to discuss a legal matter, Morgan asked board members one more time if they wanted to include the Thanksgiving practice issue under “items from the board.” The board declined.

The fact that the board chose not to discuss the practice cancellation in “items from the board” meant the board was staying by its decision last year, Morgan said.

“In not bringing it up, they are holding firm to their original decision,” Morgan said.

He added the board did discuss the Thanksgiving practice in executive session, but in relation to the possible discipline of an employee involved with the practice.

Under the state’s Open Public Meetings Act, a public body can discuss personnel issues in relation to disciplinary measures in an executive session.

As far as a reaction by school faculty, Morgan said he heard opinions on both sides of the issue.

“It was pretty split within the school. Some people were very upset that the board didn’t choose to modify their directive. Others felt that there should be that separation [between family and school activities on Thanksgiving,” Morgan said.