Sioux Falls' school board continues to dodge questions about the cap on boys' sports

The elected leaders of South Dakota’s largest public school district continue to dodge questions about a controversial policy decision made by the district they lead, oversee and have the final say in.

Sioux Falls School District Board of Education members won't talk about their view of the administration's decision to cap boys' sports participation this school year, a decision the district made last month that spread by word-of-mouth from coaches to parents and students, and that was discussed in public comment at the Nov. 27 school board meeting.

Board members wouldn't respond to further public comment about the issue from a parent during Thursday's school board meeting, wouldn't answer questions when confronted with an Argus Leader reporter about the issue, and wouldn't say any more on the topic before schools ended Thursday for winter break.

The cap on boys' sports participation numbers stems from the lawsuit and Title IX complaint the district is facing for cutting girls' gymnastics from the budget and sports offerings this summer. The season has continued because of a preliminary injunction issued by a South Dakota judge, but the district is seeking to appeal that decision in the Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals at this time.

Legal groups have filed an amicus brief in Sioux Falls Title IX lawsuit. What that means:

The parent who spoke in Thursday's meeting, Kelly Jerstad, said her son, a Lincoln High School senior on the track team, could be affected by the cap. Jerstad added that it's "clearly wrong."

After the meeting adjourned Thursday, when confronted in-person by an Argus Leader reporter after not responding to emails for weeks, board president Carly Reiter, vice president Marc Murren and member Dawn Marie Johnson all repeated they wouldn’t comment on the issue because it touches on pending litigation in the appeals court.

Board member Kate Serenbetz walked away from the question.

Board member Nan Baker took a phone call.

None of the board members would answer questions about whether they knew boys’ sports would be capped before parents spoke out about the change at the Nov. 27 board meeting, nor on whether the issue should be decided by the board, not the administration, in a public board meeting and a vote by the school board.

Jerstad said she'd heard from a coach in the district who estimated the cut could be as high as 50 student athletes on the LHS track team alone. The Argus Leader has also independently verified that boys' tennis teams at Roosevelt High School will be capped at 20 athletes.

“I suspect that everyone in this room thinks that cutting participation in boys’ school sports is a bad thing, and no one here is in favor of taking opportunity away from our public school boys, including our superintendent,” Jerstad said.

Jerstad quoted the U.S. Department of Education’s Office of Civil Rights in her comments, noting its stance that “nothing in Title IX requires the cutting or reduction of teams in order to demonstrate compliance with Title IX.”

She said the move could open up the district to further litigation, as groups like the Pacific Legal Foundation are reaching out to those affected by the cut. She added the move to cap boys’ sports will likely disproportionately affect students of a lower socioeconomic status.

Jerstad also criticized the fact that the board and district have “been mum” on this important policy change, and that administration, teachers and coaches are forbidden to speak publicly on the topic.

“To temporarily cut boys’ participation numbers, even if the goal is to eventually build them back up, would affect the lives of these boys forever,” Jerstad said.

In appeals court, Sioux Falls School District asks plaintiffs for $92K in 'security'

District officials have repeatedly refused to give hard details about how the decision was made to cap boys' sports, which teams will be affected and when more details could be released. They've also refused to cite which policy allowed the decision affecting the district's taxpayer-funded budget to be made solely by administration and not by its board, which is charged with the responsibility of balancing and approving that budget.

Instead of answering specific questions, district community relations coordinator DeeAnn Konrad has continuously pointed toward statements she sent on behalf of the district, stating district officials would not be commenting further on the matter.

"Given these legal actions, and the ongoing litigation, neither administration nor coaches will be granting interviews on this topic," Konrad wrote to the Argus Leader. "The statement provided last week will be our only communication at this time."

That statement released Nov. 29, in part, said the district "ultimately seeks clarification through a ruling on the relevance of Title IX guidance and the ability of school districts to make programmatic decisions for high school activities and athletics programs."

The district intends to work toward full compliance with Title IX while the courts and the Office of Civil Rights continue their work, Konrad said in that statement from Nov. 29 and a similar one Dec. 1, noting the preliminary injunction decision “highlighted the disparity within the district between the number of male athletes compared to female athletes.”

Does a cap on boys' sports mean equal treatment? Sioux Falls district officials won't say

The confrontation with board members Thursday happened an hour after two nationally-recognized legal groups, the Pacific Legal Foundation (PLF) and American Sports Council (ASC), filed an amicus brief in the lawsuit.

The filing asks the appeals court not to affirm the South Dakota court's decision. The district’s counsel consented to the filing of the proposed amicus brief, while the plaintiffs who support the gymnastics team did not.

PLF and ASC state in the brief that their concern lies in the district court’s holding that a lack of substantial proportionality between the ratio of male and female student-athletes in a school district compared with the ratio of male and female students enrolled in the district is sufficient to warrant a Title IX violation.

PLF is a national public interest law firm focused on fighting government overreach and abuse, while ASC is "the leading organization working for reform of Title IX regulations that have led to the widespread elimination of opportunities for male athletes," according to its website.

This article originally appeared on Sioux Falls Argus Leader: Sioux Falls' school board dodges questions about cap on boys' sports