This may prove to be interesting.
http://www.bettergov.org/news/bga-vs-ihsa-landmark-lawsuit-heads-to-state-supreme-court
http://www.bettergov.org/news/bga-vs-ihsa-landmark-lawsuit-heads-to-state-supreme-court
IHSA vs. BGA
- Thread starter Bwm57
- Start date
Battle of the Heavyweights!
Personally I think the IHSA loses this one (especially when they are on record as admitting they are a public entity). BGA can FOIA away!
Personally I think the IHSA loses this one (especially when they are on record as admitting they are a public entity). BGA can FOIA away!
Me too.
The BGA's argument is "Although the two lower courts have sided with the IHSA, the BGA argues that the agency performs a governmental function by overseeing interscholastic high school sporting events for public schools."
How is this a governmental function? Because it involves public schools? If so, then what about the parochial and private school IHSA members? If the court agrees with the BGA, then does the next lawsuit come from the atheists who will say that "government" shouldn't be overseeing religious schools' activities?
Furthermore, I have always maintained that the IHSA is a vendor to high schools in this state. Private and public schools voluntarily join this private membership association, pay dues, and receive services in exchange.
Earlier court decisions maintain that the IHSA isn't a governmental agency because the state does not require schools to offer sports. I think it isn't a governmental agency because schools do not have to join the IHSA in order to offer sports. There are a number of high schools in this state that do not belong to the IHSA. I don't believe any of those are public schools, but so what? Where is it written that public schools must belong to the IHSA? The IHSA does not require that its member schools only play other IHSA member schools. An IHSA member school could conceivably play all non-member schools and still compete for a state championship.
I don't like the IHSA either, but I think they should fight this one.
My question is what is the benefit in knowing specific information in reference to IHSA? I think their salaries are irrelevant unless schools feel the dues and the price of admission is too high. To my knowledge everything seems reasonable right now.
The elected IHSA board of directors, representing member schools, are the ones who set salaries, approve budgets, etc.
The Illinois High School Lacrosse Association and the Amateur Hockey Association of Illinois oversee high school boys lacrosse and boys and girls hockey in this state. Are they also governmental bodies now?
You guys make some good points. Maybe I was wrong and IHSA will end up winning this lawsuit. I forgot about the voluntary piece of it.
Mic drop....as far as I'm concerned on this one....same general argument that the IHSA has won in court multiple times already...
Is it true Marty Hickman bought an island in the U.S. Virgin Islands Chain or was that in the British Virgin Islands?
Love to see the financial books unedited by a F.O.I.A. request.
Love to see the financial books unedited by a F.O.I.A. request.
Rambl, i'd agree with you, except for the voluntary part of your thoughts. It is true that schools voluntarily join the IHSA; however, when there is no real alternative, courts have always held that in such situations, it's like saying JCA "must" volunteer...which is to say, they are not purely volunteering...and volunteering is like being wet...it is or it is not...wow. that's existentialist right there.
another issue that comes into play with the above is ripeness....unless a sufficient number of schools can show they are ready to leave, offer some organized sports for students in non-volunteering jurisdictions (districts/30 mile circles), then the court should mind it's own business..
No real alternative to the IHSA as governing body for sports? If the state required that schools offer sports, that alternative thing might make sense. But, the state doesn't mandate sports. Schools can offer sports as a voluntary activity...or they cannot. Some schools offer more sports than others.
So, you are saying that if a school offers sports that they have to join the IHSA for lack of any other real alternative, even though there are schools out there that are offering sports outside of the oversight of the IHSA? And that all this somehow makes the IHSA a governmental body that must comply with the FOIA?
no, not quite...and don't forget that I ultimately agree with you...
There is no real alternative for football other than the IHSA. I wish to god there was...there just is not. That does not mean that there cannot be; however, there is not. It just needs to be formed first.
For a niche sport, sure, IHSA alternatives exist...but we don't see libertyville, lemont, PC baseball in something other than the IHSA...
I can 100% see a court referring to the IHSA as a quasi government body, but I am not up on FOIA laws and quasi government bodies. They do exist. The Federal Reserve is one...there are lots of others. THe IHSA would not exist without government funding, albeit indirectly, from public school and private schools when they play public schools...The IHSA also looks like a government agency, acts like one, and is composed of board members that have a fiduciary duty to the IHSA that parallels their duty to their public schools...it's why they have standing to argue publics are unfairly biased against.
In this scenario, yeah, i have to believe, like the FED, the IHSA, though an independent organization, would be subject to FOIAs...I would have to make sure the Fed is subject to them, but it seems like they would be.
Sorry, but I don't by the argument. Tax money clearly covers it. And the parochial aspect is irrelevant. Government agencies regulate private entities in every aspect of life. I run a small private corporation. Both federal and state governments tax me, force me to comply with their human resource regulations, OSHA, malpractice laws.... you name it. Doesn't negate the fact that they are clearly government agencies.
Moreover, there is clear and common precedence here. There are private and particularly Catholic hospitals on seemingly every corner. But they are regulated by government agencies.
Any court that ignores these facts is a clear example of why we need less government in our lives.
What? That makes no sense. Nobody said that schools HAVE to offer sports. But you just made the argument for the first statement.... that if you do offer sports, there is no alternative.
Look at it this way. There is nobody requiring you to own a roofing company. It's your own private choice, your own private entity. But IF you choose to, you DO have to obtain a license with the Illinois Department of Financial and Professional regulation. You DO have to abide by OSHA laws. You DO have to abide by Illinois state law in any legal disputes. You DO have to pay state taxes on income through that company.
Shall I go on? Private and even parochial entities have to follow Illinois law. Period. I suppose there may be other techical legal aspects, but (respectfully) the argument you set forth doesn't hold water in my eyes.
Doesn't the IHSA set the admission prices to all tourney games? I assume the IHSA is getting some of that $. Otherwise why are schools charging the IHSA prices.
I disagree. If schools do offer sports, there most certainly are alternatives to voluntary IHSA membership. Schools can:
1. Operate sports independently from the IHSA and any other sports governing body.
2. Incorporate a new governing body with other schools.
3. Join a different governing body.
Those alternatives may not be attractive to most schools, but they are alternatives. There is precedence in Illinois schools offering sports and not being members of the IHSA. There are other high school sport governing bodies in this state that are not the IHSA.
The argument before the court is whether or not the IHSA provides a governmental function and therefore must comply with the FOIA. It is not about the non-FOIA government regulations and laws that non-governmental entities (like a roofing company) must comply with. It's about what kind of organization the IHSA is and the particular Illinois laws that apply to different entities.
The IHSA is a private membership association that schools join voluntarily. It governs the voluntary participation of member schools (both public and non-public) in voluntary athletic activities. Although their constitution allows them to levy dues on their members, they currently do not do that. Their revenue comes primarily from state tournament gate revenue that schools collect from the public (who attend those events voluntarily) FOR the IHSA. Other sources of income include officials' certification fees, royalties, TV revenue, etc. Someone posted a link to the IRS 990 return in this thread. Click on it and you can see precisely their various revenue streams.
Let's take your roofing company example, and let's say that your market niche is schools. And, let's say that you are really successful and that you have cornered the school market, both private and public. Most of your revenue comes from public schools (because there are more of them than private schools) that are contracting with you and paying you for your services with the tax dollars they have at their disposal. Does that mean that you provide a governmental function of some sort that should be required to comply with the FOIA? Although I think not, I think the argument could be made (but not won) that you provide more of a governmental function than the IHSA since public schools are using tax dollars to pay you.
Last edited:
Thats how they make their money. Ihsa keeps 80 percent of the gate pays the workers. Schools keep concession money and 20 percent of ticket sales
The IHSA files a 990.
http://990s.foundationcenter.org/99..._990.pdf?_ga=1.208200475.868227907.1489669721
Hickman made $581K in 2015.Other executive compensation included in these filing.
http://990s.foundationcenter.org/99..._990.pdf?_ga=1.208200475.868227907.1489669721
Hickman made $581K in 2015.Other executive compensation included in these filing.
your roofing analogy is off. If the niche of doing schools was supported by the government, say schools paid for equipment, let the company use land it owns, uses the roofing company's statistics as a guide, allows roofing company execs to sit on the gov's board and decide issues via vote....then you have a more complete example.
The more I am thinking about this, the more I am thinking the ihsa might lose.
See the note on the next page, Hickman DID NOT make $581K. He made $107K. The $473,771 is an actuarial figure that estimates the potential value of his pension, a number that fluctuates up and down annually.
Other reportable compensation:
Reportable compensation generally means compensation reported in Box 5 of the employee’s Form W-2, or in Box 7 of a non-employee’s Form 1099-MISC. Special rules apply if an employee does not have any amount reported in Box 7 of Form W-2. Other compensation generally means compensation that is not reported on Forms W-2 or 1099. A specific type of other compensation that is less than $10,000 for a given person does not need to be reported in Part VII, except tax-deferred contributions by the employer to a defined contribution retirement plan, the annual increase in the actuarial value of a defined benefit plan, and the value of health benefits not includable in reportable compensation. This $10,000 exception only applies to reporting in Part VII of Form 990; it does not apply to Schedule J.
Reportable compensation generally means compensation reported in Box 5 of the employee’s Form W-2, or in Box 7 of a non-employee’s Form 1099-MISC. Special rules apply if an employee does not have any amount reported in Box 7 of Form W-2. Other compensation generally means compensation that is not reported on Forms W-2 or 1099. A specific type of other compensation that is less than $10,000 for a given person does not need to be reported in Part VII, except tax-deferred contributions by the employer to a defined contribution retirement plan, the annual increase in the actuarial value of a defined benefit plan, and the value of health benefits not includable in reportable compensation. This $10,000 exception only applies to reporting in Part VII of Form 990; it does not apply to Schedule J.
Holy crap. You the man Crusader. If i need help with my taxes I am going to be knocking at your door!! Well virtually knocking anyways
Crusader,
You are spot on, actuarial issues for a retired employee are actual value and are reported in the year the deferment occurred. How many people out there actually have the chance to manipulate their yearly income to minimize taxes and maximize deferment into retirement savings? Yes most have access to a 401k or 403b but few can defer hundreds of thousands of dollars of income and are capped to less than $20k. Let's not even address the income level and the fact that the $107k was for a partial year.
You are spot on, actuarial issues for a retired employee are actual value and are reported in the year the deferment occurred. How many people out there actually have the chance to manipulate their yearly income to minimize taxes and maximize deferment into retirement savings? Yes most have access to a 401k or 403b but few can defer hundreds of thousands of dollars of income and are capped to less than $20k. Let's not even address the income level and the fact that the $107k was for a partial year.
Okay, so maybe the analogy is off. But I still don't see how the IHSA can be considered to provide a governmental function when membership is voluntary (we'll have to agree to disagree on the realistic alternative thing), when schools voluntarily offer sports, and students voluntarily participate in them.
What makes you think that the Supreme Court will overturn the two lower court rulings?
Just about anything that makes the IHSA sweat is fine with me. They're a smaller and, fortunately, less dangerous version of the NCAA.
What do you think the chances are of the lower courts' rulings being upheld?
