
SEYMOUR — At a meeting last week members of the school board opted to overrule their superintendent and their athletic director by allowing two students to use school-owned football gear for use in an independent league.
Traditional high school football is not happening this season because health officials consider the sport a high risk in terms of COVID-19 transmission. Instead, a seven-on-seven version is being played, similar to flag football.
Connecticut is seeing an uptick in its positivity rates — 2.2 percent on Monday, as opposed to being just under 1 percent during the summer.
But the safety hasn’t stopped student athletes from wanting to play.
Since no regular football games are being played at Seymour High School, two parents recently requested if they could borrow some gear, including helmets and pads, for their sons, who have found independent leagues
to join, which are not affiliated with SHS or the Naugatuck Valley League.
The requests were made to Athletic Director/Assistant SHS Principal Ernie DiStasi, who after receiving a legal opinion from the board’s attorney, and consulting with Superintendent of Schools Michael Wilson, denied the requests.
The stumbling is the fact the move exposes the school district to a lawsuit. Click here for a story from The Washington Post looking at an independent league in Connecticut.
“The board’s attorney told me this would not be a prudent decision because of liability purposes,” Wilson said. “Even if someone were to sign a waiver, there is potential for a child to get injured while using our equipment, and there is potential for a lawsuit and liability to be brought upon the district. The decision to deny the request was done for protection of the district against liability claims.”
DiStasi concurred, and added the CIAC (the high school sports governing organization) “does not support school districts loaning equipment to a player who chooses to play independently.”
While school board member Kristen Harmeling said she didn’t realize the CIAC’s stance, she said students and parents have faced plenty of disappointments this year, and she felt yet another ‘no’ was just wrong.
That’s why Harmeling wasn’t afraid to ask her fellow board members to “allow the use of available school equipment for activities that are not being currently offered by Seymour schools.” The majority of the board agreed with Harmeling, overriding the AD’s denial, when they voted 6 – 2 with one abstention in favor of letting the two student athletes use the gear.
“We have an opportunity to say ‘yes,’ when we have been forced to say ‘no’ over and over again to families,” Harmeling said. “We will always be able to find a reason to say ‘no,’ but this would be a pretty easy ‘yes’ with a pretty low risk.”
As far as liability, Harmeling said in today’s world “anybody can sue anybody for anything.”
Wilson said the big difference between Seymour students using sports gear during school-sanctioned sports as opposed to those using it for activities not affiliated with the district boils down to insurance.
“When it’s a school-sanctioned event the students are protected under our insurance,” Wilson said.
Although the board didn’t make it part of their motion, the parents who made the requests said they would voluntarily sign waivers absolving the district of liability in the event of an injury.
DiStasi said one of the parents, Cindy Dion, whose son is a senior, reached out to him directly to see if her son could borrow some personal gear for use in an independent league comprised of football players from different Valley schools.
Dion, in an email to the board earlier this month, said neighboring high schools —Derby and Woodland — allowed their players access to school equipment by signing a risk waiver.
“I do not want to spend almost $400 on equipment for my son when there is equipment available to him, Dion said in her email. “We are willing to sign any waivers necessary.”
DiStasi declined to comment on the board’s about-face to allow loaning the gear out after he denied it.
Board member Fred Stanek cast one of the two dissenting votes, but not because he doesn’t want to see kids back on the gridiron.
“I voted against the subject motion because of liability reasons and because the board should not be ignoring the directives and guidance of the Connecticut Department of Public Health and the CIAC in disallowing full fall football due to the COVID-19 crisis,” Stanek said. “I hope a full football program and season will be possible in the spring.
DiStasi said the CIAC is working on a plan to possibly offer a normal football season later in the school year, depending on COVID metrics and guidance from the state health department.
In nearby Derby, its Board of Education recently approved similar requests from five students who are members of the Derby Red Raiders to use school football equipment for outside play.
Two lawyers also advised the school board they could be vulnerable to lawsuits.
“We talked about it, and we felt our liability was limited because parents volunteered to sign waivers,” said Board Chairman Jim Gildea. “We feel allowing our students to participate in some form of extracurricular activities is certainly important to the educational process.”
Gildea wasn’t afraid to blast the CIAC for its handling of fall sports.
“The CIAC has been so irresponsible and all over the place in making decisions,” Gildea said. “They have given very inconsistent and very poor guidance on the subject, and have shown extremely poor leadership on this topic.”