When the CHSAA Legislative Council meets on January 28, cross country will have much on the line.
It's a once-a-year kind of thing when the CHSAA Legislative Council considers the proposals forwarded by the cross country committee, but this year might have a bit more at stake for cross country than most years--and especially most mid-cycle years.
You can find the full cross country committee report here. We discuss the two most important elements of that report below.
Number one, the cross country committee report asks the legislative council to approve allowing state meet participants to run the state meet course on the Friday afternoon before the meet from 3 PM to 6 PM. Previously, competitors have only been allowed to walk the course on Friday.
Number two, the cross country committee reports asks the legislative council (or, to be more precise in this case, the CHSAA Board of Directors) to approve the current state course for four more years beyond 2015 (which has already been locked in).
This recommendation actually came from state meet course sub-committee, and not the full cross country committee. The sub-committee met on November 17 after the cross country committee had adjourned.
The initial article as published by CHSAANow.com on November 18 indicated that the sub-committee recommendation was for two more years at NPEC/BCRP, but the wording of the article has since been changed to four more years. The wording of the cross country committee report affirms the four-more-years recommendation from the sub-committee.
The proposed four-more-years commitment does come with a
stipulation. To quote from the text of committee report, the stipulation
is "that this committee bring recommendations to make changes on the
course to comply with changes and
improvements of the course." To be candid, I'm
not sure exactly what that means, but it does appear to burden the
sub(?)-committee with making recommendations for changes on the current
state course. The wording does not specifically say that changes must actually be made, nor
does it specifically say whether some or all of the additional four years are
contingent on said change recommendations (or actual changes), nor does it specify the timetable by which such recommendations/changes must be made, but evidently
recommendations must be made.
When I get time to do some work on the issue, I'll write an article exploring possible reconfigurations of the course at NPEC/BCRP. One rumor I've heard circulating is that the big hill is under consideration for elimination, so I will specifically focus on potential course reconfigurations that would eliminate the big hill.
Obviously, there will be some strong feelings on both sides of this issue. If coaches, or parents, wish to be heard on this issue, whether pro or con, the first and best avenue to be heard is to make their views known to their own athletic directors. If you have a case to be made, make sure that case is made--and clearly--to your own athletic director. The CHSAA system is much better set up to hear concerns from athletic directors than from coaches.
Colorado Track XC will continue to report on any developments in this situation leading up to the Legislative Council meeting.