SAN DIEGO -- The last town hall meeting of the Secretary of Education's Commission on Opportunity in Athletics was by far the most contentious. It featured heated exchanges between commission members and invited panelists, included a debate about costs associated with football and was even spiced by a movie star's appearance.

The 15-member commission, which was announced in June by U.S. Department of Education Secretary Rod Paige, held four town hall meetings, the last of which was November 21.

The format for the San Diego meeting was similar to the other town hall gatherings, with four invited panelists speaking in 10-minute increments with a question-and-answer session for the entire panel at the end. Then public comment was taken, without questions, in five-minute increments.

The San Diego meeting attracted the most media attention. Twenty members registered to attend and a few more sat in the audience of the packed hotel ballroom.

Though the media might have been partly attracted by the stardom of actor Geena Davis (see story, page 20), the show media really saw was generated by commissioners and panelists.

Commission member Tom Griffith, general counsel at Brigham Young University, challenged Donna Lopiano, executive director of the Women's Sports Foundation, as soon as the last panelist in her group finished.

Griffith read Lopiano's comments in The Baltimore Sun, which quoted her as saying, "This is a fiasco. I think the commission is a setup. If I were on the commission, I would quit. I would worry about my integrity."

Griffith said those comments were an attack on his personal integrity and asked Lopiano to retract them, which she did not.

"I am not questioning your personal integrity," Lopiano said. "I am questioning the integrity of the process."

Lopiano said the commission is composed primarily of Division I-A athletics directors who "have a vested interest and a conflict of interest in weakening the law to make it less necessary to do the tough budget decisions that have to be done to comply with Title IX."

Lopiano also said the commission's panelists had been manipulated by Department of Education staff.

"The commission has rightfully, on a number of occasions, asked for certain experts to be before you," she said. "It goes up the line to the White House and what comes out is not what you've asked for but what the Department of Education wants. What you're left with is limited expertise applied to the problem and obfuscation of data. You're trying to do the right thing, and the Department of Education staff is obstructing you."

Another sharp exchange featured commission member Donna de Varona, a former Olympic gold-medal winner and sports broadcaster, who questioned panelist Rick Bay, athletics director at San Diego State University. The institution had dropped men's volleyball, saving $150,000. Bay, who had said he regards proportionality as a "quota system," also had said that Title IX was part of the impetus for the cut.

"We didn't drop the sport specifically to comply with Title IX, but we had a budget situation," he said.

Bay said he had to cut $300,000 and because of Cal-NOW (a court-mediated agreement that binds all California colleges), he had to cut $150,000 from the men's side so he could cut the same amount from the women's side.

De Varona read from a newspaper article that indicated the school had an athletics debt of $1.3 million, partly due to expenses in football.

"Could you have not cut from the $5 million football budget?" de Varona asked. "Is there any way you could have saved the men's volleyball team?"

"I could have cut across the board, I guess," Bay replied. "But to keep the rest of the program strong I felt I had to cut a sport. I could have cut the $150,000 from football, but that would have reduced our ability to be competitive in football."

While proportionality continued to be a focus of the town hall panelists and speakers, the question of interest again took center stage. For the last several meetings of the commission, Assistant Secretary Gerald Reynolds has asked panelists about interest and interest surveys.

Panelist Andrew Zimbalist, author and professor of economics at Smith College, talked extensively about the economic realities of athletics (see accompanying comments), and he also addressed the question of interest from his perspective.

"If we were to have asked about interest in 1972, many women would have been less interested, partly because society has thought them to be less interested," he said. "Participation in sport was less attractive, partly because women saw far fewer benefits in sport than men."

Kimberly Schuld, special assistant to the United States Commission on Civil Rights and former director of the Play Fair project of the Independent Women's Forum, disagreed.

"We need to take into account that there are differences in the interest levels of men and women (in sports). Society is not telling women they should not want to play, they just don't want to," she said.

"Our society doesn't tell males to participate in sports; their own biology tells them that. It is not true that males and females are the same."

Other prominent panelists included Sam Bell, president of the College Track Coaches Association; Val Ackerman, president of the Women's National Basketball Association; Chuck Neinas, president of Neinas Sports Services, former executive director of the College Football Association and an advisor to the American Football Coaches Association; and John Welty, president of California State University, Fresno. NCAA President Cedric W. Dempsey also spoke during the public comment period.

Now that the town hall portion of the commission's work has concluded, the group will turn its attention to producing a report for the Secretary of Education.

The commission will deliberate publicly December 3-4 in Philadelphia and January 8 in Washington, D.C., but those meetings will not include any public comment.

The commission is expected to forward its report to Secretary Paige at the end of January.

Actor adds levity while advocating Title IX compliance

SAN DIEGO -- Actor Geena Davis drew much of the attention as she led off the public comment portion of the Secretary of Education's Commission on Opportunity in Athletics town hall meeting by encouraging commissioners to support and enforce Title IX.

"As a mother of a 7-month-old daughter and Stuart Little, I might add, let me assure you that many parents are watching what you do," she said, referring both to her real-life daughter and her mouse "son" from the movies.

Davis also is an amateur archer who has competed in the Olympic trials. Davis said she came to athletics relatively late in life, and she urged commissioners not to rely on interest surveys that might not count girls and women like herself who have untapped athletics ability and realize it only when an opportunity presents itself.

"I am here to take you for a short ride in Thelma and Louise's car if you think it's right to limit a girl's opportunity in sports based on her answer to a survey," she said, referring to her 1991 film in which her character drives a car off a cliff.

-- Kay Hawes

Panelists

Panel One

Val Ackerman, president of the Women's National Basketball Association (WNBA)

Corey Bray, assistant director of research, NCAA

Jerry Kravitz, part-time statistician for the U.S. Office for Civil Rights and professor of psychology at Howard University

Jon Vegosen, an attorney and member of the Collegiate Committee of the U.S. Tennis Association

Panel Two

Andrew Zimbalist, professor of economics at Smith College

Chuck Neinas, president of Neinas Sports Services, former executive director of the College Football Association and an advisor to the American Football Coaches Association

Rick Bay, athletics director at San Diego State University

Rosa Perez, president of Canada College and a representative of the California Community College Commission on Athletics

John Welty, president of California State University, Fresno

Panel Three

Sam Bell, president of the College Track Coaches Association

Donna Lopiano, executive director of the Women's Sports Foundation

Debbie Corum, associate commissioner of the Southeastern Conference

Kimberly Schuld, special assistant to the United States Commission on Civil Rights and former director of the Play Fair project of the Independent Women's Forum

Additional comments

Comments from panelists and public speakers at the last town hall meeting of the Secretary's Commission on Opportunity in Athletics

"It is true that, at an institutional level, there are slightly fewer participation opportunities for men than there were two decades ago. I would like to propose a reason other than Title IX for that. In 1978, the membership of Division I agreed that departments of athletics should be financially self-supporting. To meet that goal, many institutions were forced to reduce spending and increase revenue. The data show that the early 1980s was a time when many men's sports were being cut. It seems that this drive for self sufficiency is, at least in part, to blame for many of those cuts."

Cedric W. Dempsey, president of the NCAA

* * *

"In my role as the president of a women's sports league, I think I can offer a perspective on Title IX's broader reach and real-life consequences that I believe should be factored into the commission's deliberations. Title IX is watershed legislation that has withstood the test of time. But its work is not finished. Even though three full decades have passed since Title IX became law, many girls' and women's athletics programs are still in the 'catch-up' phase compared to the counterpart programs for men and boys. Even more needs to be done to ensure that funding and resources are at the levels required to meet Title IX's clear mandate of equality."

Val Ackerman, president of the Women's National Basketball Association (WNBA)

* * *

"We suggest that Title IX be interpreted to correlate equal opportunity on a sport-by-sport basis, rather than on an across-the-board basis. That is to say, for sports such as tennis, swimming, golf and gymnastics, where both men and women play, opportunities for men and women should be equal. This approach would provide the same opportunities for men and women in each sport. It would also help to eradicate the inequities that currently exist for men without compromising women's opportunities and programs."

Jon Vegosen, an attorney and member of the Collegiate Committee of the U.S. Tennis Association

* * *

"Although I have not attended any of the three prior meetings of this commission, I have been informed that NCAA data on participation rates have been used by many of the previous presenters. At times, there has evidently been some confusion and disagreement regarding those data. As the person responsible for compiling NCAA participation-rates data for the past four years, it is my hope to provide the commission members with some insight into the collection methods and current uses of these data, as well as highlighting the limitations of the data."

Corey Bray, assistant director of research, NCAA

* * *

"By 2011, for every 100 men on campus there will be 150 women on campus. What would it take to bring institutions into compliance with proportionality? What would it take to make women 56 percent of athletes on campus? It would take the addition of 116,000 women athletes. It would take an additional 42 years for proportionality to be achieved. Men would have to decrease to 44 percent. That would require the elimination of 90,865 male athletes."

Jerome Kravitz, part-time statistician for the U.S. Office for Civil Rights and professor of psychology at Howard University

* * *

"The athletics arms race is alive and well, but it has little to show for it on the bottom line. One result is substantial waste in the current system. For example, football does not need 85 scholarships. Sixty would do fine. NFL teams have 45 roster players, plus seven reserve players. The average Division I-A team has 32 walk-ons, plus 85 scholarship players. If football scholarships were cut to 60, the average college would save approximately $750,000 annually, enough to finance more than two wrestling teams, whose average cost is $330,000 per team. But why stop here? The NCAA should seek a Congressional antitrust exemption with regard to coaches' salaries. Currently, there are dozens of Division I men's basketball coaches who make $1 million or more, and there are dozens more football coaches in this category. Knock them down to $200,000, which would put them above 90 percent of the faculty, and colleges would be able to add another three to six sports, or, heaven forbid, reduce their large athletics deficits. The problem is not Title IX and its guidelines. The problem is waste."

Andrew Zimbalist, author and professor of economics at Smith College

* * *

"No one is designing to inhibit the development of women's sports, but I have to say, 'What's fair?' You're going to hear today that you would not treat your daughter any differently than you would your son. But if my daughter chooses not to play volleyball, it should not prevent my son from playing football."

Chuck Neinas, president of Neinas Sports Services, former executive director of the College Football Association and an advisor to the American Football Coaches Association

* * *

"The proposed use of interest surveys to replace proportionality is preposterous, and it will not stand up in the courts. You cannot in good conscience consider that. This is not about interest. This is about a gold ring. There are six million high-school participants in sports, and what's at stake is $1 billion in scholarships and $1 billion in other opportunities and even the privilege of getting into some elite colleges. To say a girl isn't equally as interested in those benefits is preposterous. It is equally preposterous to say that people of different races aren't interested."

Donna Lopiano, executive director of the Women's Sports Foundation

* * *

"(As chair of a presidential team monitoring California institutions' compliance with a court-ordered consent decree) we've learned that presidential, chancellor and board leadership is essential in order to create change. We also learned that interest in intercollegiate athletics follows opportunity. Opportunity, however, can outstrip interest."

John Welty, president of California State University, Fresno

* * *

Prong one (of the three-part test) does give us the hammer we unfortunately still have to yield to make the changes we're looking for. It gives us a goal we absolutely have to turn to. I can't imagine we could do our work without the existence of prong one. Without proportionality, we would not have had the growth in women's sports. I also think (dropping sports) is about budget. I do not think you will see men's sports reintroduced if proportionality is eliminated."

Rosa Perez, president of Canada College, a community college in Redwood City, California, and a representative of the California Community College Commission on Athletics

* * *

"I'm concerned about the future of college football. I want to see more colleges sponsor it. College football has become a whipping boy in some areas and that's unfair."

Chuck Neinas, president of Neinas Sports Services, former executive director of the College Football Association and an advisor to the American Football Coaches Association

* * *

"Some will argue of course that proportionality is but one of three prongs, all of which can easily satisfy Title IX compliance, and that the proportionality prong is for those institutions that want to be absolutely certain that they are within the law. Unfortunately, however, while many institutions have been found in compliance on the basis of meeting women's interests or increased opportunities for women, many others have felt bullied into proportionality as the only means of achieving compliance, the so-called 'safe harbor.' Whether we like to admit it or not, Title IX is a quota system. We have reached a point where women's interests in sports are dictating men's opportunity."

Rick Bay, athletics director at San Diego State University

* * *

"If you eliminate prong one (of the three-part test) there's absolutely no guarantee that this system would take that money rationally that they would not be spending on women's athletics and give it back to the wrestling team."

Andrew Zimbalist, author and professor of economics at Smith College

* * *

"The visions of Title IX have yet to be realized. I am a college president today because I was a team captain first. My passion is in inspiring girls who, if given a survey today, would not indicate interest in sports. The COA (California Community Colleges Commission on Athletics) has systematically increased the number of sport opportunities for women and provided critically important leadership on gender equity to our member colleges. To us, Title IX is not social activism that favors a minority. To us, it's a law designed to ensure that fully one-half of the American population gets basic rights in the classroom and on the playing field. Our reason for that belief is clear -- it is the law, and it is the right thing to do."

Rosa Perez, president of Canada College, a community college in Redwood City, California, and a representative of the California Community College Commission on Athletics

* * *

"To require one gender to fully fund a sport while the other gender is paid is discrimination in its purist form. Is it fair to tell our male swimmers and divers that they must leave the Midwest while their female friends can stay? I am concerned that we are eliminating programs and moving toward the minimum sport sponsorship in Division I. With fewer sports, it's easier to progress in the arms race."

Ron Nugent, former swimmer at the University of Kansas

* * *

"Girls Inc. is about being strong and bold. Today I am being bold. I devote a lot of my time to soccer. Sports also keep me in shape. I like the competition and unless I have a lot of homework, they are a good way for me to spend my time. I feel school-sponsored sports are important. I come from a single-parent family, so I don't really have the resources to participate in club sports. Please don't drop the ball on girls."

Heather Kirkoff, age 11, athlete and participant in Girls Inc.

* * *

"I would suggest to you that these young women who are on dance teams and on pompom squads do that because they choose to, and they are athletes a lot more than some of the people who participate in the so-called 'emerging' sports that the NCAA is pushing on us."

Sam Bell, president of the College Track Coaches Association

* * *

"I think the reality is that the proportionality standard has been necessary. The question now is how to go forward. I think the reality is that in the coming years there will be a shift in the number of sports we are able to offer."

John Welty, president of California State University, Fresno

* * *

"We live in a world of finite resources. Now we're faced with resources having to be shared. Very few schools were able to go out and raise the funds to maintain the exact same level of resources for the men and the women. At almost every school, male athletes lost something. Maybe they lost time in the weight room, maybe they lost the ability to practice in the best gym every time. At some schools, decisions were made to cut some men's sports opportunities. At best, some in the advantaged class continue to not be happy at losing their advantaged status. They want you to fix it. They want you to go back and bring their programs back. It is impossible to go back in time and intercede in institutional decisions. The only other thing is to look at that law and weaken it. The one thing this commission shouldn't do is weaken Title IX."

Donna Lopiano, executive director of the Women's Sports Foundation

* * *

"I would like to contend that our culture has changed dramatically. We have enough female athletes playing. We have enough men teaching their daughters."

Kimberly Schuld, special assistant to the United States Commission on Civil Rights and former director of the Play Fair project of the Independent Women's Forum

* * *

"I know you feel sorry for those whose programs have been cut. You have to feel just as sorry for the women who didn't ever have a chance to play. Having a team is an institutional decision. You have to feel just as sorry for the women at that institution who don't have the opportunity because they don't have the teams."

Donna Lopiano, executive director of the Women's Sports Foundation

* * *

"It is important to state that I support Title IX. What I am against is a quota system that has eliminated opportunities for men and boys. The problem is not Title IX but its implementation. In college, we do not provide equal opportunity for those who want to participate. What we do is provide numbers for the quotas. Every decision, no matter how small, is based on what the other side has. Find out what the real interests is. Add an amendment to Title IX saying you can't cut a men's sport to comply. This will force institutions to find other solutions."

J Robinson, head wrestling coach at the University of Minnesota

* * *

"You can build whatever case you want to build based on the data, but I encourage you all to do the right thing. The right thing is not to weaken Title IX. The problem is not Title IX. We're trying to take an imperfect law and apply it to an imperfect world. If we really paid attention to the educational mission of the university, there would be ample opportunity and resources for everyone, men and women."

Cedric W. Dempsey, president of the NCAA

* * *

"More than ever before, I am worried about what will happen to our Olympic programs and what will happen to our society if these opportunities for men continue to decline."

Steve Butcher, board member of USA Gymnastics

* * *

"I would encourage you to look at the facts about dropping sports. We know those dollars saved by dropping men's sports do not go into women's sports. They go into existing men's sports. The elephant in the room, the emperor with no clothes, is Division I-A football. Title IX is blamed or used as an excuse by those who have the most ability to pay, those with Division I-A football. What is really needed is greater education. Encourage the NCAA to review grants-in-aid, discourage the arms race and encourage an increasing number of full-time coaches for women's teams."

Pam Gill-Fisher, associate athletics director and senior woman administrator, University of California, Davis

* * *

"I support Title IX in its original form, and I support women in sports. However, I do not support roster management and proportionality. I think it's a quota."

Jed Clark, assistant wrestling coach at California State University, Fullerton

* * *

"We're having this debate again because the same people who have lost in the courts, in the judicial branch and who called for the 1985 Congressional hearings and didn't get the answer they wanted in the Congressional branch are hoping to make changes through the executive branch and through political appointees. The campaign slogan of 'quotas' is false. Nearly three-quarters of the Title IX cases are settled using prongs two and three. When someone is ignorant of the law, you change their education; you don't change the law."

Valerie Bonnett, Title IX consultant

* * *

"The discussion I think you should be having is not how is this law impacting boys but why aren't we still offering enough opportunities for girls. We spend $34,000 per male student and $24,000 per female student, and people are saying we need to cut back? We haven't come far enough. What we need to do is make Title IX work better. Sports were never intended to be for boys alone. What we see is when girls compete, boys have greater respect for them."

Hanna-Beth Jackson, member of the California Assembly

* * *

"It's ironic that you've had these meetings. They possibly could have been avoided had NCAA administrators responded to the years of correspondence I've sent. We continue to lose programs. The commission should revisit proportionality by recommending revisions. You must send a clear and powerful message to the NCAA that the business of athletics must be revisited by college presidents."

Dick Aronson, executive director of the Collegiate Gymnastics Association

* * *

"Title IX is one of the best things that ever happened to fathers. Thanks to Title IX, fathers and daughters now have a whole new arena -- sports -- in which to build a relationship. We have a society where women, including our daughters, are more valued for the size of their cleavage that for the size of their hearts. As the first guy in our daughters' lives, we can bust this myth wide open. These guys (who participate in sports with their daughters) are not radical feminists, they simply want equal opportunity for their daughters and their sons."

Joe Kelly, executive director of Dads & Daughters

* * *

"Without laws like Title IX, nothing would change. Without the law, those who have always had the greater benefits would not give them up. Title IX is an easy whipping girl. It's an easy excuse. Title IX is no more a quota than the program limits placed on a chemistry class or a graduate program. Those who say they want Title IX changed mean they do not want it enforced. Now is not the time to back away from Title IX or its enforcement."

Diane Multinovich, former associate athletics director at California State University, Fresno

* * *

"There is a reciprocal relationship between equitable opportunity and interest. As educators, it is our responsibility to provide equitable opportunities. That's good for women, but it's also good for men. My sons are growing up in a world where they can expect to have women as colleagues, women as bosses. Sexist attitudes of course hurt girls, but they also dehumanize boys and men and make it difficult for them to interact with women."

Michael Messner, sociologist at the University of Southern California