Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the School Sports Policy topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Tularosa board debates allowing sixth graders on middle‑school teams, keeps current policy for now
Summary
Parents, teachers and athletic staff told the Tularosa Municipal Schools board on a lengthy exchange that sixth‑grade participation in middle‑school volleyball and basketball raises equity and logistics problems; board members agreed not to rush a change and to keep the existing policy for now.
The Tularosa Municipal Schools board heard more than an hour of public comment and staff discussion over whether to allow sixth graders to join middle‑school sports teams, with officials citing logistics, safety and equity concerns and parents urging opportunity for younger students.
Board President (speaker 1) told the room that the New Mexico Activities Association allows sixth‑grade eligibility but that "most schools don't do it" and that the board needed to weigh practical constraints. Athletic staff (speaker 8) said adding sixth graders now would mean cutting more players and expose younger students to older opponents and long bus rides: "There's a reason why you make them wait," he said.
Parents and teachers gave competing accounts. A parent (speaker 7) said sixth graders already feel part of the middle school and asked for the chance to compete. A teacher (speaker 3) said she worried that special‑education caseloads and staffing shortages would leave students underserviced: "Our sped teachers are literally running around like a chicken with their heads off," she said, describing rising IEP workloads after a recent influx of students.
Practical barriers animated much of the exchange. Speakers noted tryouts already scheduled, limited gym and locker space, and a shortage of physicals for younger students; one parent noted urgent care walk‑ins are an option but warned that some families could not access clinics on short notice. Athletic staff raised safety and developmental concerns about younger students traveling and competing with 14‑year‑olds.
Several speakers proposed alternatives — intramural programs, using sixth graders as managers, or delaying the policy change to allow planners to do logistics, schedule physicals, and consider gender equity for boys and girls. A number of board members favored delaying a decision: "I just feel like if you make a decision like a spur decision tonight, there's a lot of unintended consequences," one member said, urging the board to table changes and work through logistics.
By the end of the discussion the board indicated it would not rush a change this season and would stick with the existing policy for now, with members asking staff to return with options and logistics for future consideration. The meeting transcript does not record a formal, roll‑call vote on a policy change during the exchange.
Next steps: board members asked staff to report back with more detailed options and timelines if the board considers a policy change in a subsequent meeting.
