Opinion ID: 848690
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 3

Heading: The MHSAA is Primarily Funded by or through School Districts

Text: The MHSAA is primarily funded as a result of its relationship with the public school districts. The majority definition of funded as narrowly pertaining only to the receipt of a governmental grant or subsidy, ante at 643, 645, defies common sense. The majority's definition originates in a Court of Appeals decision [9] that first cites a dictionary definition of fund (as a verb), and then skips to a synonym, subsidize, that the panel discovered in a thesaurus. Apparently preferring subsidize to fund, even though the term fund was used by the Legislature, [10] the panel then turned to a dictionary definition of subsidy (a noun) and discovered that a subsidy is defined as a direct financial aid furnished by a government ... [or] any grant or contribution of money. Thus, by mixing verbs and nouns and substituting words for those employed by the Legislature, the panel creatively narrowed is ... funded under the statute to mean the receipt of a government grant or subsidy. While it is appropriate to refer to dictionary definitions to understand the ordinary meaning of words, it is not appropriate to pick and choose among synonyms that may only have nearly the same or similar [11] meaning and substitute those for the words specifically employed by the Legislature. I would conclude, that a fund can be understood to be money available for use so that when something is funded it is provided for by a fund, i.e. by money available for use... Webster's New World Dictionary (3d ed.). Michigan public schools represent eighty percent of the MHSAA's membership and approximately ninety to ninety-five percent of the MHSAA's funding is from gate receipts from postseason athletic tournaments for football and basketball involving public school teams. Without the voluntary participation of the public school districts in the MHSAA organized interscholastic athletic season and postseason tournaments, as well as the school districts' relinquishment of the gate receipts to MHSAA, it would cease to exist because its primary source of money available for its use would disappear. However, the question remains whether the MHSAA's gate receipt funding is derived by or through public school districts. There are many inapplicable definitions of the terms by and through. But in the context of MCL 15.232(d)(iv), the most applicable definition of by in Webster's addresses the term as used to express permission or sanction. In that sense, by is defined as with the authority or sanction of [ by your leave]. [12] The applicable definitions of through in Webster's are by means of [ through her help] and as a result of; because of [done through error]. [13] Id. Thus, the plain meaning approach to by or through in the context of the statute at issue is whether the gate receipts amount to funding that the MHSAA receives with the authority or sanction of the school districts or by means of, as a result of, or because of the school districts. [14] I would hold that because the MHSAA receives its primary funding as with the authority of (by) and as a result of (through) the voluntary membership of public school districts in the MHSAA and the school districts' voluntary participation in the interscholastic athletic seasons and postseason tournaments organized by the MHSAA, the MHSAA is primarily funded by or through the schools and is a public body under MCL 15.232(d)(iii) of the FOIA. Rather than look at the plain meaning of the words at issue, the majority suggests that the terms by and through must refer to different kinds of governmental authority. The majority adopts the analysis of the Court of Appeals and concludes that by refers to an entity that directly distributes its financial resources to the disputed organization. The majority then says through refers to the disputed organization indirectly receiving funds through some action or decision of the governmental body. Ante at 644. However, to understand the statute, it is not necessary to engraft concepts of direct and indirect funding or to conclude that the Legislature intended to reference different kinds of governmental authority when it only used the term authority once. The majority's approach defies the plain language of the statute and unduly constricts the definitions of public body and of funded. In Brentwood, the Unite States Supreme Court addressed the nature of gate receipts received by a similar state school athletic organization for its organization and sponsorship of public school athletic tournaments and stated: Unlike mere public buyers of contract services, whose payments for services rendered do not convert the service providers into public actors, ... the schools here obtain membership in the service organization and give up sources of their own income to their collective association. The Association ... exercises the authority of the predominantly public schools to charge admission to their games; the Association does not receive this money from the schools, but enjoys the moneymaking capacity as its own. [ Brentwood, supra at 299, 121 S.Ct. 924.] Like the TSSAA, the MHSAA is more than a public contractor exchanging payments for services. By collecting gate receipts at tournaments, the MHSAA enjoys the schools' moneymaking capacity as its own. [15] This underscores the conclusion that the MHSAA receives its primary funding by or through the schools' authority. The majority argues that the MHSAA creates its own `market,' and stresses that without the MHSAA's effort no revenue from tournament games would be generated for any entity, including MHSAA member schools. Ante at 644-645, 646. The majority thus concludes that the MHSAA is merely a service provider and that the gate receipts are simply fees paid for services. However, as noted above, the MHSAA is not simply in a situation where the organization provides a fee for a particular service. True, the MHSAA does organize interscholastic seasons and postseason tournaments. It also provides medical insurance, publications, and training to its members. However, schools do not join the MHSAA or allow it to sell tickets to events featuring student athletes simply because the MHSAA provides medical insurance, publications, or training. As already explained, school districts allow the MHSAA to coordinate events and relinquish related gate receipts to the MHSAA because the MHSAA is the dominant statewide organization of interscholastic athletics, and failure to join and comply with MHSAA rules would effectively prevent the schools from participating in interscholastic athletics. It should be noted that the MHSAA is distinguishable from ordinary service providers to the schools. The school districts have delegated the authority to the MHSAA to make policy decisions. These decisions are within the proper function of school districts to regulate athletics, MCL 380.11a(4); MCL 380.11a(9), such as athletic eligibility and training, participation in outside sports activities and required scholastic achievement for participating athletes. This intertwinement between the MHSAA and the school districts makes the MHSAA subject to the FOIA where an ordinary service provider would not be.