Cal State Told to Restore Women’s Volleyball Team

WESTMINSTER —  A Superior Court judge Friday officially reinstated women’s volleyball at Cal State Fullerton, while a top athletic official at the university pledged that things will improve soon for female athletes.

“Just stay tuned. It will happen, probably sooner than most think,” Associate Athletic Director Maryalyce Jeremiah said. “We’re not the bad guys in this like it appears, and that will play itself out. People will see that down the road.”

Referring to the 20-year-old federal law that requires men and women to be treated equally in all areas of education, she said, “There isn’t anything I believe in more than gender equity, and this department will achieve it under Title IX.”

The court order signed Friday capped an eight-week crusade by advocates of women’s sports to overturn a university decision to kill women’s volleyball as part of a cost-cutting measure. At the same time, the issue has been taken beyond a single sport.

This week, federal investigators sent questionnaires as part of an inquiry into possible inequities in the entire sports program at the university, where 55% of students--but just 28% of athletes--are women in the current year. And 72% of its 1991-92 athletic money is spent on men.

Fullerton is just one of many universities feeling the heat. Two other Cal State athletic departments--Fresno State and San Jose State--are also being investigated by the U.S. Education Department, which has made a priority this year out of enforcing Title IX of the federal Education Act of 1972, officials say.

The comments Friday by Jeremiah, who played an integral part in the January decision to drop women’s volleyball, indicated a new sense of urgency by the university to address the issues being raised.

Cal State officials have been reluctant to discuss volleyball’s future during court battles. But Fullerton is working on plans to add women’s soccer and golf, which university officials say would cost less and provide more opportunities for women than volleyball does.

Kirk Boyd, an attorney who represents the volleyball team and its coach, Jim Huffman, said he will remain skeptical until he sees results, but he added that Jeremiah’s comments provide a basis for optimism.

“I hope it’s movement toward a reasonable position on their part that incorporates the reinstatement of the most popular sport among women in California,” Boyd said. “It’s offensive to me if they try to start other teams when volleyball is so popular here.

“If they truly believe in women’s rights, they must also recognize the rights of women to choose to participate in their most popular sport.”

Huffman said: “Obviously, the dropping of volleyball started this thing, but adding volleyball isn’t going to end it. The only way to end it is to comply with Title IX.”

Despite Jeremiah’s comments, the university has maintained a hard line in court. An attorney representing Fullerton asked the volleyball team to put up a $25,000 bond to cover possible damages, a common practice for defendants in such cases.

But the request was denied by Judge Floyd H. Schenk on Friday, after Huffman filed documents saying students could not come up with that kind of money.

“That was the only right thing to do,” Huffman said. “I would have been surprised if he let them victimize the victims.”

Boyd added, “We’re just ecstatic--we won across the board.”

Not exactly. Schenk did amend the preliminary injunction proposal to say the university must provide “appropriate coaching,” for volleyball, but he did not order Fullerton to retain Huffman, who is not under contract for next season.

Although there was no announcement Friday on Huffman’s status, he has been given no indication that he will remain.

“If they don’t retain me, they better have someone to replace me at that moment, or we’ll go right back to the judge,” Huffman said.

Both sides indicated that there could be a settlement before a permanent injunction hearing in front of Schenk within 90 days.

“Given the court’s decision, it makes no sense for the defendants to continue to waste public funds in an effort to prevent equality,” Boyd said. “We won, and nothing is going to change at a permanent injunction hearing--no new information will go before the court. The money would be better spent on athletic teams, both men’s and women’s.”

Nancy Carlin, an attorney representing the university, said she found Boyd’s comment “amusing, given all the times we’ve tried to discuss settling with him.”

“I’m pleased to see he’s taking a more open position,” she said.

A POLARIZED DEPARTMENT: Coach Huffman does not want fight to become personal. C1

NO EASY TASK: Women seldom get Division I soccer scholarships. C14

College Sports: Men Get More Money

Although men and women enroll in nearly equal numbers at Division I colleges throughout the United States, a recent NCAA survey for the 1990-91 school year shows that male athletes get more of university sporting dollars. How Orange County’s two main state universities rate:

Total enrollment: Cal State Fullerton Men: 44.9% Women: 55.1% UC Irvine Men: 47.5% Women: 52.5% NCAA: Men: 46.5% Women: 53.5%

Athletes: Cal State Fullerton Men: 69.0% Women: 31.0% UC Irvine Men: 63.3% Women: 33.7% NCAA: Men: 69.1% Women: 30.9%

Men’s teams favored with funds: Percentage of operating funds given to men’s teams: CSUF: 81.5% UCI: 74.0% NCAA: 77.4%

More men are recruited: Percentage of recruitment funds spent on male teams: CSUF: 82.9% UCI: 74.9% NCAA: 82.8%

Men get more scholarships: Percentage of sports scholarship dollars that go to men: CSUF: 70.9% UCI: 64.5% NCAA: 69.5%

NOTE: Based on information reported by 253 (92%) of the NCAA Division I schools, CSUF and UC Irvine.

SOURCES: The National Collegiate Athletic Assn., CSUF, UC Irvine

How State’s Universities Treat Men’s and Women’s Athletics

Here’s how men’s and women’s sports at NCAA Division I public schools in California compare. Figures are those provided for the 1991-92 academic year by schools as of Friday, subject to adjustment based on revenue and fluctuating participation. Budget figures are those dedicated to men’s and women’s sports--including operating expenses, coaching salaries, recruiting and scholarships--and do not include generic athletic expenses such as administration, facility maintenance and, in most cases, sports information departments.

UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA

Berkeley Irvine UCLA No. of men students: 11,547 6,465 12,185 No. of women students: 10,170 7,346 12,241 Men to women ratio (student body): 53.2/46.8 46.8/53.2 49.9/50.1 Men to women ratio (athletes): 71.3/28.7 67.0/33.0 72.0/28.0 No. of Men athletes: 650 229 360 No. in Football: 95 0 122 Men’s Sports 12 11 12 No. of Women athletes: 262 113 140 Women’s Sports 11 7 9 Budgeted for men: $9.8 million $1.4 million $10.2 million Budgeted for women: $2.9 million $699,000 $2.1 million Men to women budget ratio: 77.2/22.8 66.3/33.7 83.1/16.9

Santa Barbara No. of men students: 8,067 No. of women students: 8,230 Men to women ratio (student body): 49.5/50.5 Men to women ratio (athletes): 67.0/33.0 No. of Men athletes: 335 No. in Football: 69 Men’s Sports 12 No. of Women athletes: 165 Women’s Sports 9 Budgeted for men: $1.2 million Budgeted for women: $439,000 Men to women budget ratio: 72.8/27.2

CALIFORNIA STATE UNIVERSITY

Fresno Fullerton No. of men students: 7,469 9,596 No. of women students: 8,426 11,678 Men to women ratio (student body): 47.0/53.0 45.3/54.7 Men to women ratio (athletes): 76.1/23.9 72.0/28.0 No. of Men athletes: 372 267 No. in Football: 129 89 Men’s Sports 11 9 No. of Women athletes: 117 104 Women’s Sports 7 8 Budgeted for men: $5.3 million $2.5million Budgeted for women: $1.5 million $959,000 Men to women budget ratio: 78.0/22.0 72.1/27.9

Long Beach No. of men students: 11,937 No. of women students: 13,543 Men to women ratio (student body): 46.8/53.2 Men to women ratio (athletes): 70.2/29.8 No. of Men athletes: 248 No. in Football: 96 Men’s Sports 8 No. of Women athletes: 105 Women’s Sports 7 Budgeted for men: $1.6 million Budgeted for women: $635,000 Men to women budget ratio: 61.5/38.5

CALIFORNIA STATE UNIVERSITY

Northridge San Diego No. of men students: 10,710 12,675 No. of women students: 13,422 13,753 Men to women ratio (student body): 44.4/55.6 48.0/52.0 Men to women ratio (athletes): 68.3/31.7 71.8/28.2 No. of Men athletes: 287 325 No. in Football: 90 101 Men’s Sports 9 10 No. of Women athletes: 133 128 Women’s Sports 7 8 Budgeted for men: $2.3 million $3.0 million Budgeted for women: $1.4 million $1.0 million Men to women budget ratio: 61.7/38.3 74.2/25.8

San Jose No. of men students: 11,631 No. of women students: 11,503 Men to women ratio (student body): 50.3/49.7 Men to women ratio (athletes): 69.0/31.0 No. of Men athletes: 198 No. in Football: 87 Men’s Sports 7 No. of Women athletes: 89 Women’s Sports 7 Budgeted for men: $2.9 million Budgeted for women: $1.2 million Men to women budget ratio: 70.7/29.3

NOTES:

UC Berkeley: Budget figures are those projected for 1992-93; 1991-92 figures unavailable but similar according to school officials.

UC Santa Barbara: Men’s numbers include football, which was discontinued Feb. 19; budget figures do not include scholarships, which school officials said they could not provide.

CS Long Beach: Men’s numbers include football, which was discontinued Dec. 12; track and field is budgeted as a co-ed sport for $114,221.

Budget figures over $1 million rounded to the nearest 100,000. Budget ratios calculated before rounding.

Compiled by MARK SPINN / For The Times