Asst Coach at RS was in contact with a student athlete's parent from another district who was also an old friend and the conversation was all in a text messenger. Copies of the messages were given by that parent to their superintendent, who reported to the district committee. The texting the coach did was the strongest evidence for recruitment as it included extremely negative comments about the coaching staff at the student's current school and it also involved the coach indirectly offering the parent a job at RS and offers to work with the student athlete on the side.
The coach also indicated in the texting that he wanted to make sure it didn't look like recruiting. The negative comments about the student's current coaching staff were seen as a violation of the code of conduct and the behavior and wording he used in his messages was seen as coercion to consider coming to RS. Multiple "red flags" as they put it, were raised. The coach's character and values seemed to be well documented and supported by several coaches he had worked with in the past, however, whether he was actually trying to recruit or not, the committee felt he showed a major error in how a UIL coach, especially for a school that has recently been in the hot seat, should conduct themselves. They elected to impose a lighter punishment, most likely due to it not being as blatant as other instances and as mentioned his character was strongly supported by his peers.