Appellants cited two primary reasons for Webster's transfer to West High from NU High: (1) concerns about Webster's study skills and proficiency in mathematics; and (2) uncertainty about the future of grades 10 through 12 at NU High following the 2002-2003 school year. Regarding the family's first reason, Appellants testified that the family contacted Sylvan Learning Center in Waterloo in the spring of 2001 because of their concerns for Webster's general study skills and specifically his mathematics proficiency. Appellants stated at the appeal hearing that "little work" is done at the Laboratory School with respect to study skills. They also testified that they perceived a lack of articulation between the middle school mathematics curriculum at the laboratory school and its high school mathematics curriculum. Between Webster's 8th and 9th grade years, the Claytons enrolled him in their local Sylvan Learning Center's basic math and study skills programs, according to documents submitted by Appellants. Appellants testified that the family did not transfer Webster to West High prior to his 9th grade year because "too many things were missing in terms of skills."

Mrs. Clayton also presented many reasons for the transfer related to what she termed the changing school environment at NU High. In February of 2002, officials at the University of Northern Iowa, the "parent" facility of the laboratory school, announced that grades 10 through 12 of NU High would "shift" to Cedar Falls and other area schools, beginning with the 2003-2004 school year. This, quite naturally, produced a great deal of consternation among parents of high school students at NU High. It is clear from Exhibits 1 through 3 that the existence of grades 10 through 12 at NU High for the 2002-2003 school year was not in doubt, nor does Mrs. Clayton argue that her family was fearful that the school would close immediately. Rather, she argues that the February 2002 announcement from UNI precipitated a drastic enough change in the present school environment that it simply was not the same school in which the family had enrolled Webster in the first place. To buttress this assertion, Mrs. Clayton testified that faculty and students had left and that services had changed. When asked, Mrs. Clayton admitted that she knew of no faculty members who had left whom Webster would have had as teachers this year. However, she did state that the elementary principal had left, leaving the secondary principal to act in that capacity also, to the best of her knowledge. She also stated that the activities director and a student advisor, the latter of whom Webster had apparently had much contact with, had chosen to leave the school prior to the start of the 2002-2003 school year.

Finally, Mrs. Clayton argues that the athletic eligibility transfer rules are punitive in nature because they punish students whose families transfer them from one school to another school for motivations other than athletics. She states that sports had nothing to do with her family's decision to have Webster leave NU High to attend West High, noting in addition to her other concerns that a transition to a new school as a sophomore would be easier on Webster than would a transition as a junior if NU High closes or is "shifted" to another district. On behalf of IHSAA, Mr. Saggau did not dispute that the Clayton family's motivation in transferring Webster was based on academic reasons, not athletic reasons. He testified that the Board of Control gave full consideration to whether the reasons presented by the Claytons constituted sufficient extenuating circumstances to override the dictates of the General Transfer Rule. Mr. Saggau analogized Webster's transfer to an open enrollment transfer. Both transfers are available to parents for academic reasons, but, absent extenuating circumstances, the student who transfers is subject to the period of ineligibility before being able to compete in interscholastic athletics.

This is a member-school-to-member-school transfer, and is covered by the general transfer rule. Webster and his family have always lived in the Waterloo district. When asked if the family would have had Webster transfer based on academic concerns alone, assuming that NU High would be in existence for years to come with no changes, Mrs. Clayton gave conflicting testimony. If Webster would have left NU High for West High based solely on the family's concerns about his studies, Webster would not be immediately eligible to participate in interscholastic athletics at any school to which he may have transferred. It must be noted that the transfer rules are reasonably related to IHSAA's purpose of deterring transfers that are not so wholesomely motivated. In re R.J. Levesque, 17 D.o.E. App. Dec. 317 (1999). The majority of courts, including the federal courts in Iowa, have ruled that there is no right to participate in interscholastic athletics [Brands v. Sheldon Community School, 671 F.Supp. 627 (N.D. Iowa 1987); Gonyo v. Drake University, 837 F.Supp. 989 (S.D. Iowa 1993)].

School environments can change for various reasons ? loss or surrender of accreditation, reorganization with one or more other districts, whole-grade sharing with one or more other districts, rejection of a reorganization plan, or rejection of a whole-grade sharing agreement. As these occurrences have been envisioned by the Iowa legislature, we are not without guidance. Iowa's Open Enrollment Law, section 282.18(2001) of the Iowa Code, states that a parent or guardian may file for open enrollment of a child after the statutory January 1 deadline if one of the above circumstances has occurred, but only if the parent or guardian does so within a set window of time after the action is finalized. The statute does not allow for late-filed open enrollment applications made in anticipation of action. We have previously held that parents "should be able to wait to see what their school board does, and hear the Board's basis for its [decision], before having to make their decision." In re Cameron Kroemer, 9 D.o.E. App. Dec. 302 (1992). In summary, there are recognized changes of a school environment when the 90 consecutive school days of ineligibility do not apply. If grades 10 through12 of NU High cease to be offered or are "shifted" to the Cedar Falls or other districts in 2003-2004 school year, affected students will have immediate eligibility anywhere they attend school at the start of that school year. Because a transfer that is made in anticipation of a change is not recognized in the Iowa Code or Iowa Administrative Code as an exception to the general rule, we cannot read into the law what the lawmakers did not include themselves. A rule of statutory construction that cannot be disregarded is that, had the legislature intended to include immediate eligibility for students who transfer the year before anticipated changes to the student's present school, the legislature would have so acted. Legislative intent is expressed by omission as well as by inclusion. Wiebenga v. Iowa Department of Transportation, Motor Vehicle Division, 530 N.W.2d 732, 735 (Iowa 1995).

That the September 4, 2002, decision of the Board of Control of the Iowa High School Athletic Association that Webster Clayton IV is ineligible to compete in interscholastic athletics for 90 consecutive school days at West High was AFFIRMED.