What follows is strictly my opinion and does not represent a position of the AIA executive board or its member schools.

Fans of high school free agency can breathe a sigh of relief. You'll still be able to speculate on who will transfer where for the foreseeable future. And moms and dads, there's no rush in the next few days or months to transfer your son or daughter without fear of them sitting out a year. Take your time.

That's because Friday morning a vote by the Arizona Interscholastic Association's Legislative Council shot down a proposed transfer rule amendment that would have made students who transferred from one school to another ineligible for a year in sport(s) they played at their previous school regardless of a move (change of domicile). The vote was 25-14 for the final proposed amendment. However, a two-thirds vote was required for passage. It needed 26 votes to pass since 39 folks were voting.

Unfortunately, MILEAGE, may have been the culprit that doomed the amendment. What a shame. It was the issue (athletically-motivated transfer) that's critical in an already tilted athletic playing field in the state thanks to Arizona's open enrollment law. Most, if not all of the discussion on the amendment on Friday centered on mileage. The original transfer rule proposal on the LC's agenda was a 25-mile radius. One LC member argued there should be no mileage limit, i.e. make transfers for athletic reasons open and shut (hardship appeals would stil be available). You, transfer, you sit out a year.

There was more debate over mileage. For metro areas, for rural areas. Twenty-five miles. Fifty miles. One-hundred-fifty miles. Numbers all over the place.

Ultimately, the transfer amendment on the agenda was amended to 50 miles. No distinction metro or rural. That amended proposal passed, 31-8. Seemed like passage was minutes away. Then came the shocking 25-11-3 vote (11 nos and 3 abstensions). At least six members changed their vote.

Most loglcal folks knew this rule was a good one. One certainly good enough to test. Heck, what's wrong with trying it for a year and then re-evaluate if need be. Some seemed to get cold feet listening to the amount of extra time and energy that may have come about to field anticipated uptick in appeals.

But so what. You have to start somewhere on an issue like this. It does no good to let it continue as is. Schools, administrators, coaches and level-headed parents have been clamoring for ways to reel in the large number of athletically-motivated transfers for years. That was the purpose of this amendment. For some LC members to get bogged down in distance and lose focus on the crux of the matter is tragic and a lost opportunity.

So the tilted playing field in Arizona will remain tilted. Passing the transfer-rule amendment could have brought a couple degrees sway toward level. Had it been given a logical chance.  

Les Willsey has covered high school athletics in Arizona and the East Valley for 28 years, 25 of those with the East Valley Tribune.