Education Innovation

School Reform Legislation

2008 House Bill 349

Open Enrollment Revisions

Sponsors
Representative Julie Fisher

Senator Dan Eastman

HB 349 Status

- Passed the Utah House 63 to 1, with 11 absent

- Passed the Utah Senate 25 to 2, with 2 absent

- Signed into law March 18, 2008

- Goes into effect May 5, 2008

>See the bill's official status

HB 349 Text

>Read the text of House Bill 349l

HB 349 Summary
1. Clarifies reasons a school may reject an application for enrollment.

2. Defines a school’s capacity for open enrollment based on district average class size. As class sizes drop, the capacity of the school drops proportionally.

3. Modifies the threshold below which a school is open for enrollment of nonresident students from 90% of capacity to 90% of capacity or space for 40 additional students.

4. Introduces a “late enrollment” period during which a student may apply for enrollment in a nonresident school. Late enrollment capacity is based on current staff and will not effect a schools staffing plans. The regular open enrollment period ends the 3rd Friday in February prior to the start of the school year.

5. Requires local school boards to post data on the school district's website regarding school capacity and applications for enrollment of nonresident students.

6. Requires local school boards to establish policies ensuring that schools do not discriminate against any individual or group of nonresident students.

Endorsements

• Davis Parents Association
  H headed by Randy Smith, this was the main organization advocating for HB 349

• Superintendent Bryan Bowles
  Davis School District
  
  “I believe this bill to be a good one that supports the notion of family choice in education. I am a strong believer that families should have tremendous voice in school choice for their children. This bill is a clear, responsible way to accomplish that goal.”

• Utah Technology Council
  “The Utah Technology Council has identified H.B. 349, Open Enrollment Revisions, as our 2nd highest workforce priority for the 2008 legislative session. We believe this legislation is good for our children because it gives parents greater flexibility in meeting the needs of each child and it creates a natural incentive for schools to understand and respond to the needs of their customers (students and parents)”

--Richard Nelson, President & CEO

Why HB 349 is Needed

The following are trues stories from families who would have been entitled to open enrollment if HB349 had been the law when they requested a transfer:

Denise Griffiths
2007-08 Transfer request:

My daughter’s stress and anxiety left her hating school and suffering a down turn in her delicate health situation. We believed a change in schools and peers would help. A transfer should have been easy since our school was over crowded and the other school had room for almost 200 students.

We applied to transfer her by the deadline but was rejected. Our written appeal, with letters from two doctors, was also rejected. When I complained to the district I was told “it is not about capacity, it’s about things you don’t understand”.

In desperation to help my daughter, we were compelled to turn over custody to grandparents. Unbelievably, a school administrator attended the custody hearing to inform the judge that we were just trying to get around district policy. I wish the district understood that it’s about the children and things that parents do understand.

---------------------------------------

Jody Haycock

2006-07 Transfer request:

It was very important to our family that our children attend high school together. Since the school our senior was already attending, had a lot of empty seats, we thought it would be easy to transfer our sophomore.

After the district repeatedly denied our request for a transfer, we suggested that our senior be allowed to transfer back to our resident school. Unfortunately, since she played soccer they would not allow that either. It took six months of begging before they finally allowed our children to attend school together.

---------------------------------------

Pania Heimuli

2007-08 Transfer request:

We were anxious to enroll our honor student in the new International Baccalaureate program at Bountiful High. The school had printed 3,000 postcards recruiting students throughout the district, but when we applied for a transfer, the request and subsequent appeals, were denied. We put purchase offers on three homes within the school’s boundaries, and enrolled my son as a resident student, no longer needing district consent.

At my request, the Governor's Office of Ethnic Affairs contacted the district. That same evening I got a personal call from the District Superintendent who gave immediate, written approval to override the denials I had received.

I am appreciative that he stepped in. However, "open enrollment" shouldn’t be limited to those who can afford to move or who have contacts in the administration. We should assume that most parents have neither of these options...and only the best interests of their children at heart.

Related Articles

>Enrollment period for students expanded

Deseret News article, May 6, 2008

>Landmark education bill goes into effect, today

PCE press release, May 5, 2008