ASHLAND — The number of students open-enrolled at Ashland City Schools has increased by 74 students over the past decade.
Jumping back even further, the district’s current number of open-enrolled students (205) is a little more than three times the amount recorded in 1999 (61). But this trend of the past nearly three decades may begin to slow — or eventually become nonexistent.
In contrast, 221 students who reside in the district currently open enroll at other surrounding school districts — a number which has also increased over the past decade.
During its meeting on March 9, the Ashland City School District Board of Education began discussions regarding the district’s open enrollment policy. Those talks continued Wednesday when the board met in special session.
A revised open enrollment policy will more than likely be on the table for a vote when the board meets March 23. Board members and district administrators spent about 90 minutes discussing such a policy Wednesday evening.
Superintendent Steve Paramore shared his recommendations for what he’d like the revised policy to include, welcoming feedback and questions from the board and members of the public.
Decline in state foundation funding is ‘disheartening,’ says Paramore
But why is the district acting to revise the policy in the first place?
In 2022, Ashland City Schools enrolled in the Ohio Fair School Funding Plan — designed to calculate the cost of educating a child using a mix of state funds and local property/income taxes.
The plan says the base amount per pupil — or cost of educating one district student — is $8,110 for fiscal year 2026. The local capacity per pupil — or amount of local taxes funding one child’s education — is $4,918.
That base amount per pupil is modeled after a student who lives in the school district. This is different than the number for a student who does not live in the district, but attends the school.
The state’s funding plan for Ashland allots nearly $3,192 of state funding per open-enrolled student — nearly a $5,000 difference between the two types of students.
The district is left to float the difference to educate open-enrolled students whose families do not reside in the district — and therefore do not pay taxes toward the district.
Paramore said March 9 that funding from the state foundation is expected to drop by about six to seven percent next year.
“(There are currently) 205 open-enrolled students. So, in a year, if we were to receive $8,110 for them, that would be $1.66 million. We only receive $1,005,671,” he said previously.
RELATED READING
What next?
Paramore put the topic in front of the board March 9 because students must have open-enrollment forms postmarked by April 1.
While no firm decisions were made or votes taken Wednesday, board members did share opinions on certain recommendations proposed by Paramore regarding a revised policy.
Some of the superintendent’s recommended policy change includes allowing continued open enrollment for:
- Children of Ashland City Schools staff members who reside outside the district. Paramore said this school year that includes 27 students.
- Students who are already open-enrolled in the district. Current seniors account for 23 of the open-enrolled students this school year.
- Siblings of students who are already open-enrolled at Ashland. There are currently 42 sibling groups open-enrolled in the district, Paramore said. A sibling can be a full, half, adopted or step-sibling.
Charging tuition for open enrollment is another option at the district’s disposal. But Paramore doubled-down on the fact he is not a fan of that option.
“I am not a proponent of tuition, because that sets the precedent that if you can afford it, you can stay and if you can’t, you have to go back to your home school,” he said.
When asked by Pam Mowry, board president, no school board members said they feel the district should do away with open enrollment entirely.
Mowry stressed that any revised policy — which may or may not be approved March 23 — would likely be a one-year policy that would be revisited next school year — and possibly an annual basis depending on the state of funding from year to year.
She said in no way does the board or administration not know the value every student brings to the district. But the board is responsible to treat the financial deficit the district is facing, due to this particular area of education, seriously.
“If you want more of something you reward it. You don’t punish it. We all I think here believe, and I’ll speak for myself, that open enrollment and parent choice is what we want,” Mowry said. “We want parents to have choices, even if they don’t choose us.”