College Station ISD discusses reopening out-of-district transfers to boost enrollment; board seeks feedback

College Station ISD administration presented a proposal at the Oct. 21 workshop to revise FDA(LOCAL) and allow a limited out-of-district transfer program to bring additional students into the district. The presentation was framed as a request for board feedback; no vote was taken.

Administration said the district is about 300 students below its budgeted enrollment for the current year and that gap amounts to a shortfall of roughly $2 million. Staff described the proposal as controlled transfers rather than open enrollment: applicants would submit documentation and be screened by criteria such as grades, attendance, discipline and assessment results. Staff suggested possible raw criteria "on the table" such as grades of 80 or above, attendance of 95% or higher, and 0'2 discipline referrals, and said the district would create two application piles (qualified and not qualified) rather than allowing parents to pick specific campuses.

The superintendent and staff said the program could initially be limited to elementary grades (not higher than sixth grade) to allow the district time to run the program and plan for high-school placements later. For high school placement they proposed a straight lottery if the program expanded to that level to avoid families choosing campuses for athletics or program access. Transfers would be re-evaluated annually and could be revoked for attendance or discipline reasons; staff said removal would be based on attendance/discipline rather than academic performance.

Staff said intake would be managed through tracked feeder patterns ("you don't get to pick a school") and that the district would advertise available "tracks" with the application window in December'January and notifications by February to allow staffing decisions before teacher contracts are finalized in the spring. Administration said it would research how larger districts manage site-specific programs and exceptions (for example, if a program is only at one campus) and that special-education needs and transportation requirements (including McKinney-Vento considerations) would be addressed in the application and capacity review.

The presentation included operational estimates: staff suggested starting capacity of about 300'400 students depending on grade-level mix and staffing, noting the number accepted in year one would depend on how many applied and on staffing capacity. Board members raised concerns about potential impacts on special education programs, classroom sizes, staffing capacity and equity between in-district students and transfer students. Staff replied that acceptance decisions would be tied to available classroom space and the district's ability to staff programs; if staffing for a particular program were insufficient, that would be a disqualifying condition in the application.

Administration referenced Chapter 89 in describing changes to two-way dual-language classroom composition and noted that districts across Texas have opened transfer windows recently in response to enrollment declines. Staff also said they would consult other districts that have run transfer or online programs to identify marketing practices and operational lessons.

A superintendent summary line captured the rationale: "We can do 1 or 2 things. We can sit back and not do anything and pray every 2 years that the state's gonna finally do something to help us or we can get more proactive and try to do what we can to make sure we're taking care of our kids." The board gave feedback supportive of a cautious, phased approach in which a program could be piloted for one or two years and adjusted based on experience. No motion or formal vote was taken at the workshop; staff said a policy change could be prepared for the November meeting if the board wishes to proceed.