The Cuyahoga Falls Board of Education on Nov. 19 heard an extended presentation on open enrollment that paired student‑performance data with fiscal and operational analysis and prompted proposals to tighten the district’s application rules.

Superintendent Dr. Selico presented 2024–25 data showing 412 open‑enrolled students — about 12% of the district — in that year and 279 students (8%) this year. He said test‑score gaps on state assessments ranged “from anywhere from 7 percent to 16% depending on which subject you’re looking at,” and that there was a marked difference in habitual absenteeism: “we had a 7.7% difference between open‑enrolled and resident students,” he said.

The superintendent and staff linked the attendance and achievement differences to program costs and staff time. They estimated registrar work, special‑education evaluation and IEP development, and attendance‑intervention hours as meaningful human‑capital demands tied to open‑enrolled pupils. On staffing reductions tied to enrollment changes, the superintendent said savings could range “come close to $850,000” on the high end and about $600,000 on the conservative end, depending on which positions and seniority levels changed.

Board members pushed back and probed tradeoffs. Boardmember Gomez urged a practical application change: "If we're going to keep open enrollment, they should have to answer what is my transportation plan so that they know we're serious about how you're getting your kid to school," he said, proposing that applicants include a transportation statement as part of the application package.

Other trustees emphasized both compassion for families and the need for data. One member noted policy work earlier in the year that reduced open‑enrolled students and estimated that change produced roughly $1.5 million in savings; staff said they would verify those calculations. Trustees also asked whether removing habitually absent students from the pool had already biased the historical test‑score comparisons and requested follow‑up analyses isolating outcomes for students who remain in the district.

No policy change was adopted at the meeting. Staff said they will return with more detailed analysis, including multi‑year attendance trends, the composition of the open‑enrolled population (special‑education and court‑placed students), and options for incorporating transportation or attendance criteria into the application process.