Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Student Enrollment topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Clover School District board holds first reading of interdistrict transfer policy, keeps state fee formula and parental transportation requirement
Summary
At a business meeting, the Clover School District Board received a first reading of policy JFAB and its administrative rule covering interdistrict transfers, keeping the state fee formula, placing transportation responsibility on parents, and outlining denial criteria, appeals and capacity rules.
Get email alerts on the Student Enrollment topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
The Clover School District Board on a first reading discussed proposed changes to its interdistrict transfer policy (JFAB) and a related administrative rule, including how the district will charge and collect tuition from nonresident students and how it will evaluate applications.
Superintendent Dr. Quinn introduced the policy and turned the presentation over to Mr. Ruth, who walked the board through the proposed administrative rule. Mr. Ruth said the district intends to continue to use the state department’s formula to determine transfer fees and "we do not want to lower them to the amount of the scholarship." He also told the board the district would keep transportation responsibility with the parents of transfer students rather than providing district transportation.
The administrative rule would remove a requirement that nonresident tuition be paid in full by the first day of school and instead allow a pay schedule with set benchmarks, and it would permit continuous enrollment for interdistrict transfers so students would not necessarily need to reapply each year. The rule would require the district to request student records from the sending district, including IEP and 504 plans, discipline records, testing and health records, before finalizing admission.
The presentation listed specific denial criteria: falsified application information discovered through records requests; a pattern of unlawful absences or tardies (examples cited: five unlawful tardies or absences thresholds cited for high school, and other thresholds for lower grades); suspension history; level-three offenses; expulsion or recommendation for expulsion; and failure to meet specialized-program requirements. Mr. Ruth said there is a process to add students to a wait list or to choose alternate schools if a preferred school lacks capacity.
Board members focused questions on reapplication rights, special education handling and athletics. One member asked whether a student admitted from another district could reapply to a different school the following year; Mr. Ruth confirmed interdistrict students may reapply while noting intra-district transfers are governed by a different set of criteria and generally limited to hardship exceptions. On special education, Mr. Ruth said incoming IEPs would lead to team review and an evaluation of specialized-program capacity rather than being used alone to deny enrollment. On athletics and recruiting, board members raised concerns about potential recruiting between newly opening high schools; Mr. Ruth said recruiting complaints would be reported to the South Carolina High School League.
The presentation also covered required capacity studies and a proposed option to include a growth buffer and annual enrollment buffer (an approach cited by Fort Mill) designed to protect fast-growing districts; presenters noted the state department may not accept those optional buffers. Mr. Ruth said a draft of the policy will be submitted to the state department by the end of July for feedback, and the board must adopt a final policy by the end of August to meet the state deadline.
This was a first reading; the board did not adopt the policy at the meeting. Members were invited to request edits before a second reading and formal adoption.

