Montana House Bill 250 makes open enrollment more transparent

A version of the following written comment was submitted to the Montana Senate Education and Cultural Resources Committee on March 25, 2025.

Montana House Bill 250 would tweak the definition of school capacity so school districts can limit the number of transfers by either the maximum student contact hours for a teacher or the maximum class size permitted under the accreditation standards of the board of public education. It also clarifies the financial obligations of the sending and receiving school districts. Additionally, the proposal would clarify what detailed open enrollment data should be included in the annual report to the education committee on out-of-district attendance.  While some of these provisions are steps in the right direction, others lack clarity, especially those related to the districts’ available capacity.

H.B. 250 makes the open enrollment process more transparent by showing where students transfer to and from, highlighting districts in high or low demand. However, this provision could be further improved by ensuring that the annual report to the education committee on out-of-district attendance is published on the Montana Office of Public Instruction’s website. Additionally, this report should include other open enrollment data, such as the number of rejected applicants and why they were denied.

However, H.B. 250 would let school districts limit the number of transfers based on the “maximum student contact hours for a teacher” per 20-5-320(2)(e)(i)(C). The proposal could be improved by clarifying the definition of this term and identifying where it is in the accreditation standards of the board of public education. Moreover, this proposed language unnecessarily limits the number of transfers since H.B. 250 would also let school districts limit transfers based on the maximum class sizes under the same standards.  If codified, it’s unclear that transfer applicants can only be rejected due to insufficient capacity, significantly undermining the state’s strong open enrollment policy.

Currently, 16 states have strong cross-district open enrollment laws, including Montana, Idaho, North Dakota, and South Dakota. 

Strong open enrollment laws ensure that students can attend schools that are the right fit. Many students use these programs to enroll in A or B-rated school districts. Others use it to escape bullying, access Advanced Placement (AP) courses, use specialized learning models, have smaller class sizes, or shorten their commutes. 

California’s Legislative Analyst’s Office’s 2016 report and Reason Foundation’s 2024 report both show that the competitive effects of open enrollment can encourage districts to improve.  In a 2023 EdChoice report, district administrators in Arizona, North Carolina, Indiana, and Florida stated that open enrollment encouraged them to innovate by creating or improving existing programs to attract and retain students. 

According to national polling released by EdChoice in February 2025, open enrollment is supported by 74% of school parents. It also enjoys bipartisan support: 77% of Democrats and 74% of Republicans favor allowing families to attend schools across district lines. Moreover, robust open enrollment laws signed into law in Idaho, Montana, and West Virginia during the 2023 legislative sessions enjoyed significant bipartisan support. 

Open enrollment can benefit rural districts, helping them boost enrollment. During the 2021-22 school year, Wisconsin districts gained nearly 2,500 students on net. In fact, districts in Wisconsin’s towns and rural locales gained the lion’s share of transfers at 52%. Similar data from West Virginia showed that rural districts gained nearly half of all cross-district transfers.

Strengthening Montana’s robust open enrollment policy ensures that public schools are available to all students and empowers families to find public schools that are the right fit.

The post Montana House Bill 250 makes open enrollment more transparent appeared first on Reason Foundation.