Appellants filed timely open enrollment applications and the District Board "tabled" their applications at its November 13, 1995 meeting. No reason was given for the Board's action. At the December 11, 1995, meeting the Board again "tabled" the applications. The superintendent testified that the Board felt that Appellants should come and explain, in person, what problems with the Exira District caused them to seek open enrollment. In that way, the Board could work on "correcting" any problems the parents had. The superintendent wrote a letter asking the parents to attend and discuss their reasons with the Board. Appellants felt intimidated and uncomfortable. They did not attend the December Board meeting.

The superintendent testified that the reason the open enrollment applications were "tabled" at the November meeting was to give two newly-elected Board members a chance to review the law. The Board stated it would like an explanation of all open enrollment requests.

The State Board has previously stated the use of the term "application" in the statute is a misnomer because it implies that the parents seek Board approval of the open enrollment request. If the form is timely filed, the resident district board has no discretion to deny the open enrollment, unless the district is under voluntary or court-ordered desegregation.

"Tabling" the timely-filed open enrollment requests is synonymous with denying the requests for purposes of appeal. It is not appropriate, and is, in fact beyond the school board's authority to impose additional conditions on parents exercising their rights under the Statute.

Appellants in this case have been inconvenienced at best and at worst, have had their lives upset in one or more way because of the Board's position on their open enrollment applications. If there was any way to compensate the Appellants for their time and inconvenience, the hearing panel would suggest that the State Board order it.

That the decisions of the Board of Directors of the Exira Community School District denying open enrollment for Appellants' children was reversed.