Murch Boundary Change

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Look, as a future Hearst parent I would tell the Murch parents that are concerned to visit Hearst. Ask for a meeting with the principal. Meet real parents and kids at the school, I think you will be impressed and heartened by the strong community. Please come and see for yourself, even if it is a bit of a walk or a short drive for you.

I know you love your school and I am genuinely pleased for you. I want for all families to be happy with their neighborhood schools and have easy commutes. We are happy with our neighborhood school and it is Murch. We looked at schools before we purchased - including school visits - my preference for Murch is not based on a lack of information about Hearst. I have that preference and I purchased a house in that neighborhood, just 2 blocks from the school. I would not be unhappy about these changes if I thought it would bring about better schools for everyone in the city. But I fail to see how slicing up the pie in arbitrary ways helps achieve this. And as others have pointed out, this will not go very far to alleviate crowding in Murch... some renters will move apartment buildings to stay in-bounds or rent in a different building to begin with; siblings might get grandfathered; and there is the possibility of a minimum set aside for OOB kids..... I cannot see how these will make Murch less over-crowded.

And before anyone jumps on me for my last sentence above - I fully support grandfathering of siblings. On OOB set asides - I feel like the city is using this to compensate for having had a poor housing policy for years and years so there is insufficient geographic diversity of incomes in the city and we are using kids and families to fix this and giving families long commutes and less family time which gives poorer education outcomes. Traffic is already awful in this city. On the other hand, we need to deal with the realities on the ground and on the whole, OOB set asides have a place .... but my family are going to be pushed away from a school two blocks from our house - too young to have started there yet so no grandfathering - in order to alleviate over-crowding..... but probably won't do much.

All this energy is targeted in the wrong direction. I would like to see an end to the infighting - lets band together and let the DME know we reject all of this plan in its entirety and to go back to the beginning and come up with plans that will actually fix schools, provide high quality opportunities for all the kids of the city, and support families with decent schools in their neighborhoods, with lots of extra resources in the neighborhoods that need it. And that we value diversity in our schools but our children deserve better than to have to commute across the city to fix their housing policy - we need affordable housing in all neighborhoods.

Good ideas if building up neighborhood schools is the dme's goal, but I don't think it is. Ask her

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm a parent whose kid will be rezoned from Murch to Hearst and actually think that by the time my kid gets to Hearst it will be a better school than Murch (more diversity, better facilities, and smaller with no impending renovation headache). The thing I'm pissed about is the commute - whatever way you slice it it will add half an hour to my morning - that's 30 minutes less that i'll get to spend with my kids (other than the one i'm dragging along uphill to school) or get stuff done around the house or do work so that I can be blackberry free at home. It is pretty sucky that parents coming from the other side of connecticut will drive by my house as they speed down 36th street from albemarle on the other side of connecticut and park to drop their kid off at Murch. It is pretty sucky that Murch will lose the support of a close neighbor for things like their fall fair. It is pretty sucky that when I go to vote for Mayor I will be doing so at Murch, where my kids can't go to school anymore. For my family with my three young kids every minute saved is helpful. It is why we live in the city rather than commute from BFE. that 30 minutes twice a day is 5 hours a week, and 260 hours a year. It means that when I have a kid at Hearst and Deal I'll be walking in two totally different directions to get the kids to school instead of just up Davenport. So while I would love to send my kids to Hearst - it is definitely a problem for me from a commute perspective.

While I hear your frustration, let me submit that you're not the only parent in the city who has a sucky morning commute. Considering the fact that there are more kids in charters and in OOB slots across the District, I would argue that the majority of families here have a sucky morning commute, including this mom of three.

Life doesn't guarantee convenience.

Again, if it is that much of a hardship, apply for proximity preference.

We live on Veazy. We have kids three years apart. We also will have a kid at Hearst and a kid at Deal. Such is life. We will make it work. I'm sure you can too.

Seriously? You're complaining that the children you chose to space three years apart will not be in MS and ES together during the exact same years? You honestly think that's equivalent? SMH.

I think you missed the poster's point. The first poster was complaining that when they have children in two different schools they won't be able to walk along the same street. The next posters was merely pointing out that almost EVERYONE with 2 kids not the same age will face the problem of two different locations for school at some point, and for the VAST majority of us that won't be two schools just down the street from one another. And we do just fine.

Right, but one of them is in middle school - you're not talking about two different elementary schools. Is the difference really that difficult for you to fathom??

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Look, as a future Hearst parent I would tell the Murch parents that are concerned to visit Hearst. Ask for a meeting with the principal. Meet real parents and kids at the school, I think you will be impressed and heartened by the strong community. Please come and see for yourself, even if it is a bit of a walk or a short drive for you.

I know you love your school and I am genuinely pleased for you. I want for all families to be happy with their neighborhood schools and have easy commutes. We are happy with our neighborhood school and it is Murch. We looked at schools before we purchased - including school visits - my preference for Murch is not based on a lack of information about Hearst. I have that preference and I purchased a house in that neighborhood, just 2 blocks from the school. I would not be unhappy about these changes if I thought it would bring about better schools for everyone in the city. But I fail to see how slicing up the pie in arbitrary ways helps achieve this. And as others have pointed out, this will not go very far to alleviate crowding in Murch... some renters will move apartment buildings to stay in-bounds or rent in a different building to begin with; siblings might get grandfathered; and there is the possibility of a minimum set aside for OOB kids..... I cannot see how these will make Murch less over-crowded.

And before anyone jumps on me for my last sentence above - I fully support grandfathering of siblings. On OOB set asides - I feel like the city is using this to compensate for having had a poor housing policy for years and years so there is insufficient geographic diversity of incomes in the city and we are using kids and families to fix this and giving families long commutes and less family time which gives poorer education outcomes. Traffic is already awful in this city. On the other hand, we need to deal with the realities on the ground and on the whole, OOB set asides have a place .... but my family are going to be pushed away from a school two blocks from our house - too young to have started there yet so no grandfathering - in order to alleviate over-crowding..... but probably won't do much.

All this energy is targeted in the wrong direction. I would like to see an end to the infighting - lets band together and let the DME know we reject all of this plan in its entirety and to go back to the beginning and come up with plans that will actually fix schools, provide high quality opportunities for all the kids of the city, and support families with decent schools in their neighborhoods, with lots of extra resources in the neighborhoods that need it. And that we value diversity in our schools but our children deserve better than to have to commute across the city to fix their housing policy - we need affordable housing in all neighborhoods.

14:48 above, and I stand by what I said. It's flat out wrong for you to be pushed out of your school.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Look, as a future Hearst parent I would tell the Murch parents that are concerned to visit Hearst. Ask for a meeting with the principal. Meet real parents and kids at the school, I think you will be impressed and heartened by the strong community. Please come and see for yourself, even if it is a bit of a walk or a short drive for you.

I know you love your school and I am genuinely pleased for you. I want for all families to be happy with their neighborhood schools and have easy commutes. We are happy with our neighborhood school and it is Murch. We looked at schools before we purchased - including school visits - my preference for Murch is not based on a lack of information about Hearst. I have that preference and I purchased a house in that neighborhood, just 2 blocks from the school. I would not be unhappy about these changes if I thought it would bring about better schools for everyone in the city. But I fail to see how slicing up the pie in arbitrary ways helps achieve this. And as others have pointed out, this will not go very far to alleviate crowding in Murch... some renters will move apartment buildings to stay in-bounds or rent in a different building to begin with; siblings might get grandfathered; and there is the possibility of a minimum set aside for OOB kids..... I cannot see how these will make Murch less over-crowded.

And before anyone jumps on me for my last sentence above - I fully support grandfathering of siblings. On OOB set asides - I feel like the city is using this to compensate for having had a poor housing policy for years and years so there is insufficient geographic diversity of incomes in the city and we are using kids and families to fix this and giving families long commutes and less family time which gives poorer education outcomes. Traffic is already awful in this city. On the other hand, we need to deal with the realities on the ground and on the whole, OOB set asides have a place .... but my family are going to be pushed away from a school two blocks from our house - too young to have started there yet so no grandfathering - in order to alleviate over-crowding..... but probably won't do much.

All this energy is targeted in the wrong direction. I would like to see an end to the infighting - lets band together and let the DME know we reject all of this plan in its entirety and to go back to the beginning and come up with plans that will actually fix schools, provide high quality opportunities for all the kids of the city, and support families with decent schools in their neighborhoods, with lots of extra resources in the neighborhoods that need it. And that we value diversity in our schools but our children deserve better than to have to commute across the city to fix their housing policy - we need affordable housing in all neighborhoods.

14:48 above, and I stand by what I said. It's flat out wrong for you to be pushed out of your school.

So,?is your position that real estate provides and entitlement to a particular school that can never be. Banged for any reason?

School zones get moved all the time in different regions for a variety of reasons, Fairfax County VA is pretty notorious for it to keep schools the right size. Parents don't like it and changes need to make sense, but an entitlement?

[Anonymous]

Banged should be "changed"

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm a parent whose kid will be rezoned from Murch to Hearst and actually think that by the time my kid gets to Hearst it will be a better school than Murch (more diversity, better facilities, and smaller with no impending renovation headache). The thing I'm pissed about is the commute - whatever way you slice it it will add half an hour to my morning - that's 30 minutes less that i'll get to spend with my kids (other than the one i'm dragging along uphill to school) or get stuff done around the house or do work so that I can be blackberry free at home. It is pretty sucky that parents coming from the other side of connecticut will drive by my house as they speed down 36th street from albemarle on the other side of connecticut and park to drop their kid off at Murch. It is pretty sucky that Murch will lose the support of a close neighbor for things like their fall fair. It is pretty sucky that when I go to vote for Mayor I will be doing so at Murch, where my kids can't go to school anymore. For my family with my three young kids every minute saved is helpful. It is why we live in the city rather than commute from BFE. that 30 minutes twice a day is 5 hours a week, and 260 hours a year. It means that when I have a kid at Hearst and Deal I'll be walking in two totally different directions to get the kids to school instead of just up Davenport. So while I would love to send my kids to Hearst - it is definitely a problem for me from a commute perspective.

While I hear your frustration, let me submit that you're not the only parent in the city who has a sucky morning commute. Considering the fact that there are more kids in charters and in OOB slots across the District, I would argue that the majority of families here have a sucky morning commute, including this mom of three.

Life doesn't guarantee convenience.

Again, if it is that much of a hardship, apply for proximity preference.

We live on Veazy. We have kids three years apart. We also will have a kid at Hearst and a kid at Deal. Such is life. We will make it work. I'm sure you can too.

Seriously? You're complaining that the children you chose to space three years apart will not be in MS and ES together during the exact same years? You honestly think that's equivalent? SMH.

I think you missed the poster's point. The first poster was complaining that when they have children in two different schools they won't be able to walk along the same street. The next posters was merely pointing out that almost EVERYONE with 2 kids not the same age will face the problem of two different locations for school at some point, and for the VAST majority of us that won't be two schools just down the street from one another. And we do just fine.

Right, but one of them is in middle school - you're not talking about two different elementary schools. Is the difference really that difficult for you to fathom??

You are really missing the point of this particular discussion. The original PP WAS complaining about having to walk in different directions for her kids in middle and elementary schools. She was not talking about 2 elementary schools. So the subsequent PPs were pointing out that most people have to do this once their kids are in middle and elementary schools, and it's not a big deal. Very few people have them right next to each other, as Murch and Deal are.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Look, as a future Hearst parent I would tell the Murch parents that are concerned to visit Hearst. Ask for a meeting with the principal. Meet real parents and kids at the school, I think you will be impressed and heartened by the strong community. Please come and see for yourself, even if it is a bit of a walk or a short drive for you.

I know you love your school and I am genuinely pleased for you. I want for all families to be happy with their neighborhood schools and have easy commutes. We are happy with our neighborhood school and it is Murch. We looked at schools before we purchased - including school visits - my preference for Murch is not based on a lack of information about Hearst. I have that preference and I purchased a house in that neighborhood, just 2 blocks from the school. I would not be unhappy about these changes if I thought it would bring about better schools for everyone in the city. But I fail to see how slicing up the pie in arbitrary ways helps achieve this. And as others have pointed out, this will not go very far to alleviate crowding in Murch... some renters will move apartment buildings to stay in-bounds or rent in a different building to begin with; siblings might get grandfathered; and there is the possibility of a minimum set aside for OOB kids..... I cannot see how these will make Murch less over-crowded.

And before anyone jumps on me for my last sentence above - I fully support grandfathering of siblings. On OOB set asides - I feel like the city is using this to compensate for having had a poor housing policy for years and years so there is insufficient geographic diversity of incomes in the city and we are using kids and families to fix this and giving families long commutes and less family time which gives poorer education outcomes. Traffic is already awful in this city. On the other hand, we need to deal with the realities on the ground and on the whole, OOB set asides have a place .... but my family are going to be pushed away from a school two blocks from our house - too young to have started there yet so no grandfathering - in order to alleviate over-crowding..... but probably won't do much.

All this energy is targeted in the wrong direction. I would like to see an end to the infighting - lets band together and let the DME know we reject all of this plan in its entirety and to go back to the beginning and come up with plans that will actually fix schools, provide high quality opportunities for all the kids of the city, and support families with decent schools in their neighborhoods, with lots of extra resources in the neighborhoods that need it. And that we value diversity in our schools but our children deserve better than to have to commute across the city to fix their housing policy - we need affordable housing in all neighborhoods.

14:48 above, and I stand by what I said. It's flat out wrong for you to be pushed out of your school.

So,?is your position that real estate provides and entitlement to a particular school that can never be. Banged for any reason?

School zones get moved all the time in different regions for a variety of reasons, Fairfax County VA is pretty notorious for it to keep schools the right size. Parents don't like it and changes need to make sense, but an entitlement?

How about an extremely "reasonable expectation?" I'm afraid this entitlement language (which I don't recall Murch poster using) doesn't facilitate understanding.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Look, as a future Hearst parent I would tell the Murch parents that are concerned to visit Hearst. Ask for a meeting with the principal. Meet real parents and kids at the school, I think you will be impressed and heartened by the strong community. Please come and see for yourself, even if it is a bit of a walk or a short drive for you.

I know you love your school and I am genuinely pleased for you. I want for all families to be happy with their neighborhood schools and have easy commutes. We are happy with our neighborhood school and it is Murch. We looked at schools before we purchased - including school visits - my preference for Murch is not based on a lack of information about Hearst. I have that preference and I purchased a house in that neighborhood, just 2 blocks from the school. I would not be unhappy about these changes if I thought it would bring about better schools for everyone in the city. But I fail to see how slicing up the pie in arbitrary ways helps achieve this. And as others have pointed out, this will not go very far to alleviate crowding in Murch... some renters will move apartment buildings to stay in-bounds or rent in a different building to begin with; siblings might get grandfathered; and there is the possibility of a minimum set aside for OOB kids..... I cannot see how these will make Murch less over-crowded.

And before anyone jumps on me for my last sentence above - I fully support grandfathering of siblings. On OOB set asides - I feel like the city is using this to compensate for having had a poor housing policy for years and years so there is insufficient geographic diversity of incomes in the city and we are using kids and families to fix this and giving families long commutes and less family time which gives poorer education outcomes. Traffic is already awful in this city. On the other hand, we need to deal with the realities on the ground and on the whole, OOB set asides have a place .... but my family are going to be pushed away from a school two blocks from our house - too young to have started there yet so no grandfathering - in order to alleviate over-crowding..... but probably won't do much.

All this energy is targeted in the wrong direction. I would like to see an end to the infighting - lets band together and let the DME know we reject all of this plan in its entirety and to go back to the beginning and come up with plans that will actually fix schools, provide high quality opportunities for all the kids of the city, and support families with decent schools in their neighborhoods, with lots of extra resources in the neighborhoods that need it. And that we value diversity in our schools but our children deserve better than to have to commute across the city to fix their housing policy - we need affordable housing in all neighborhoods.

Yes, some families will choose to move into the new, smaller boundary and that will continue to overcrowd the school. But shifting the boundaries will still move children out and make the school less overcrowded than it would have otherwise been. In other words, it may still be overcrowded in this scenario, but it would have been even more overcrowded had the boundary not been shifted. I have sympathy for those families who are 2 blocks from the school and have children not yet in school. But you cannot argue that shifting boundaries will not relieve overcrowding. I find more constructive (although it has a little of a "not us, do it to them" feel) suggestions that the boundary be drawn at say Albemarle or Appleton instead of Chesapeake, and instead move the boundary north on the other side of Connecticut. Not as many families on the east side of Connecticut, but maybe they would be enough to accommodate the two block shift on the west side.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Look, as a future Hearst parent I would tell the Murch parents that are concerned to visit Hearst. Ask for a meeting with the principal. Meet real parents and kids at the school, I think you will be impressed and heartened by the strong community. Please come and see for yourself, even if it is a bit of a walk or a short drive for you.

I know you love your school and I am genuinely pleased for you. I want for all families to be happy with their neighborhood schools and have easy commutes. We are happy with our neighborhood school and it is Murch. We looked at schools before we purchased - including school visits - my preference for Murch is not based on a lack of information about Hearst. I have that preference and I purchased a house in that neighborhood, just 2 blocks from the school. I would not be unhappy about these changes if I thought it would bring about better schools for everyone in the city. But I fail to see how slicing up the pie in arbitrary ways helps achieve this. And as others have pointed out, this will not go very far to alleviate crowding in Murch... some renters will move apartment buildings to stay in-bounds or rent in a different building to begin with; siblings might get grandfathered; and there is the possibility of a minimum set aside for OOB kids..... I cannot see how these will make Murch less over-crowded.

And before anyone jumps on me for my last sentence above - I fully support grandfathering of siblings. On OOB set asides - I feel like the city is using this to compensate for having had a poor housing policy for years and years so there is insufficient geographic diversity of incomes in the city and we are using kids and families to fix this and giving families long commutes and less family time which gives poorer education outcomes. Traffic is already awful in this city. On the other hand, we need to deal with the realities on the ground and on the whole, OOB set asides have a place .... but my family are going to be pushed away from a school two blocks from our house - too young to have started there yet so no grandfathering - in order to alleviate over-crowding..... but probably won't do much.

All this energy is targeted in the wrong direction. I would like to see an end to the infighting - lets band together and let the DME know we reject all of this plan in its entirety and to go back to the beginning and come up with plans that will actually fix schools, provide high quality opportunities for all the kids of the city, and support families with decent schools in their neighborhoods, with lots of extra resources in the neighborhoods that need it. And that we value diversity in our schools but our children deserve better than to have to commute across the city to fix their housing policy - we need affordable housing in all neighborhoods.

14:48 above, and I stand by what I said. It's flat out wrong for you to be pushed out of your school.

So,?is your position that real estate provides and entitlement to a particular school that can never be. Banged for any reason?

School zones get moved all the time in different regions for a variety of reasons, Fairfax County VA is pretty notorious for it to keep schools the right size. Parents don't like it and changes need to make sense, but an entitlement?

How about an extremely "reasonable expectation?" I'm afraid this entitlement language (which I don't recall Murch poster using) doesn't facilitate understanding.

But that gets back to there better be a sound reason for making the change and the change made need to address the concern and otherwise make sense. Stating "it is flat out wrong to push" someone out of a school zone doesn't leave room for a reasonable discussion of the facts. Nobody is happy about rezoning, but the facts may necessitate it and it is not beyond reason to move school zones to address demographic shifts. I would rather focus on whether this shift is needed and done right than arguments about "you can't do this to me because I bought planning to go to this school."

[Anonymous]

Walkability is important, especially in the traffic-choked areas around Janney/Murch/Deal/Wilson. It may not seem like a big deal to those people who already have to drive to school, but, for those that walk, it is. I have to drive and I can't tell you how often I wish I could walk. I think all this angst could be avoided if the focus shifted from removing kids from their IB schools/which school is better than the others, and instead focused on making all neighborhood schools good schools - then you no longer need to even talk about IB or OOB, this school or that school.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Walkability is important, especially in the traffic-choked areas around Janney/Murch/Deal/Wilson. It may not seem like a big deal to those people who already have to drive to school, but, for those that walk, it is. I have to drive and I can't tell you how often I wish I could walk. I think all this angst could be avoided if the focus shifted from removing kids from their IB schools/which school is better than the others, and instead focused on making all neighborhood schools good schools - then you no longer need to even talk about IB or OOB, this school or that school.

+ 1

Good for the whole city.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Walkability is important, especially in the traffic-choked areas around Janney/Murch/Deal/Wilson. It may not seem like a big deal to those people who already have to drive to school, but, for those that walk, it is. I have to drive and I can't tell you how often I wish I could walk. I think all this angst could be avoided if the focus shifted from removing kids from their IB schools/which school is better than the others, and instead focused on making all neighborhood schools good schools - then you no longer need to even talk about IB or OOB, this school or that school.

+ 1

Good for the whole city.

No one has said walkability is not important, it is simply not the only or even most important issue. I am more worked up about the changing of the oyster feeder pattern and that is because of the quality issues involved. Again, no child is being removed from his/her school. Fwiw, I am not an oyster parent.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Look, as a future Hearst parent I would tell the Murch parents that are concerned to visit Hearst. Ask for a meeting with the principal. Meet real parents and kids at the school, I think you will be impressed and heartened by the strong community. Please come and see for yourself, even if it is a bit of a walk or a short drive for you.

I know you love your school and I am genuinely pleased for you. I want for all families to be happy with their neighborhood schools and have easy commutes. We are happy with our neighborhood school and it is Murch. We looked at schools before we purchased - including school visits - my preference for Murch is not based on a lack of information about Hearst. I have that preference and I purchased a house in that neighborhood, just 2 blocks from the school. I would not be unhappy about these changes if I thought it would bring about better schools for everyone in the city. But I fail to see how slicing up the pie in arbitrary ways helps achieve this. And as others have pointed out, this will not go very far to alleviate crowding in Murch... some renters will move apartment buildings to stay in-bounds or rent in a different building to begin with; siblings might get grandfathered; and there is the possibility of a minimum set aside for OOB kids..... I cannot see how these will make Murch less over-crowded.

And before anyone jumps on me for my last sentence above - I fully support grandfathering of siblings. On OOB set asides - I feel like the city is using this to compensate for having had a poor housing policy for years and years so there is insufficient geographic diversity of incomes in the city and we are using kids and families to fix this and giving families long commutes and less family time which gives poorer education outcomes. Traffic is already awful in this city. On the other hand, we need to deal with the realities on the ground and on the whole, OOB set asides have a place .... but my family are going to be pushed away from a school two blocks from our house - too young to have started there yet so no grandfathering - in order to alleviate over-crowding..... but probably won't do much.

All this energy is targeted in the wrong direction. I would like to see an end to the infighting - lets band together and let the DME know we reject all of this plan in its entirety and to go back to the beginning and come up with plans that will actually fix schools, provide high quality opportunities for all the kids of the city, and support families with decent schools in their neighborhoods, with lots of extra resources in the neighborhoods that need it. And that we value diversity in our schools but our children deserve better than to have to commute across the city to fix their housing policy - we need affordable housing in all neighborhoods.

14:48 above, and I stand by what I said. It's flat out wrong for you to be pushed out of your school.

So,?is your position that real estate provides and entitlement to a particular school that can never be. Banged for any reason?

School zones get moved all the time in different regions for a variety of reasons, Fairfax County VA is pretty notorious for it to keep schools the right size. Parents don't like it and changes need to make sense, but an entitlement?

If you read the next sentence after the bolded one...it states that their would be less unhappiness if the changes were going to bring about improvements in quality.....but when it is just change without solid reasons then we not object???

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Look, as a future Hearst parent I would tell the Murch parents that are concerned to visit Hearst. Ask for a meeting with the principal. Meet real parents and kids at the school, I think you will be impressed and heartened by the strong community. Please come and see for yourself, even if it is a bit of a walk or a short drive for you.

I know you love your school and I am genuinely pleased for you. I want for all families to be happy with their neighborhood schools and have easy commutes. We are happy with our neighborhood school and it is Murch. We looked at schools before we purchased - including school visits - my preference for Murch is not based on a lack of information about Hearst. I have that preference and I purchased a house in that neighborhood, just 2 blocks from the school. I would not be unhappy about these changes if I thought it would bring about better schools for everyone in the city. But I fail to see how slicing up the pie in arbitrary ways helps achieve this. And as others have pointed out, this will not go very far to alleviate crowding in Murch... some renters will move apartment buildings to stay in-bounds or rent in a different building to begin with; siblings might get grandfathered; and there is the possibility of a minimum set aside for OOB kids..... I cannot see how these will make Murch less over-crowded.

And before anyone jumps on me for my last sentence above - I fully support grandfathering of siblings. On OOB set asides - I feel like the city is using this to compensate for having had a poor housing policy for years and years so there is insufficient geographic diversity of incomes in the city and we are using kids and families to fix this and giving families long commutes and less family time which gives poorer education outcomes. Traffic is already awful in this city. On the other hand, we need to deal with the realities on the ground and on the whole, OOB set asides have a place .... but my family are going to be pushed away from a school two blocks from our house - too young to have started there yet so no grandfathering - in order to alleviate over-crowding..... but probably won't do much.

All this energy is targeted in the wrong direction. I would like to see an end to the infighting - lets band together and let the DME know we reject all of this plan in its entirety and to go back to the beginning and come up with plans that will actually fix schools, provide high quality opportunities for all the kids of the city, and support families with decent schools in their neighborhoods, with lots of extra resources in the neighborhoods that need it. And that we value diversity in our schools but our children deserve better than to have to commute across the city to fix their housing policy - we need affordable housing in all neighborhoods.

14:48 above, and I stand by what I said. It's flat out wrong for you to be pushed out of your school.

So,?is your position that real estate provides and entitlement to a particular school that can never be. Banged for any reason?

School zones get moved all the time in different regions for a variety of reasons, Fairfax County VA is pretty notorious for it to keep schools the right size. Parents don't like it and changes need to make sense, but an entitlement?

If you read the next sentence after the bolded one...it states that their would be less unhappiness if the changes were going to bring about improvements in quality.....but when it is just change without solid reasons then we not object???

I was responding to the post after that one, which spoke only to the "pushing people out" being wrong and was not qualified for good reason. You may note that I also said it needs to make sense not that families should be loved around willy nilly.

The schools we are talking about are crowded, and dcps does have demographic information, and they are clustered close together which drives what changes may make sense if in fact they are necessary. But if we cannot get beyond entitlement without bounds we cannot have that discussion.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Walkability is important, especially in the traffic-choked areas around Janney/Murch/Deal/Wilson. It may not seem like a big deal to those people who already have to drive to school, but, for those that walk, it is. I have to drive and I can't tell you how often I wish I could walk. I think all this angst could be avoided if the focus shifted from removing kids from their IB schools/which school is better than the others, and instead focused on making all neighborhood schools good schools - then you no longer need to even talk about IB or OOB, this school or that school.

But DME will do whatever possible to keep that from happening and keep parents squabbling, because DME is a charter fan and neighborhood schools don't fit into that.

Notice that there aren't any charters in ward 3? It's because people have been happy with their neighborhood schools. people across the city are happy with the ward 3 schools too and work just as hard to get in them as they work to get into charters.

I wouldn't be surprised if charters open soon in ward 3 -- to provide options for those shut-out neighbors and make more spaces for OOB in the ward 3 DCPS schools.

More charters, more shuffling around. How does this help you or your children?