Renting but not occupying for DCPS in-boundary residency purposes?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote: Maybe this has been addressed on previous pages but I’m not reading all of those but I thought the rules changed where by someone who was in boundary but then moves out of boundary, but still resides in the district, can now continue at that school. So if that’s the case then OP could rent for one year claim in boundary status and then “move“ out of boundary for the next year and be permitted to legitimately Continue to attend the school. I would even suggest she move into the rental for that one year to enjoy a short commute and to keep everything on the up and up

Yep - we covered that on page 2

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:So far, I gather the following would be wrong:

1. If you rent a place just for the IB address and then sublet it to someone with kids, you are causing overcrowding because you are taking two slots meant for the same resident, one for your kid and one for your tenant's kid. Don't do that.
2. If you rent a place that would not fit your family (like a studio apartment if you have 5 kids), you are causing overcrowding because you are taking more slots than are planned for the size property you are renting. Don't do that either.

Other than those two scenarios, I fail to see how this is a problem. It's not like they are pulling an address out of thin air.

No one would rent a studio to a 7 member family. And if you don't live in the boundary you don't get to go to that school. It's not rocket science, really. Surely you know that if everyone did this, it would be a huge problem right. I mean why pay for private, when all you can do is rent the cheapest apartment in the great school district and go there? Some of you are really dense.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm not an address cheater and I don't take pot shots at them on these threads. At our school, what I've notice about those who bitch about alleged cheaters who pay DC taxes, and can produce the residency docs OSSE requires, is that they're:

A) not very happy people

B) jealous, even insanely jealous, of families with the wherewithal to rent IB apartments and buy 2nd homes to secure addresses for desirable public schools. There also may be other, more personal reasons, they're envious of specific alleged cheaters.

I have news for you guys, you aren't going to succeed in catching or shaming "cheaters" no matter how hard you try. They probably aren't breaking the law or OSSE rules, not as written.

If you aren't going to bother taking up the anti cheating cause with OSSE, DCPS, your DC City Council Member, or the press, you might as well be shouting down the wind.

It is amazing to me to what lengths cheaters go to shame those who question them. We aren't jealous of your home in an up-and-coming neighborhood or your commute to drop your kid off in our schools. We are pissed that you are taking resources away from our kids. Go back to your school or face the music.

Snort. I can practically see you foaming at the mouth. Down girl.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So far, I gather the following would be wrong:

1. If you rent a place just for the IB address and then sublet it to someone with kids, you are causing overcrowding because you are taking two slots meant for the same resident, one for your kid and one for your tenant's kid. Don't do that.
2. If you rent a place that would not fit your family (like a studio apartment if you have 5 kids), you are causing overcrowding because you are taking more slots than are planned for the size property you are renting. Don't do that either.

Other than those two scenarios, I fail to see how this is a problem. It's not like they are pulling an address out of thin air.

No one would rent a studio to a 7 member family. And if you don't live in the boundary you don't get to go to that school. It's not rocket science, really. Surely you know that if everyone did this, it would be a huge problem right. I mean why pay for private, when all you can do is rent the cheapest apartment in the great school district and go there? Some of you are really dense.

I don't see the problem either. Let the demographers catch up with the practices.

You make your choices, and manage risk as you see fit; other people make their own choices and take their own chances. I wouldn't risk renting an apartment to access an IB school, but I might buy real estate to do it, moving between properties as I saw fit for my tax dollars. I'm not convinced that a parent who rents a place has, gasp, more claim to an in-boundary school than a real property owner, regardless of how much time s/he spends at the property in question.

I'll leave it to you, the philosophers, epidemiologists and poets to ponder what would happen if everybody did anything in particular.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So far, I gather the following would be wrong:

1. If you rent a place just for the IB address and then sublet it to someone with kids, you are causing overcrowding because you are taking two slots meant for the same resident, one for your kid and one for your tenant's kid. Don't do that.
2. If you rent a place that would not fit your family (like a studio apartment if you have 5 kids), you are causing overcrowding because you are taking more slots than are planned for the size property you are renting. Don't do that either.

Other than those two scenarios, I fail to see how this is a problem. It's not like they are pulling an address out of thin air.

No one would rent a studio to a 7 member family. And if you don't live in the boundary you don't get to go to that school. It's not rocket science, really. Surely you know that if everyone did this, it would be a huge problem right. I mean why pay for private, when all you can do is rent the cheapest apartment in the great school district and go there? Some of you are really dense.

Define "live" as per DC law.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So far, I gather the following would be wrong:

1. If you rent a place just for the IB address and then sublet it to someone with kids, you are causing overcrowding because you are taking two slots meant for the same resident, one for your kid and one for your tenant's kid. Don't do that.
2. If you rent a place that would not fit your family (like a studio apartment if you have 5 kids), you are causing overcrowding because you are taking more slots than are planned for the size property you are renting. Don't do that either.

Other than those two scenarios, I fail to see how this is a problem. It's not like they are pulling an address out of thin air.

No one would rent a studio to a 7 member family. And if you don't live in the boundary you don't get to go to that school. It's not rocket science, really. Surely you know that if everyone did this, it would be a huge problem right. I mean why pay for private, when all you can do is rent the cheapest apartment in the great school district and go there? Some of you are really dense.

I don't see the problem either. Let the demographers catch up with the practices.

You make your choices, and manage risk as you see fit; other people make their own choices and take their own chances. I wouldn't risk renting an apartment to access an IB school, but I might buy real estate to do it, moving between properties as I saw fit for my tax dollars. I'm not convinced that a parent who rents a place has, gasp, more claim to an in-boundary school than a real property owner, regardless of how much time s/he spends at the property in question.

I'll leave it to you, the philosophers, epidemiologists and poets to ponder what would happen if everybody did anything in particular.

You are so full of shit I’m surpisef you don’t topple over.

I’m pretty sure you know it’s wrong and why it’s wrong but just refuse to admit it because you are cheating the system. Criminals always find a way to justify their crimes.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So far, I gather the following would be wrong:

1. If you rent a place just for the IB address and then sublet it to someone with kids, you are causing overcrowding because you are taking two slots meant for the same resident, one for your kid and one for your tenant's kid. Don't do that.
2. If you rent a place that would not fit your family (like a studio apartment if you have 5 kids), you are causing overcrowding because you are taking more slots than are planned for the size property you are renting. Don't do that either.

Other than those two scenarios, I fail to see how this is a problem. It's not like they are pulling an address out of thin air.

No one would rent a studio to a 7 member family. And if you don't live in the boundary you don't get to go to that school. It's not rocket science, really. Surely you know that if everyone did this, it would be a huge problem right. I mean why pay for private, when all you can do is rent the cheapest apartment in the great school district and go there? Some of you are really dense.

Define "live" as per DC law.

It’s been done over and over again. Playing stupid doesn’t work in the court of law.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:All true. You'd need to have a lot of chutzpah, and the tough-mindedness to tune out the background noise, to pull it off, OP. But it's been done many times before and, to my knowledge, the wicked survived.

There'd be virtually no background noise. In the eyes of most, you're child is an OOB student.

It's not something I would do, but this talk of play dates or other parents whispering wouldn't be the reason.

[Anonymous]

It's a little disconcerting how many of you seem unfazed by the idea of cheating the system. So much for civil society.

[Anonymous]

The purpose of the boundary system is to limit the number of families that are entitled to a spot at a particular school to be a function of the number of homes within the geographical boundary of that school. Otherwise, the entire District would be entitled to go to the single best school in the DCPS system, and there would be no way to manage capacity vs demand. Someone renting a place in-boundary of a school, even if they don't live there, just to be able to send their children to that school, doesn't defeat the purpose of the boundary system, because the properties available for rent are still a subset of the total number of properties in the school's geographical boundary, so renting them doesn't open the floodgates for everyone outside of the boundary, they still have to find a property to rent, and that property is accounted for in the capacity that the school is meant to handle.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The purpose of the boundary system is to limit the number of families that are entitled to a spot at a particular school to be a function of the number of homes within the geographical boundary of that school. Otherwise, the entire District would be entitled to go to the single best school in the DCPS system, and there would be no way to manage capacity vs demand. Someone renting a place in-boundary of a school, even if they don't live there, just to be able to send their children to that school, doesn't defeat the purpose of the boundary system, because the properties available for rent are still a subset of the total number of properties in the school's geographical boundary, so renting them doesn't open the floodgates for everyone outside of the boundary, they still have to find a property to rent, and that property is accounted for in the capacity that the school is meant to handle.

Bwahahaha you clearly have no idea how untrue that is for ward 3 schools. There is not enough space for kids who live in bounds much less cheaters.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It's a little disconcerting how many of you seem unfazed by the idea of cheating the system. So much for civil society.

The previous chancellor of the schools cheated the system. Yes, she was exercising authority she had, but we all know it was essentially cheating the system.

The the ultimate authority over DC schools is going to play fast and loose, I can't imagine why anyone else wouldn't try to get away with it if they were so inclined.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why have you decided your "conscience is clean" before knowing the rules?

My conscience is clean because I'm currently supporting the public school system through my substantial tax contributions, which is just fine by me, and I'm willing to continue doing it, but I'd like to also get some benefit from it. I do OK in terms of income, and I choose to live in an "up-and-coming" part of the city, because I don't believe in well-off people segregating themselves in their Georgetown or Kalorama islands of privilege. I want my daughter to be exposed to a richer, more diverse social environment than she currently gets at her $4K/month private school, but I'm not willing to sacrifice the quality of her education. If I can spend $1,500 on rent instead, and send her to a good public school that I'm already paying for, I won't feel an ounce of guilt about it.

Fake Trolley Bear

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It's a little disconcerting how many of you seem unfazed by the idea of cheating the system. So much for civil society.

I do see who’s in the White House, right? Why are you surprised my anything. This country is rotten from the head down.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why have you decided your "conscience is clean" before knowing the rules?

My conscience is clean because I'm currently supporting the public school system through my substantial tax contributions, which is just fine by me, and I'm willing to continue doing it, but I'd like to also get some benefit from it. I do OK in terms of income, and I choose to live in an "up-and-coming" part of the city, because I don't believe in well-off people segregating themselves in their Georgetown or Kalorama islands of privilege. I want my daughter to be exposed to a richer, more diverse social environment than she currently gets at her $4K/month private school, but I'm not willing to sacrifice the quality of her education. If I can spend $1,500 on rent instead, and send her to a good public school that I'm already paying for, I won't feel an ounce of guilt about it.

Fake Trolley Bear

You gonna do all this and subject your child to a school time of lies to get into an overcrowded school in a District that is one of the worst in the country, were only 60+ kids are passing the PARCC exam! Sure go ahead, enroll yourself, clearly you need a better education too!