How likely will a new mayor overturn the boundary changes?

[Anonymous]

A lot of folks are upset about boundary changes (Crestwood. Cleveland Pk/Woodley PK for Middke School) and letting the candidates know, so I coukd envision some changes there.

[Anonymous]

None of the candidates really want to fool with the boundaries. They'll stay for their term.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:A lot of folks are upset about boundary changes (Crestwood. Cleveland Pk/Woodley PK for Middke School) and letting the candidates know, so I coukd envision some changes there.

For every family that is unhappy with the boundary changes, there are two who are happy with them.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:A lot of folks are upset about boundary changes (Crestwood. Cleveland Pk/Woodley PK for Middke School) and letting the candidates know, so I coukd envision some changes there.

For every family that is unhappy with the boundary changes, there are two who are happy with them.

This

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:A lot of folks are upset about boundary changes (Crestwood. Cleveland Pk/Woodley PK for Middke School) and letting the candidates know, so I coukd envision some changes there.

For every family that is unhappy with the boundary changes, there are two who are happy with them.

This

Exactly. The polling is clear on this, and politicians pay attention to polls, especially when the numbers are so convincing. Also, +1 to the comment above that outgoing CMs have no incentive to block the changes. It would need to be a unanimous vote to overcome the mayoral veto, and there are several CMs who would never support it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:A lot of folks are upset about boundary changes (Crestwood. Cleveland Pk/Woodley PK for Middke School) and letting the candidates know, so I coukd envision some changes there.

As a Woodley resident, let me say that, while we certainly would rather feed into Deal, I understand and support the new boundaries overall. That work had to be done, and I hope the incoming major won't create major havoc by trying to revert them.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I really like our new school zone. It's going to be a great fit for us. But from the few articles I've read, it sounds like Bowser and Catania will both overturn the new school boundary changes if elected. I know no one out there has a crystal ball but does anyone have a sense on how likely this is to happen? And when would the reversal be declared? Right after they are elected? Sometime before the DCPS lottery? I'm actually thinking about moving if the redistricting is reversed.

Thanks for shedding any light at all on this.

Wow - that is different. Can I ask what change was made for you?

FWIW, I think some of the elementary boundary changes will be left alone because they're not controversial, or in your case - welcomed.

Oyster's boundary expanded southward, that would be my guess.

Could be folks who are assigned to Van Ness now instead of Amidon-Bowen, or those in Shaw and Bloomingdale who are now assigned to Cleveland ES. There are definitely some people who feel like big winners in the redistricting process. Plus people who wanted to send their kids to PK at their neighborhood Title I school probably like the DME's guarantee they'll have a space.

Bloomingdale is not assigned to Cleveland. All of Bloomingdale is assigned to Langley under the new proposals. For most of us the current situation where we have 3 inbound schools, including Seaton is preferable.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I really like our new school zone. It's going to be a great fit for us. But from the few articles I've read, it sounds like Bowser and Catania will both overturn the new school boundary changes if elected. I know no one out there has a crystal ball but does anyone have a sense on how likely this is to happen? And when would the reversal be declared? Right after they are elected? Sometime before the DCPS lottery? I'm actually thinking about moving if the redistricting is reversed.

Thanks for shedding any light at all on this.

Wow - that is different. Can I ask what change was made for you?

FWIW, I think some of the elementary boundary changes will be left alone because they're not controversial, or in your case - welcomed.

Oyster's boundary expanded southward, that would be my guess.

Could be folks who are assigned to Van Ness now instead of Amidon-Bowen, or those in Shaw and Bloomingdale who are now assigned to Cleveland ES. There are definitely some people who feel like big winners in the redistricting process. Plus people who wanted to send their kids to PK at their neighborhood Title I school probably like the DME's guarantee they'll have a space.

Bloomingdale is not assigned to Cleveland. All of Bloomingdale is assigned to Langley under the new proposals. For most of us the current situation where we have 3 inbound schools, including Seaton is preferable.

Sorry, I'm the one who wrote that after looking at http://dme.dc.gov/sites/default/files/dc/sites/dme/publication/attachments/Cleveland.pdf but I guess I don't know the boundaries of Bloomingdale. It looked like Bloomingdale to me.

[Anonymous]

Has DME Smith been fired yet? All three mayoral candidates have criticized her pet project.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I really like our new school zone. It's going to be a great fit for us. But from the few articles I've read, it sounds like Bowser and Catania will both overturn the new school boundary changes if elected. I know no one out there has a crystal ball but does anyone have a sense on how likely this is to happen? And when would the reversal be declared? Right after they are elected? Sometime before the DCPS lottery? I'm actually thinking about moving if the redistricting is reversed.

Thanks for shedding any light at all on this.

Wow - that is different. Can I ask what change was made for you?

FWIW, I think some of the elementary boundary changes will be left alone because they're not controversial, or in your case - welcomed.

Oyster's boundary expanded southward, that would be my guess.

Could be folks who are assigned to Van Ness now instead of Amidon-Bowen, or those in Shaw and Bloomingdale who are now assigned to Cleveland ES. There are definitely some people who feel like big winners in the redistricting process. Plus people who wanted to send their kids to PK at their neighborhood Title I school probably like the DME's guarantee they'll have a space.

Bloomingdale is not assigned to Cleveland. All of Bloomingdale is assigned to Langley under the new proposals. For most of us the current situation where we have 3 inbound schools, including Seaton is preferable.

Sorry, I'm the one who wrote that after looking at http://dme.dc.gov/sites/default/files/dc/sites/dme/publication/attachments/Cleveland.pdf but I guess I don't know the boundaries of Bloomingdale. It looked like Bloomingdale to me.

No. It looks like it includes a small section of Bloomingdale on the west side of First St NW which is kind of strange since the way the map is drawn, the kids on the westside of the street are zoned for Cleveland while the ones on the eastside attend Langley?!?

Doesn't really matter, most kids in Bloomingdale go to charters. I don't know anyone who attends Langley or Cleveland.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I really like our new school zone. It's going to be a great fit for us. But from the few articles I've read, it sounds like Bowser and Catania will both overturn the new school boundary changes if elected. I know no one out there has a crystal ball but does anyone have a sense on how likely this is to happen? And when would the reversal be declared? Right after they are elected? Sometime before the DCPS lottery? I'm actually thinking about moving if the redistricting is reversed.

Thanks for shedding any light at all on this.

Wow - that is different. Can I ask what change was made for you?

FWIW, I think some of the elementary boundary changes will be left alone because they're not controversial, or in your case - welcomed.

Oyster's boundary expanded southward, that would be my guess.

Could be folks who are assigned to Van Ness now instead of Amidon-Bowen, or those in Shaw and Bloomingdale who are now assigned to Cleveland ES. There are definitely some people who feel like big winners in the redistricting process. Plus people who wanted to send their kids to PK at their neighborhood Title I school probably like the DME's guarantee they'll have a space.

Bloomingdale is not assigned to Cleveland. All of Bloomingdale is assigned to Langley under the new proposals. For most of us the current situation where we have 3 inbound schools, including Seaton is preferable.

Sorry, I'm the one who wrote that after looking at http://dme.dc.gov/sites/default/files/dc/sites/dme/publication/attachments/Cleveland.pdf but I guess I don't know the boundaries of Bloomingdale. It looked like Bloomingdale to me.

No. It looks like it includes a small section of Bloomingdale on the west side of First St NW which is kind of strange since the way the map is drawn, the kids on the westside of the street are zoned for Cleveland while the ones on the eastside attend Langley?!?

Doesn't really matter, most kids in Bloomingdale go to charters. I don't know anyone who attends Langley or Cleveland.

I think you have misinterpreted the map. That map clearly shows the boundary going to 2nd St NW. That's the widely accepted boundary for Bloomingdale (Bloomingdale runs between N. Capitol and 2nd NW and from Florida ave in the south to the Macmillan Reservoir in the north).

While there's a lot of community support for Langley and has been for several years, most invested parents do indeed send their kids to charters. This past year, there has been more momentum in favor of Seaton which is also currently inbound for Bloomingdale (the southern part at least) along with Garrison. Under the proposed boundary changes we lose the right to send our kids to Seaton (and Garrison) which, in my opinion, is a shame (though my kid is in a charter - chosen because of it's specialty otherwise I'd be sending them to Seaton).