If you get in nowhere, what next?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Honestly - It's called planning. You need to move to a desirable school, just like the rest of us. You can't have your cheap house and fantastic school, unfortunately. We don't even own yet because of this. We could afford a place in a bad neighborhood, with bad schools. We decided to rent in a desirable area. These were your choices.

While the above response seems a little abrupt, I have to agree that we viewed the choices as outlined above -- buying a cheap house we could afford in marginal neighborhood downtown with crappy schools (or cheap house way out in the burbs with a mediocre school), the gamble of getting into private school or renting a smaller home/apartment in a school district we liked. We chose the latter. Sucks that we don't own a house and are so old, that is perhaps not the wisest financial choice (although I've begun to feel a lot better about it since the market meltdown). But, we do love the public school we chose and hope to buy a house somewhere some day.....

Not all folks bought homes when they had kids. Look, I think the "honestly" poster could've conveyed the same intent, but in a different tone. The poster could've suggested that the parent, if a home owner, may need to put house on market or rent it out in order that the family relocate to a neighborhood with a stronger school. The family may need to rent if they are unable to afford a home in the school district. Alas, I was left with the impression that "honestly" was more interested in sniping at the poster rather than providing some constructive suggestions to a distraught parent.

[Anonymous]

What's unhelpful about some of the prior posts on this board is not that they're harsh -- harsh can be very helpful; sometimes it's the only thing that is -- but that they're backward-looking. What matters is not some prior decision, but what the options are now. And now you have three options: 1. deal; 2. pay; 3. move. Deal with your in-boundary school for at least a year, pay for an independent/parochial school, or move to a better school district. Those choices may all be suboptimal (or they might not -- your DC might luck into a fabulous teacher in your "lousy" neighborhood school, e.g.), but they're pretty much what's on the table: You ought to research the heck out of all three and then make the best decision you can for your family.

Good luck!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:What's unhelpful about some of the prior posts on this board is not that they're harsh -- harsh can be very helpful; sometimes it's the only thing that is -- but that they're backward-looking. What matters is not some prior decision, but what the options are now. And now you have three options: 1. deal; 2. pay; 3. move. Deal with your in-boundary school for at least a year, pay for an independent/parochial school, or move to a better school district. Those choices may all be suboptimal (or they might not -- your DC might luck into a fabulous teacher in your "lousy" neighborhood school, e.g.), but they're pretty much what's on the table: You ought to research the heck out of all three and then make the best decision you can for your family.

Good luck!

I'm 10:04. I think I was suggesting that "honestly" could have made forward thinking suggestions....

[Anonymous]

I just re-read the OP. I don't think the poster is actually IN the situation described, it appears to be a rhetorical question, one full of plaintive musing.

But one answer to the question for someone actually in that situation could be to move. There are 8 gajillion apartments for rent in DC zipcodes that feed DC's best schools, all up and down Mass Ave, Wisconsin and Connecticut. Some are not luxury prices.

LOTS of parents of modest means rent in these various big buildings.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Not all folks bought homes when they had kids. Look, I think the "honestly" poster could've conveyed the same intent, but in a different tone. The poster could've suggested that the parent, if a home owner, may need to put house on market or rent it out in order that the family relocate to a neighborhood with a stronger school. The family may need to rent if they are unable to afford a home in the school district. Alas, I was left with the impression that "honestly" was more interested in sniping at the poster rather than providing some constructive suggestions to a distraught parent.

Exactly! Look, a lot of singles and/or couples bought houses in gentrifying neighborhoods because they wanted to live near downtown, wanted to re-hab an old house, wanted a cool neighborhood; marriage and children weren't even on their radar screen. There are a lot of reasons that people are where they are, and it's no kind of a failure to think or plan because of it. The backwards-looking ferret-carrying poster doesn't seem to realize that not everyone has made her decisions and mistakes, nor do they have her regrets and resultant bitterness and hostility.

Plenty of us are quite happy - thank you very much! - in our "relatively" cheap downtown homes (only in DC - and maybe NY & SF - is $500K a "cheap" house...) and don't feel we're out of line to demand good schools. And on top of that every time you look up information on schools, charter schools show up in the news. You hear about so many great ones, so many interesting choices and you don't realize how daunting the odds are until you're in the middle of it all. Honestly some of these schools have more applicants than all the OOBs for Janney/Key/Lafayette/Mann/Murch COMBINED.

If I were in the OP's shoes I would probably find a quick easy rental near a school I liked just to establish residency and enroll inbounds. After a few months we'd "buy a house OOB" and move back to our home. Sublet the temporary place until the lease ran out. It would be a pain, but worth it. Everyone knows that as long as the child isn't a behavior problem, it's politically untenable for the principal to ask the child to leave. After all, what's the difference really between that child and an OOB child who got lucky through the lottery? Nothing except that the parents are SERIOUSLY dedicated if they've gone through that much hassle to get into the school! Maybe the neighbors like the bitter ferret-carrier would be angry, but who cares? Educating children is the reason people like school principals go into education as a career, and being able to assist the children of the not-incredibly-wealthy OOB students who successfully gamed the system doesn't make them break a sweat. Trust me on that.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Not all folks bought homes when they had kids. Look, I think the "honestly" poster could've conveyed the same intent, but in a different tone. The poster could've suggested that the parent, if a home owner, may need to put house on market or rent it out in order that the family relocate to a neighborhood with a stronger school. The family may need to rent if they are unable to afford a home in the school district. Alas, I was left with the impression that "honestly" was more interested in sniping at the poster rather than providing some constructive suggestions to a distraught parent.

Exactly! Look, a lot of singles and/or couples bought houses in gentrifying neighborhoods because they wanted to live near downtown, wanted to re-hab an old house, wanted a cool neighborhood; marriage and children weren't even on their radar screen. There are a lot of reasons that people are where they are, and it's no kind of a failure to think or plan because of it. The backwards-looking ferret-carrying poster doesn't seem to realize that not everyone has made her decisions and mistakes, nor do they have her regrets and resultant bitterness and hostility.

Plenty of us are quite happy - thank you very much! - in our "relatively" cheap downtown homes (only in DC - and maybe NY & SF - is $500K a "cheap" house...) and don't feel we're out of line to demand good schools. And on top of that every time you look up information on schools, charter schools show up in the news. You hear about so many great ones, so many interesting choices and you don't realize how daunting the odds are until you're in the middle of it all. Honestly some of these schools have more applicants than all the OOBs for Janney/Key/Lafayette/Mann/Murch COMBINED.

If I were in the OP's shoes I would probably find a quick easy rental near a school I liked just to establish residency and enroll inbounds. After a few months we'd "buy a house OOB" and move back to our home. Sublet the temporary place until the lease ran out. It would be a pain, but worth it. Everyone knows that as long as the child isn't a behavior problem, it's politically untenable for the principal to ask the child to leave. After all, what's the difference really between that child and an OOB child who got lucky through the lottery? Nothing except that the parents are SERIOUSLY dedicated if they've gone through that much hassle to get into the school! Maybe the neighbors like the bitter ferret-carrier would be angry, but who cares? Educating children is the reason people like school principals go into education as a career, and being able to assist the children of the not-incredibly-wealthy OOB students who successfully gamed the system doesn't make them break a sweat. Trust me on that.

You sound entitled and totally misinformed, nevermind the fact that you're advocating something that's illegal. And - the fact that you think a principal would support this means your head is really in the sand. If the OP were SO INVOLVED and the parent who would be willing to go through all of the trouble to rent an apartment for a few mos is so involved - then why don't they work their magic and put their energies into helping buuild up their ZONED SCHOOL???? 33% of DC kids go to a charter. It's not en mass, yet. There are PLENTY of chances to get invovled in your neighborhood (YES - even before a person has children - because families drive up home values and make for a nice community). Go get on the PTA, bang some drums at DCPS meetings. It's NOT HARD. Heck - it's a hell of a lot easier than commuting clear across the city everyday to a school that isn't your own and lyiong about it in the process.

You don't like the system? then change the system. Don't "one up" corruption and unbalanced schooling by doing your own corrupt action.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:You sound entitled and totally misinformed, nevermind the fact that you're advocating something that's illegal. And - the fact that you think a principal would support this means your head is really in the sand. If the OP were SO INVOLVED and the parent who would be willing to go through all of the trouble to rent an apartment for a few mos is so involved - then why don't they work their magic and put their energies into helping buuild up their ZONED SCHOOL???? 33% of DC kids go to a charter. It's not en mass, yet. There are PLENTY of chances to get invovled in your neighborhood (YES - even before a person has children - because families drive up home values and make for a nice community). Go get on the PTA, bang some drums at DCPS meetings. It's NOT HARD. Heck - it's a hell of a lot easier than commuting clear across the city everyday to a school that isn't your own and lyiong about it in the process.

You don't like the system? then change the system. Don't "one up" corruption and unbalanced schooling by doing your own corrupt action.

You are hilarious. Illegal? Get real. There is nothing illegal about owning one property and renting another. There is nothing illegal in moving from one domicile to another and back. There is no law being broken here. The system is what it is, and playing it is not corrupt. Corrupt would be paying someone in the school to move up on the waitlist. This is simply playing the game and you know what they say - don't hate the player, hate the game.

[Anonymous]

Too bad the players make the game. The players can refuse to play by shitty rules.

What you are proposing is unethical and will not stop the problem. I'ts narrow minded and selfish. Why don't you actually propose something useful for the schools instead of what could work for a family or 2?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Too bad the players make the game. The players can refuse to play by shitty rules.

What you are proposing is unethical and will not stop the problem. I'ts narrow minded and selfish. Why don't you actually propose something useful for the schools instead of what could work for a family or 2?

Your moralizing could not impress me less. It's very easy to get on your high horse when it's someone else's child whose education is at stake. How quick are you to throw your own child to the wolves, I wonder? And yet you pontificate about someone else's decisions - as long as they support your best interests. Look if you're so anxious to improve the schools why aren't YOU doing it instead of maximizing your chances at the one you like best? I'm just advising the OP to do the same thing.

Listen, I'm NOT advocating breaking any laws or violating any codes. I'm NOT suggesting something remotely illegal. These are THE RULES OF THE GAME. This is THE SYSTEM. It is what it is. Do with that what you like. Me, within the confines of the law I would look to my own child first and worry about the anonymous opinions of a group of nosy old hens on DCUM later (if at all).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Not all folks bought homes when they had kids. Look, I think the "honestly" poster could've conveyed the same intent, but in a different tone. The poster could've suggested that the parent, if a home owner, may need to put house on market or rent it out in order that the family relocate to a neighborhood with a stronger school. The family may need to rent if they are unable to afford a home in the school district. Alas, I was left with the impression that "honestly" was more interested in sniping at the poster rather than providing some constructive suggestions to a distraught parent.

Exactly! Look, a lot of singles and/or couples bought houses in gentrifying neighborhoods because they wanted to live near downtown, wanted to re-hab an old house, wanted a cool neighborhood; marriage and children weren't even on their radar screen. There are a lot of reasons that people are where they are, and it's no kind of a failure to think or plan because of it. The backwards-looking ferret-carrying poster doesn't seem to realize that not everyone has made her decisions and mistakes, nor do they have her regrets and resultant bitterness and hostility.

Plenty of us are quite happy - thank you very much! - in our "relatively" cheap downtown homes (only in DC - and maybe NY & SF - is $500K a "cheap" house...) and don't feel we're out of line to demand good schools. And on top of that every time you look up information on schools, charter schools show up in the news. You hear about so many great ones, so many interesting choices and you don't realize how daunting the odds are until you're in the middle of it all. Honestly some of these schools have more applicants than all the OOBs for Janney/Key/Lafayette/Mann/Murch COMBINED.

If I were in the OP's shoes I would probably find a quick easy rental near a school I liked just to establish residency and enroll inbounds. After a few months we'd "buy a house OOB" and move back to our home. Sublet the temporary place until the lease ran out. It would be a pain, but worth it. Everyone knows that as long as the child isn't a behavior problem, it's politically untenable for the principal to ask the child to leave. After all, what's the difference really between that child and an OOB child who got lucky through the lottery? Nothing except that the parents are SERIOUSLY dedicated if they've gone through that much hassle to get into the school! Maybe the neighbors like the bitter ferret-carrier would be angry, but who cares? Educating children is the reason people like school principals go into education as a career, and being able to assist the children of the not-incredibly-wealthy OOB students who successfully gamed the system doesn't make them break a sweat. Trust me on that.

You sound entitled and totally misinformed, nevermind the fact that you're advocating something that's illegal. And - the fact that you think a principal would support this means your head is really in the sand. If the OP were SO INVOLVED and the parent who would be willing to go through all of the trouble to rent an apartment for a few mos is so involved - then why don't they work their magic and put their energies into helping buuild up their ZONED SCHOOL???? 33% of DC kids go to a charter. It's not en mass, yet. There are PLENTY of chances to get invovled in your neighborhood (YES - even before a person has children - because families drive up home values and make for a nice community). Go get on the PTA, bang some drums at DCPS meetings. It's NOT HARD. Heck - it's a hell of a lot easier than commuting clear across the city everyday to a school that isn't your own and lyiong about it in the process.

You don't like the system? then change the system. Don't "one up" corruption and unbalanced schooling by doing your own corrupt action.

New poster confirming that this practice is perfectly legal and done all the time. Families choose living arrangements according to their needs, one of which is access to decent schools. Part of DC's student population is highly transient anyway. This allows them to continue their schooling without disruption.

Also, principals want to pack their schools with high-achieving children who will score well on the tests. Principals hardly have the luxury of sanctimoniousness-- they have to scramble for resources, including bright students, more than anyone else. Assuming you're confident your child will be an asset to the school, you need have no worry that the principal will exercise her privilege to remove an out-of-boundary student. If the child is a behavior problem, has attendance issues, this is grounds for removal. Perhaps it is even wise to assume that parents of students who are less of an asset for learning limitation reasons will also need to watch their backs, although thickness alone isn't grounds for dismissal!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Not all folks bought homes when they had kids. Look, I think the "honestly" poster could've conveyed the same intent, but in a different tone. The poster could've suggested that the parent, if a home owner, may need to put house on market or rent it out in order that the family relocate to a neighborhood with a stronger school. The family may need to rent if they are unable to afford a home in the school district. Alas, I was left with the impression that "honestly" was more interested in sniping at the poster rather than providing some constructive suggestions to a distraught parent.

Exactly! Look, a lot of singles and/or couples bought houses in gentrifying neighborhoods because they wanted to live near downtown, wanted to re-hab an old house, wanted a cool neighborhood; marriage and children weren't even on their radar screen. There are a lot of reasons that people are where they are, and it's no kind of a failure to think or plan because of it. The backwards-looking ferret-carrying poster doesn't seem to realize that not everyone has made her decisions and mistakes, nor do they have her regrets and resultant bitterness and hostility.

Plenty of us are quite happy - thank you very much! - in our "relatively" cheap downtown homes (only in DC - and maybe NY & SF - is $500K a "cheap" house...) and don't feel we're out of line to demand good schools. And on top of that every time you look up information on schools, charter schools show up in the news. You hear about so many great ones, so many interesting choices and you don't realize how daunting the odds are until you're in the middle of it all. Honestly some of these schools have more applicants than all the OOBs for Janney/Key/Lafayette/Mann/Murch COMBINED.

If I were in the OP's shoes I would probably find a quick easy rental near a school I liked just to establish residency and enroll inbounds. After a few months we'd "buy a house OOB" and move back to our home. Sublet the temporary place until the lease ran out. It would be a pain, but worth it. Everyone knows that as long as the child isn't a behavior problem, it's politically untenable for the principal to ask the child to leave. After all, what's the difference really between that child and an OOB child who got lucky through the lottery? Nothing except that the parents are SERIOUSLY dedicated if they've gone through that much hassle to get into the school! Maybe the neighbors like the bitter ferret-carrier would be angry, but who cares? Educating children is the reason people like school principals go into education as a career, and being able to assist the children of the not-incredibly-wealthy OOB students who successfully gamed the system doesn't make them break a sweat. Trust me on that.

You sound entitled and totally misinformed, nevermind the fact that you're advocating something that's illegal. And - the fact that you think a principal would support this means your head is really in the sand. If the OP were SO INVOLVED and the parent who would be willing to go through all of the trouble to rent an apartment for a few mos is so involved - then why don't they work their magic and put their energies into helping buuild up their ZONED SCHOOL???? 33% of DC kids go to a charter. It's not en mass, yet. There are PLENTY of chances to get invovled in your neighborhood (YES - even before a person has children - because families drive up home values and make for a nice community). Go get on the PTA, bang some drums at DCPS meetings. It's NOT HARD. Heck - it's a hell of a lot easier than commuting clear across the city everyday to a school that isn't your own and lyiong about it in the process.

You don't like the system? then change the system. Don't "one up" corruption and unbalanced schooling by doing your own corrupt action.

New poster confirming that this practice is perfectly legal and done all the time. Families choose living arrangements according to their needs, one of which is access to decent schools. Part of DC's student population is highly transient anyway. This allows them to continue their schooling without disruption.

Also, principals want to pack their schools with high-achieving children who will score well on the tests. Principals hardly have the luxury of sanctimoniousness-- they have to scramble for resources, including bright students, more than anyone else. Assuming you're confident your child will be an asset to the school, you need have no worry that the principal will exercise her privilege to remove an out-of-boundary student. If the child is a behavior problem, has attendance issues, this is grounds for removal. Perhaps it is even wise to assume that parents of students who are less of an asset for learning limitation reasons will also need to watch their backs, although thickness alone isn't grounds for dismissal!

It is actually AGAINST DCPS regulations. And they DO check. Don't ruin it for the rest of us. The schools are already bursting at the seams and full of fmailies who sacrifice and make choices in order to send their kids to the best school for their child. Just because you think YOU deserve something doesn't mean that it's right. Your actions have an effect on others.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Not all folks bought homes when they had kids. Look, I think the "honestly" poster could've conveyed the same intent, but in a different tone. The poster could've suggested that the parent, if a home owner, may need to put house on market or rent it out in order that the family relocate to a neighborhood with a stronger school. The family may need to rent if they are unable to afford a home in the school district. Alas, I was left with the impression that "honestly" was more interested in sniping at the poster rather than providing some constructive suggestions to a distraught parent.

Exactly! Look, a lot of singles and/or couples bought houses in gentrifying neighborhoods because they wanted to live near downtown, wanted to re-hab an old house, wanted a cool neighborhood; marriage and children weren't even on their radar screen. There are a lot of reasons that people are where they are, and it's no kind of a failure to think or plan because of it. The backwards-looking ferret-carrying poster doesn't seem to realize that not everyone has made her decisions and mistakes, nor do they have her regrets and resultant bitterness and hostility.

Plenty of us are quite happy - thank you very much! - in our "relatively" cheap downtown homes (only in DC - and maybe NY & SF - is $500K a "cheap" house...) and don't feel we're out of line to demand good schools. And on top of that every time you look up information on schools, charter schools show up in the news. You hear about so many great ones, so many interesting choices and you don't realize how daunting the odds are until you're in the middle of it all. Honestly some of these schools have more applicants than all the OOBs for Janney/Key/Lafayette/Mann/Murch COMBINED.

If I were in the OP's shoes I would probably find a quick easy rental near a school I liked just to establish residency and enroll inbounds. After a few months we'd "buy a house OOB" and move back to our home. Sublet the temporary place until the lease ran out. It would be a pain, but worth it. Everyone knows that as long as the child isn't a behavior problem, it's politically untenable for the principal to ask the child to leave. After all, what's the difference really between that child and an OOB child who got lucky through the lottery? Nothing except that the parents are SERIOUSLY dedicated if they've gone through that much hassle to get into the school! Maybe the neighbors like the bitter ferret-carrier would be angry, but who cares? Educating children is the reason people like school principals go into education as a career, and being able to assist the children of the not-incredibly-wealthy OOB students who successfully gamed the system doesn't make them break a sweat. Trust me on that.

You sound entitled and totally misinformed, nevermind the fact that you're advocating something that's illegal. And - the fact that you think a principal would support this means your head is really in the sand. If the OP were SO INVOLVED and the parent who would be willing to go through all of the trouble to rent an apartment for a few mos is so involved - then why don't they work their magic and put their energies into helping buuild up their ZONED SCHOOL???? 33% of DC kids go to a charter. It's not en mass, yet. There are PLENTY of chances to get invovled in your neighborhood (YES - even before a person has children - because families drive up home values and make for a nice community). Go get on the PTA, bang some drums at DCPS meetings. It's NOT HARD. Heck - it's a hell of a lot easier than commuting clear across the city everyday to a school that isn't your own and lyiong about it in the process.

You don't like the system? then change the system. Don't "one up" corruption and unbalanced schooling by doing your own corrupt action.

New poster confirming that this practice is perfectly legal and done all the time. Families choose living arrangements according to their needs, one of which is access to decent schools. Part of DC's student population is highly transient anyway. This allows them to continue their schooling without disruption.

Also, principals want to pack their schools with high-achieving children who will score well on the tests. Principals hardly have the luxury of sanctimoniousness-- they have to scramble for resources, including bright students, more than anyone else. Assuming you're confident your child will be an asset to the school, you need have no worry that the principal will exercise her privilege to remove an out-of-boundary student. If the child is a behavior problem, has attendance issues, this is grounds for removal. Perhaps it is even wise to assume that parents of students who are less of an asset for learning limitation reasons will also need to watch their backs, although thickness alone isn't grounds for dismissal!

it's not a living arrangement. Unless you're going to send your kid to live alone in a studio for a few months. It's a scam. PLain and simple.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

It is actually AGAINST DCPS regulations. And they DO check. Don't ruin it for the rest of us. The schools are already bursting at the seams and full of fmailies who sacrifice and make choices in order to send their kids to the best school for their child. Just because you think YOU deserve something doesn't mean that it's right. Your actions have an effect on others.

Sure they check - they verify you live where you claim to live. That's why you actually have to go to the trouble to sign a lease inbounds. That way you can show them your lease document in, say, Chevy Chase instead of your mortgage documents in Petworth (as opposed to just CLAIMING to live in Chevy Chase when you really live in Petworth). But they don't run some kind of check to verify that you don't in fact own any other property in the District. And if you did, so what? More than one family in this town owns more than one property. You live where you have the documents to prove you live. So lease someplace you want your child to go to school. As long as you're a DC tax-payer your child deserves a free public education at the best public school you can get into. If you want to restrict school zones only to property owners inbounds (as opposed to lease-holders) then be my guest trying to push that bill through the council but I've got $1,000 right here and now that says Marion Barry will see you burn in hell first.

[Anonymous]

14:52 here-- The families actually live in these rental properties, of course, so there is no fraud. They may or may not own property elsewhere. If they choose to move at some point, the child is commonly switched to out-of-boundary status. Principals will make continuity for the student a priority. They will also make retaining a high-scoring student a priority.

My family did not need to do this, but I am sympathetic.

[Anonymous]

Same PP- This is really a solution for families that are not yet settled as homeowners in DC, especially if they have recently moved from elsewhere.