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

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don’t care as much if you’re a bona fide DC paying for another DC residence and paying income taxes in DC. That’s still better than the cheater scumbags who in fact live in Pee-Gee but sneak their kids into DCPS and charters for the free child care, among other reasons. And what’s more, many of the cheating parent are scamming DC government employees.

Ah, I see. So it's okay if high SES families who own multiple properties cheat the system since they're more desirable, more likely to blend in at their school of choice--but not low SES families from "Pee-Gee."

PG County families DO NOT PAY DC taxes. Ultimate cheats!

Doesn’t PG have special privileges as Ward 9?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:DCPS is supported by the DC tax base. When high SES parents flee the city, as they did en masse in the 80s and 90s, the tax base contracts. Parents who "work the system" generally can't afford privates, at least not easily, and aren't going to leave the Metro area.

Once overcrowded DCPS schools like Janney, Lafayette and Murch, and now Maury on Cap Hill, have seen their capacity increase substantially through building additions in recent years, financed with tax payers dollars.

My vote is for everybody high SES who elects to stay using an IB address for a DCPS school they're willing to use, whatever the hassle and risk involved in securing one, to continue to pay into city coffers, rather than running off to the burbs.

A low or middle-income SES earner who's renting can't expand the tax base like a parent investing in DC real estate and paying property tax, preferably on multiple properties. The larger the tax base, the more funds available for services to the poor. The more high SES families who stay, the more high SES classmates for low SES kids who benefit from having high SES classmates, and high SES parent watchdogs and fundraisers in DCPS schools. We gain nothing as a city when high SES parents hit the road for lack of schools they're comfortable with.

No. How about -- if you're so high SES and so valuable to the city, just figure out a freakin' way to buy real estate zoned for a school you're willing to send your child to, instead of thinking you have the right to cheat because you're white and well-off.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
A low or middle-income SES earner who's renting can't expand the tax base like a parent investing in DC real estate and paying property tax, preferably on multiple properties. The larger the tax base, the more funds available for services to the poor. The more high SES families who stay, the more high SES classmates for low SES kids who benefit from having high SES classmates, and high SES parent watchdogs and fundraisers in DCPS schools. We gain nothing as a city when high SES parents hit the road for lack of schools they're comfortable with.

Not necessarily true.

Low and middle-income earner who rents is paying more proportionally in taxes (income, sales and indirect property tax) than a wealthy family who itemizes and takes advantage of tax-deferred savings vehicles.

The "best" taxpayers, from the city's perspective, are professional, childless 20- and 30-somethings who use very few city services and spend their disposable income on entertainment and restaurants. Families of all income levels, demand and consume a lot more city services, as do seniors.

Please just stop with this line of thinking. We're citizens with equal rights to public services; this does NOT depend on our tax contributions, race, or earnings. A healthy economy needs to take care of people of ALL levels, educate them, and value their contributions. A city filled with childless 20-somethings and "high SES" families only would be a terrible place to live. See SF.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don’t care as much if you’re a bona fide DC paying for another DC residence and paying income taxes in DC. That’s still better than the cheater scumbags who in fact live in Pee-Gee but sneak their kids into DCPS and charters for the free child care, among other reasons. And what’s more, many of the cheating parent are scamming DC government employees.

Ah, I see. So it's okay if high SES families who own multiple properties cheat the system since they're more desirable, more likely to blend in at their school of choice--but not low SES families from "Pee-Gee."

PG County families DO NOT PAY DC taxes. Ultimate cheats!

Doesn’t PG have special privileges as Ward 9?

Do they pay property taxes to DC? There is no Ward 9. I assume you are kidding. But no those folks committed to PG County when they moved there. If they want DC school they need to move to DC. Likewise DC folks committed to a neighborhood by renting or owning and should go to the school they are zoned for. Where does this deep sense of entitlement come from?!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don’t care as much if you’re a bona fide DC paying for another DC residence and paying income taxes in DC. That’s still better than the cheater scumbags who in fact live in Pee-Gee but sneak their kids into DCPS and charters for the free child care, among other reasons. And what’s more, many of the cheating parent are scamming DC government employees.

Ah, I see. So it's okay if high SES families who own multiple properties cheat the system since they're more desirable, more likely to blend in at their school of choice--but not low SES families from "Pee-Gee."

PG County families DO NOT PAY DC taxes. Ultimate cheats!

Doesn’t PG have special privileges as Ward 9?

Such an old and tired joke.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:DCPS is supported by the DC tax base. When high SES parents flee the city, as they did en masse in the 80s and 90s, the tax base contracts. Parents who "work the system" generally can't afford privates, at least not easily, and aren't going to leave the Metro area.

Once overcrowded DCPS schools like Janney, Lafayette and Murch, and now Maury on Cap Hill, have seen their capacity increase substantially through building additions in recent years, financed with tax payers dollars.

My vote is for everybody high SES who elects to stay using an IB address for a DCPS school they're willing to use, whatever the hassle and risk involved in securing one, to continue to pay into city coffers, rather than running off to the burbs.

A low or middle-income SES earner who's renting can't expand the tax base like a parent investing in DC real estate and paying property tax, preferably on multiple properties. The larger the tax base, the more funds available for services to the poor. The more high SES families who stay, the more high SES classmates for low SES kids who benefit from having high SES classmates, and high SES parent watchdogs and fundraisers in DCPS schools. We gain nothing as a city when high SES parents hit the road for lack of schools they're comfortable with.

No. How about -- if you're so high SES and so valuable to the city, just figure out a freakin' way to buy real estate zoned for a school you're willing to send your child to, instead of thinking you have the right to cheat because you're white and well-off.

You're the troll here, mate. The PP ADVOCATED FOR BUYING real estate. I don't have time for apartment cheaters, but have no problem with parents who buy real estate partly for zoning purposes, no matter where they sleep.

Everybody I know who gets hot under the collar about multiple property owners in our neighborhood "cheating" lives in rental housing and longs to afford to buy IB for JKLM, Ross, Oyster etc.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:DCPS is supported by the DC tax base. When high SES parents flee the city, as they did en masse in the 80s and 90s, the tax base contracts. Parents who "work the system" generally can't afford privates, at least not easily, and aren't going to leave the Metro area.

Once overcrowded DCPS schools like Janney, Lafayette and Murch, and now Maury on Cap Hill, have seen their capacity increase substantially through building additions in recent years, financed with tax payers dollars.

My vote is for everybody high SES who elects to stay using an IB address for a DCPS school they're willing to use, whatever the hassle and risk involved in securing one, to continue to pay into city coffers, rather than running off to the burbs.

A low or middle-income SES earner who's renting can't expand the tax base like a parent investing in DC real estate and paying property tax, preferably on multiple properties. The larger the tax base, the more funds available for services to the poor. The more high SES families who stay, the more high SES classmates for low SES kids who benefit from having high SES classmates, and high SES parent watchdogs and fundraisers in DCPS schools. We gain nothing as a city when high SES parents hit the road for lack of schools they're comfortable with.

No. How about -- if you're so high SES and so valuable to the city, just figure out a freakin' way to buy real estate zoned for a school you're willing to send your child to, instead of thinking you have the right to cheat because you're white and well-off.

You're the troll here, mate. The PP ADVOCATED FOR BUYING real estate. I don't have time for apartment cheaters, but have no problem with parents who buy real estate partly for zoning purposes, no matter where they sleep.

Everybody I know who gets hot under the collar about multiple property owners in our neighborhood "cheating" lives in rental housing and longs to afford to buy IB for JKLM, Ross, Oyster etc.

What's your problem with renting? There's nothing morally superior about owning vs. renting; it's a financial choice.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:DCPS is supported by the DC tax base. When high SES parents flee the city, as they did en masse in the 80s and 90s, the tax base contracts. Parents who "work the system" generally can't afford privates, at least not easily, and aren't going to leave the Metro area.

Once overcrowded DCPS schools like Janney, Lafayette and Murch, and now Maury on Cap Hill, have seen their capacity increase substantially through building additions in recent years, financed with tax payers dollars.

My vote is for everybody high SES who elects to stay using an IB address for a DCPS school they're willing to use, whatever the hassle and risk involved in securing one, to continue to pay into city coffers, rather than running off to the burbs.

A low or middle-income SES earner who's renting can't expand the tax base like a parent investing in DC real estate and paying property tax, preferably on multiple properties. The larger the tax base, the more funds available for services to the poor. The more high SES families who stay, the more high SES classmates for low SES kids who benefit from having high SES classmates, and high SES parent watchdogs and fundraisers in DCPS schools. We gain nothing as a city when high SES parents hit the road for lack of schools they're comfortable with.

No. How about -- if you're so high SES and so valuable to the city, just figure out a freakin' way to buy real estate zoned for a school you're willing to send your child to, instead of thinking you have the right to cheat because you're white and well-off.

You're the troll here, mate. The PP ADVOCATED FOR BUYING real estate. I don't have time for apartment cheaters, but have no problem with parents who buy real estate partly for zoning purposes, no matter where they sleep.

Everybody I know who gets hot under the collar about multiple property owners in our neighborhood "cheating" lives in rental housing and longs to afford to buy IB for JKLM, Ross, Oyster etc.

But wealthier folks buying extra housing to get their kids into schools in other neighborhoods (and if you can afford to buy a rental property for this purpose it also means you can afford to buy the property to live in it) are driving up housing prices and making it harder for people who would otherwise live in the neighborhood in what I guess is subpar housing since I can't otherwise understand why someone wouldn't choose to live in a house they own in the district where there kid attends school? It's hard for me to understand in what way the city benefits from people doing this and I can see all sorts of negatives to this practice.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:DCPS is supported by the DC tax base. When high SES parents flee the city, as they did en masse in the 80s and 90s, the tax base contracts. Parents who "work the system" generally can't afford privates, at least not easily, and aren't going to leave the Metro area.

Once overcrowded DCPS schools like Janney, Lafayette and Murch, and now Maury on Cap Hill, have seen their capacity increase substantially through building additions in recent years, financed with tax payers dollars.

My vote is for everybody high SES who elects to stay using an IB address for a DCPS school they're willing to use, whatever the hassle and risk involved in securing one, to continue to pay into city coffers, rather than running off to the burbs.

A low or middle-income SES earner who's renting can't expand the tax base like a parent investing in DC real estate and paying property tax, preferably on multiple properties. The larger the tax base, the more funds available for services to the poor. The more high SES families who stay, the more high SES classmates for low SES kids who benefit from having high SES classmates, and high SES parent watchdogs and fundraisers in DCPS schools. We gain nothing as a city when high SES parents hit the road for lack of schools they're comfortable with.

No. How about -- if you're so high SES and so valuable to the city, just figure out a freakin' way to buy real estate zoned for a school you're willing to send your child to, instead of thinking you have the right to cheat because you're white and well-off.

You're the troll here, mate. The PP ADVOCATED FOR BUYING real estate. I don't have time for apartment cheaters, but have no problem with parents who buy real estate partly for zoning purposes, no matter where they sleep.

Everybody I know who gets hot under the collar about multiple property owners in our neighborhood "cheating" lives in rental housing and longs to afford to buy IB for JKLM, Ross, Oyster etc.

But wealthier folks buying extra housing to get their kids into schools in other neighborhoods (and if you can afford to buy a rental property for this purpose it also means you can afford to buy the property to live in it) are driving up housing prices and making it harder for people who would otherwise live in the neighborhood in what I guess is subpar housing since I can't otherwise understand why someone wouldn't choose to live in a house they own in the district where there kid attends school? It's hard for me to understand in what way the city benefits from people doing this and I can see all sorts of negatives to this practice.

You know what drives up housing prices? Demand. Demand drives up prices. No matter who is buying. There is nothing special about people who would otherwise live in the neighborhood if they only could afford it. We would all otherwise live somewhere different. You either can buy property or you can't, it's a dollar and cent decision, not a value one.

[Anonymous]

I'm sorry you can't afford new counter tops but the boundary cheaters aren't to blame.

[Anonymous]

No, there's nothing morally superior about owning vs. renting. But it's much more than a financial choice, at least for high SES parents who plan to stick around DC for more than a school year or two. When you buy a residential property, not primarily as a rental or an investment property, you make a commitment to sinking down roots in a place, at least for a while. You have skin in the game.

I'm not impressed with those who rent apartments simply to gain school and tax addresses. I certainly wouldn't tattle on such a parent to DCPS, but I wouldn't want to associate with them either.

[Anonymous]

Renting little apartments to gain access to desirable schools isn't uncommon in metro regions all around the world. Talk to uber educated parents who live in London or Paris. In NYC, things are much worse. Parents of 4 year olds pay consultants hundreds of dollars an hour to prep the poor kids for exams to access gifted K -5 programs/schools.

[Anonymous]

It’s fraud and if you get caught, you’ll be fined and forced to pay each years tuition for each child...

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It’s fraud and if you get caught, you’ll be fined and forced to pay each years tuition for each child...

Nope. You will not be charged tuition if you are a DC taxpayer who is caught. That only happens to non-DC residents.

You would have to return to your IB school.

[Anonymous]

Does anybody who isn't a senior city official/friend of Kaya get caught "boundary hopping" if the parents can produce a bunch of residency docs linking the family to an in boundary address? Not just the enrollment documents like utilities bills and DC withholding, but sevearl years of certified DC tax returns, car registration etc. they have to produce if DCPS investigates.

I've seen media reports about non-DC residents getting caught sending kids to DCPS and charter schools. The kids get thrown out, and sometimes the parents get charged back tuition, and maybe even face criminal charges.

In my 15 years in DC, I haven't heard of any ordinary boundary jumpers' kids getting tossed out of schools.