Janney PTA giving 10% of money to some sister school?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm very active in our PTA (not Janney) and have observed many schools EOTP don't really have function PTAs. What are those of use more fortunate supposed to do: Cut a check to the school front office?

I seriously doubt many of those schools have the facility to handle funds transparently and with reasonable accountability.

Yes- the schools under discussion don't even have PTAs so really the entire idea is just theoretical.

Wait, what? Some do.

Quite a few don't. Or they have a PTA, but it hasn't gone through the whole process to get incorporated through DC and then get 501(c)(3) status. I've helped a couple DCPS got through the process. I should get back into volunteering to do it for others. Of course it can make a tremendous difference, but often no one at these schools realize that. They will donate to the school as they can-- buy the teachers books and extra supplies, host school wide events, etc.-- out of their own pocket, but they miss out on grants and big community donations without the 501(c)(3) status.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Does Janney not have a listserv?

Plenty of information and discussion has happened on Janney's list. Please join it and enter the conversation there.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm very active in our PTA (not Janney) and have observed many schools EOTP don't really have function PTAs. What are those of use more fortunate supposed to do: Cut a check to the school front office?

I seriously doubt many of those schools have the facility to handle funds transparently and with reasonable accountability.

Work directly with the teachers or a representative from the parents who can manage that. But then what they need. The first $1,000 is probably the most impactful.

Well, as other threads have mentioned, most WOTP schools already do this.

Someone seems to be advocating that a PTA cut an undesignated check of donor money, which was collected under a system to which laws and fiduciary obligations apply, to an individual unrelated to the organization with no fiduciary responsibility to the donors or the ultimate donee, to do ... whatever. Obviously, that can't legally happen, so the whole Kojo show struck me as peculiar since you would expect someone on the show to understand this! We are a city full of lawyers after all. So instead, these schools help to meet the needs of other schools through other legal means, such as the one you suggested. They reach out, identify a need at the school, and then ask their parents to meet that specific need separately, not through previously donated funds that were given for a totally different purpose.

Fundraising is not for "fun" -- it comes with legal strings attached. It is a big part of why PTAs are 501(c)(3) organizations and have insurance too. Going forward, there are legal ways to handle a "sister school" situation, but until that is set up under the bylaws and with proper voting, etc. etc., the funds are claimed.

Holy sh!t, this! A hundred times this!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I find the entire discussion a distraction. Public education should be funded with public dollars, paid for by taxes on all citizens. What people are proposing is effectively a tax, but on a narrow tax base -- PTA funds raised by a small subset of schools. Why should those funds be taxed more than other funds? We should be advocating for higher taxes (or a reallocation of spending) to support schools if we think we don't have enough resources.

This!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I find the entire discussion a distraction. Public education should be funded with public dollars, paid for by taxes on all citizens. What people are proposing is effectively a tax, but on a narrow tax base -- PTA funds raised by a small subset of schools. Why should those funds be taxed more than other funds? We should be advocating for higher taxes (or a reallocation of spending) to support schools if we think we don't have enough resources.

This!

DC already has the highest taxes in the country. DCPS is the lowest performing district behind Mississippi. (Note that DC charters and privates are not included. Also, that upper NW DCPS elementaries are the district's saving grace.) Raising taxes isn't going to help - it's going to further gut the middle class that is finally returning to the city. WE HAVE THE MONEY. We're not spending it well. These are different issues.

Proof? We're about to flush $200 million down Coolidge HS so that 300 10th grade students who can't read at an 8th grade level or do 5th grade math can fail to learn surrounded by infrastructure.

Why? Because the menopausal set in upper ward 4 has sentimental feelings for the high school they once attended - despite it being a rail stop on the high-school-to-prison pipeline. Even the former principal at Coolidge is a criminal.

We don't need to spend more. We need to stop wasting what we spend.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I find the entire discussion a distraction. Public education should be funded with public dollars, paid for by taxes on all citizens. What people are proposing is effectively a tax, but on a narrow tax base -- PTA funds raised by a small subset of schools. Why should those funds be taxed more than other funds? We should be advocating for higher taxes (or a reallocation of spending) to support schools if we think we don't have enough resources.

This!

DC already has the highest taxes in the country. DCPS is the lowest performing district behind Mississippi. (Note that DC charters and privates are not included. Also, that upper NW DCPS elementaries are the district's saving grace.) Raising taxes isn't going to help - it's going to further gut the middle class that is finally returning to the city. WE HAVE THE MONEY. We're not spending it well. These are different issues.

Proof? We're about to flush $200 million down Coolidge HS so that 300 10th grade students who can't read at an 8th grade level or do 5th grade math can fail to learn surrounded by infrastructure.

Why? Because the menopausal set in upper ward 4 has sentimental feelings for the high school they once attended - despite it being a rail stop on the high-school-to-prison pipeline. Even the former principal at Coolidge is a criminal.

We don't need to spend more. We need to stop wasting what we spend.

And this is why parents want to fund raise privately to a school PTA to direct dollars to activities that will fund worthwhile and needed activities in their school. Sadly, while I would be willing to pay higher property taxes for better public schools in theory, I don't trust the DC govt or DC school system to spend my dollars wisely (and don't think there's sufficient accountability- political or otherwise- around the funds. See Duke Ellington, $$$ spent on renovating schools that have low enrollment, political reality that DC will never add another ES in upper NW although the schools are massive and bursting at the seams).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Janney parents already fund less 'privileged' schools. It's called paying 'bigly' DC income, property & sales taxes.

And families at Title I schools also pay taxes. The Janney extension and reno wasn't paid for by the PTA. The teachers and staff aren't paid bonuses by the PTA. Your property values are directly linked to a public school funded by the public.

If you don't want to donate, fine. But don't play the victim.

actually a lot of them don't pay taxes because they don't make enough money. There is real poverty in DC if you haven't noticed. I am not a janney parent and I don't think should feel shamed at all. They did the work, raised the funds and they can do what the want. and yes, if they live IB, they are likely payin more in income tax and property tax than most families in high poverty neighborhoods. doesn't mean anything other than its just a fact.

I agree with this statement. I don't live anywhere near the Janney zone, and I find most Janney parents really annoying. That said, it is their money and they should use it for their children. Poor children get Title 1 funding. I am more worried about schools without title one funding and without a rich PTA.

Based on meeting actual parents IRL or on this board?

That's like my judging all Hill parents for all the crazy stuff I read on those threads or all EOTP parents who complain about their IB school with veiled racist comments (what's the FARMS %? What's the percentage of white kids? What's the OOB %?) while all the while patting themselves on the back for how progressive they are living in their $1M house in Mt Peasant.

Based on parents I know and still know in real life. I have been to many a Janney birthday party where people made veiled or not so veiled racist comments as well.

And to the confused PP, Mount pleasant is some distance from Capitol Hill.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Janney parents already fund less 'privileged' schools. It's called paying 'bigly' DC income, property & sales taxes.

And families at Title I schools also pay taxes. The Janney extension and reno wasn't paid for by the PTA. The teachers and staff aren't paid bonuses by the PTA. Your property values are directly linked to a public school funded by the public.

If you don't want to donate, fine. But don't play the victim.

actually a lot of them don't pay taxes because they don't make enough money. There is real poverty in DC if you haven't noticed. I am not a janney parent and I don't think should feel shamed at all. They did the work, raised the funds and they can do what the want. and yes, if they live IB, they are likely payin more in income tax and property tax than most families in high poverty neighborhoods. doesn't mean anything other than its just a fact.

I agree with this statement. I don't live anywhere near the Janney zone, and I find most Janney parents really annoying. That said, it is their money and they should use it for their children. Poor children get Title 1 funding. I am more worried about schools without title one funding and without a rich PTA.

Based on meeting actual parents IRL or on this board?

That's like my judging all Hill parents for all the crazy stuff I read on those threads or all EOTP parents who complain about their IB school with veiled racist comments (what's the FARMS %? What's the percentage of white kids? What's the OOB %?) while all the while patting themselves on the back for how progressive they are living in their $1M house in Mt Peasant.

Based on parents I know and still know in real life. I have been to many a Janney birthday party where people made veiled or not so veiled racist comments as well.

And to the confused PP, Mount pleasant is some distance from Capitol Hill.

Side note- I was actually defending your right to spend your own money on your kids, but you instead had to be insulting and catty. How unsurprising.

[Anonymous]

Also, DC does not have the highest taxes in the country. Not by a long shot. You discredit a potentially decent argument when you begin with something that is objectively false.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Janney parents already fund less 'privileged' schools. It's called paying 'bigly' DC income, property & sales taxes.

And families at Title I schools also pay taxes. The Janney extension and reno wasn't paid for by the PTA. The teachers and staff aren't paid bonuses by the PTA. Your property values are directly linked to a public school funded by the public.

If you don't want to donate, fine. But don't play the victim.

actually a lot of them don't pay taxes because they don't make enough money. There is real poverty in DC if you haven't noticed. I am not a janney parent and I don't think should feel shamed at all. They did the work, raised the funds and they can do what the want. and yes, if they live IB, they are likely payin more in income tax and property tax than most families in high poverty neighborhoods. doesn't mean anything other than its just a fact.

I agree with this statement. I don't live anywhere near the Janney zone, and I find most Janney parents really annoying. That said, it is their money and they should use it for their children. Poor children get Title 1 funding. I am more worried about schools without title one funding and without a rich PTA.

Based on meeting actual parents IRL or on this board?

That's like my judging all Hill parents for all the crazy stuff I read on those threads or all EOTP parents who complain about their IB school with veiled racist comments (what's the FARMS %? What's the percentage of white kids? What's the OOB %?) while all the while patting themselves on the back for how progressive they are living in their $1M house in Mt Peasant.

Based on parents I know and still know in real life. I have been to many a Janney birthday party where people made veiled or not so veiled racist comments as well.

And to the confused PP, Mount pleasant is some distance from Capitol Hill.

NP. You "don't live anywhere near the Janney zone" yet have been to many Janney birthday parties to judge "most Janney parents"? Doesn't sound very plausible.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Janney parents already fund less 'privileged' schools. It's called paying 'bigly' DC income, property & sales taxes.

And families at Title I schools also pay taxes. The Janney extension and reno wasn't paid for by the PTA. The teachers and staff aren't paid bonuses by the PTA. Your property values are directly linked to a public school funded by the public.

If you don't want to donate, fine. But don't play the victim.

actually a lot of them don't pay taxes because they don't make enough money. There is real poverty in DC if you haven't noticed. I am not a janney parent and I don't think should feel shamed at all. They did the work, raised the funds and they can do what the want. and yes, if they live IB, they are likely payin more in income tax and property tax than most families in high poverty neighborhoods. doesn't mean anything other than its just a fact.

I agree with this statement. I don't live anywhere near the Janney zone, and I find most Janney parents really annoying. That said, it is their money and they should use it for their children. Poor children get Title 1 funding. I am more worried about schools without title one funding and without a rich PTA.

Based on meeting actual parents IRL or on this board?

That's like my judging all Hill parents for all the crazy stuff I read on those threads or all EOTP parents who complain about their IB school with veiled racist comments (what's the FARMS %? What's the percentage of white kids? What's the OOB %?) while all the while patting themselves on the back for how progressive they are living in their $1M house in Mt Peasant.

Based on parents I know and still know in real life. I have been to many a Janney birthday party where people made veiled or not so veiled racist comments as well.

And to the confused PP, Mount pleasant is some distance from Capitol Hill.

I don't think the PP was confused about the locations of Capitol Hill and Mt. Pleasant. Reread the post, this was an "or" statement.