When is the next event on DME's boundary evaluation process?

[Anonymous]

I don't see any more specific events listed on the DME calendar where citizens can comment. http://dme.dc.gov/book/student-assignment-and-school-boundaries-review-process/getting-involved-and-timeline But I know that at the last open meeting, the DME indicated her office wants to encourage more feedback. Is anyone aware of any upcoming events not advertised on the DME site?

Also, as I read the full-program timeline -- http://dme.dc.gov/node/734972 -- it looks like DME is planning to release a comprehensive and final proposal in May, which will be discussed over the summer and (absent tweaks) imposed as a final plan in September. If people have comments, it seems now is the time to submit them, because the next proposal will be pretty close to final.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I don't see any more specific events listed on the DME calendar where citizens can comment. http://dme.dc.gov/book/student-assignment-and-school-boundaries-review-process/getting-involved-and-timeline But I know that at the last open meeting, the DME indicated her office wants to encourage more feedback. Is anyone aware of any upcoming events not advertised on the DME site?

Also, as I read the full-program timeline -- http://dme.dc.gov/node/734972 -- it looks like DME is planning to release a comprehensive and final proposal in May, which will be discussed over the summer and (absent tweaks) imposed as a final plan in September. If people have comments, it seems now is the time to submit them, because the next proposal will be pretty close to final.

The Advisory Committee meets on May 6 to start trying to reach consensus on a proposal. I suspect no new big events will be scheduled until after their recommendation is released in late May. Now is indeed the time to speak up.

[Anonymous]

Are the Advisory Committee meetings open? Or closed to the public?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Are the Advisory Committee meetings open? Or closed to the public?

I assume closed or we would have heard about it before now. But I really don't know. They post their materials and (with a huge delay) their meeting minutes on the DME's website.

[Anonymous]

I really don't see how they can make anything final in September when there will be a new mayor come January.

[Anonymous]

I think the meeting minutes thing is basically wrong.

While they did so for early meetings and promise they will post for others, I think it is clear now that they do not intend to public the meeting minutes. If they were written up for January at all, we're going on three months later, so the world's worst transcription service could have lost the tape twice and hired a second-grader to type it up and it would already be done.

My belief is that when the meetings started actually discussing substance and coming up with anything resembling proposals, they stopped preparing meeting summaries for release.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I really don't see how they can make anything final in September when there will be a new mayor come January.

The Mayor will (likely) still be the Mayor in September. So he can approve the final recommendation (or change it). Of course, a new mayor can approve something else in January. But I think part of the timing is intentional. Boundary changes are necessary but never popular (part of the reason DC hasn't done it for almost 40 years). So Gray can approve something, and Mayor Bowser or Catania can blame him but say it is a done deal now.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I really don't see how they can make anything final in September when there will be a new mayor come January.

The Mayor will (likely) still be the Mayor in September. So he can approve the final recommendation (or change it). Of course, a new mayor can approve something else in January. But I think part of the timing is intentional. Boundary changes are necessary but never popular (part of the reason DC hasn't done it for almost 40 years). So Gray can approve something, and Mayor Bowser or Catania can blame him but say it is a done deal now.

I agree with PP's analysis. There will be significant inertia against making a change to the September plan after the November election concludes. Even if the new mayor disagrees with aspects of the September plan, it's hard to see how he/she would want to wade into the battle and piss lots of people off, when he/she can more easily blame it on the former administration. Seems the new mayor will have other more pressing issues. People need to speak now, or be prepared to live with whatever the DME proposes.

At the last meeting, DME said she wants more feedback from Wards that had not previously participated. But if there are no more meetings on the schedule, how is that going to occur?

[dcmom]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I really don't see how they can make anything final in September when there will be a new mayor come January.

The Mayor will (likely) still be the Mayor in September. So he can approve the final recommendation (or change it). Of course, a new mayor can approve something else in January. But I think part of the timing is intentional. Boundary changes are necessary but never popular (part of the reason DC hasn't done it for almost 40 years). So Gray can approve something, and Mayor Bowser or Catania can blame him but say it is a done deal now.

I agree with PP's analysis. There will be significant inertia against making a change to the September plan after the November election concludes. Even if the new mayor disagrees with aspects of the September plan, it's hard to see how he/she would want to wade into the battle and piss lots of people off, when he/she can more easily blame it on the former administration. Seems the new mayor will have other more pressing issues. People need to speak now, or be prepared to live with whatever the DME proposes.

At the last meeting, DME said she wants more feedback from Wards that had not previously participated. But if there are no more meetings on the schedule, how is that going to occur?

I think they can make the boundary changes, and maybe the OOB set-aside, but I would be really surprised if they moved forward with A or C and the new Mayor didn't roll it back come January. However, I've lived in DC long enough that I shouldn't be surprised when anything happens.

[Anonymous]

dcmom wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I really don't see how they can make anything final in September when there will be a new mayor come January.

The Mayor will (likely) still be the Mayor in September. So he can approve the final recommendation (or change it). Of course, a new mayor can approve something else in January. But I think part of the timing is intentional. Boundary changes are necessary but never popular (part of the reason DC hasn't done it for almost 40 years). So Gray can approve something, and Mayor Bowser or Catania can blame him but say it is a done deal now.

I agree with PP's analysis. There will be significant inertia against making a change to the September plan after the November election concludes. Even if the new mayor disagrees with aspects of the September plan, it's hard to see how he/she would want to wade into the battle and piss lots of people off, when he/she can more easily blame it on the former administration. Seems the new mayor will have other more pressing issues. People need to speak now, or be prepared to live with whatever the DME proposes.

At the last meeting, DME said she wants more feedback from Wards that had not previously participated. But if there are no more meetings on the schedule, how is that going to occur?

I think they can make the boundary changes, and maybe the OOB set-aside, but I would be really surprised if they moved forward with A or C and the new Mayor didn't roll it back come January. However, I've lived in DC long enough that I shouldn't be surprised when anything happens.

I agree. But with both Catania and Bowser (sort of) ruling out options A or C, I cannot see the advisory committee recommending one of those options. I agree that we could be wrong, or that some element of A or C creeps into the proposal, but I am doubtful.

[Anonymous]

At the DME meetings the timeline was discussed, I believe she said to expect the preliminary recommendation in June, opportunity for more feedback and a final recommendation in July with mayoral action expected in September.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

dcmom wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I really don't see how they can make anything final in September when there will be a new mayor come January.

The Mayor will (likely) still be the Mayor in September. So he can approve the final recommendation (or change it). Of course, a new mayor can approve something else in January. But I think part of the timing is intentional. Boundary changes are necessary but never popular (part of the reason DC hasn't done it for almost 40 years). So Gray can approve something, and Mayor Bowser or Catania can blame him but say it is a done deal now.

I agree with PP's analysis. There will be significant inertia against making a change to the September plan after the November election concludes. Even if the new mayor disagrees with aspects of the September plan, it's hard to see how he/she would want to wade into the battle and piss lots of people off, when he/she can more easily blame it on the former administration. Seems the new mayor will have other more pressing issues. People need to speak now, or be prepared to live with whatever the DME proposes.

At the last meeting, DME said she wants more feedback from Wards that had not previously participated. But if there are no more meetings on the schedule, how is that going to occur?

I think they can make the boundary changes, and maybe the OOB set-aside, but I would be really surprised if they moved forward with A or C and the new Mayor didn't roll it back come January. However, I've lived in DC long enough that I shouldn't be surprised when anything happens.

I agree. But with both Catania and Bowser (sort of) ruling out options A or C, I cannot see the advisory committee recommending one of those options. I agree that we could be wrong, or that some element of A or C creeps into the proposal, but I am doubtful.

I think most of "A" is already off the table. At the Saturday meetings they showed a slide that said that 83% of respondents were against city-wide lotteries.

I wonder what it would do to the energy of this debate if we didn't have that issue to contend with?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

At the last meeting, DME said she wants more feedback from Wards that had not previously participated. But if there are no more meetings on the schedule, how is that going to occur?

By reaching out to people who she knows already agree with we and claiming they speak for Wards 7 and 8?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:At the last meeting, DME said she wants more feedback from Wards that had not previously participated. But if there are no more meetings on the schedule, how is that going to occur?

By reaching out to people who she knows already agree with [her] and claiming they speak for Wards 7 and 8?

Yeah, that's my fear. If DME's proposal is some wacky one that relies on such informal data, then someone ought to FOIA all the input and meeting notes.

[Anonymous]

Is the DME willing to go down with this ship? This thing is taking on water at an ever increasing rare.