Updates on LAMB at Kingsbury?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Wow people are really nuts. I guess it’s possible some of the crazies on this lawsuit are on this thread. So let me get this straight: a few Lamb parents rubbed you the wrong way at a meeting, so now you have a personal vendetta against the whole school, and think it shouldn’t be allowed to buy a building which is already a school? Because some kind of “promises” won’t be kept? What exactly? Just basic montoeing of traffic flows and mitigation, really? Which will certainly be less bothersome than the traffic from the luxury condos you prefer, all because you decided a public SCHOOL is somehow just snobby and awful? I swear to god some people have some kind of autoalerts on certain schools on here and they pop up and trash talk any freaking chance they get.

You clearly have been to none of the meetings where residents voiced reasonable concerns and suggestions. LAMB has shown no interest in working with the community other than their token unenforceable "promises".
Thank you for showing your ignorance on the matter.

I am a NP and I am interested in hearing the reasonable concerns. I am being serious- I have never heard any of the concerns other than more traffic.

“Your Christmas tree sale will interfere with ours!” Yes, really.

Do you realize that the tree sale is one of the best fundraising activities for a title 1 school across the street? They don't have as many wealthy families as LAMB to chip in thousands of dollars. And they also don't have big financial backers like the Walton family to throw money around.

And it was brought up as a concern, not a deal breaker. It was part of a letter of support from the parents of the neighboring school.

PP, you are the type of LAMB parent that is the reason this isn't going smoother.

LAMB draws children from that same neighborhood and is likely to draw even more when it moves to Kingsbury, given that it will be inaccessible for Wards 6, 7 and 8 for most families. Denying another school their own fundraiser is the height of pettiness.

Folks. There will be no "denying another school their own fundraiser". Come on, this is crazy. This is not the reason - it's just one example of the many, many, many things that LAMB has already addressed.

I would like to point to the final list of "conditions" which are 35, proposed to address each and every concern. Where you may also read in detail about the lengthy process that LAMB has already gone through in order to appease mainly the neighbors (West already supported the move). Oh, and you can also watch all the proceedings, and read the transcripts: https://app.dcoz.dc.gov/Content/Search/ViewCaseReport.aspx?case_id=19581.

I am the poster who was called uninformed earlier. Nothing could be further from the truth, as I have in fact read through all of these pages of materials. The bottom line is that LAMB proposed a starting cap of 300 students until Kingsbury moves out, then increase up to 600 (not all at once). Prior to the increase LAMB must prove that it deserves the approval by adhering to these conditions, prior to being given the certificate of occupancy.

So, rather than simply disrespecting everyone and ignoring their requests, LAMB has by now bent over backward to accommodate every. single. request. And put a monitoring system in place. The one thing it's simply unable to do is return to the board and go through this process AGAIN in 2-3 years, to get the ceiling increased. It should be abundantly clear by now why the mortgage lenders would not be okay with this. Clearly, the aggrieved neighbors are going to do this all again, at every chance they get, and fight to the death.

Honestly, if anyone has another school property available for LAMB of similar size and amenities, in either ward 4 or 5, go ahead and suggest it. Otherwise, this property really needs to be used by a school, and a charter school is the best possible option. These neighbors need to be called out for their extreme pettiness, not LAMB.

I think most parents, including West parents are supportive of the move. If there's really nothing to worry about in terms of traffic and such, then why would it be a problem to come back and ask for a ceiling increase? Sure, a few people who will never be happy will object, but they'll be overruled.

LAMB parent here. I understand why it seems easy enough to just go back to get another round of approval to increase to 600 kids, particularly if LAMB follows the 35 conditions we agreed to. The problem is that we need a mortgage now and a lender will only give it to us if there is a reasonable assurance that we can get to 600 kids, in order to have per-pupil funding to pay the mortgage. There is a big difference between having to go back to BZA for another full approval (which we could not agree to because of mortgage) and having to get a certificate of occupancy (or whatever it is called) to accommodate 600 kids. And 600 kids will not be in there the first year, we will grow to 600 kids over the next 5 years or so.

[Anonymous]

How dire is Kingsbury's financial situation? Are they going to be able to just sit around for a year while the LAMB approval goes through the court?

Could they put the building back on the market?

[Anonymous]

We know nothing about LAMB financially except what they tell us. For all we know that could be Kingsbury and the broker making big $$ by pitching LAMB and the community to fight.

There's no way to know either because charter schools aren't subject to FOIA.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:We know nothing about LAMB financially except what they tell us. For all we know that could be Kingsbury and the broker making big $$ by pitching LAMB and the community to fight.

There's no way to know either because charter schools aren't subject to FOIA.

Sure we do. It's right on the DCPCSB website. Just like all the other schools. https://www.dcpcsb.org/sites/default/files/Latin%20American%20Montessori%20Bilingual%20PCS_1.pdf

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We know nothing about LAMB financially except what they tell us. For all we know that could be Kingsbury and the broker making big $$ by pitching LAMB and the community to fight.

There's no way to know either because charter schools aren't subject to FOIA.

Sure we do. It's right on the DCPCSB website. Just like all the other schools. https://www.dcpcsb.org/sites/default/files/Latin%20American%20Montessori%20Bilingual%20PCS_1.pdf

Could you point me to the part where it talks about the financial viability of the deal?

See all that's done out of the public sight. You have no idea who is getting rich off it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We know nothing about LAMB financially except what they tell us. For all we know that could be Kingsbury and the broker making big $$ by pitching LAMB and the community to fight.

There's no way to know either because charter schools aren't subject to FOIA.

Sure we do. It's right on the DCPCSB website. Just like all the other schools. https://www.dcpcsb.org/sites/default/files/Latin%20American%20Montessori%20Bilingual%20PCS_1.pdf

Could you point me to the part where it talks about the financial viability of the deal?

See all that's done out of the public sight. You have no idea who is getting rich off it.

I don’t find this plausible but couldn’t you figure it out based on the sale value? Or approximate value?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We know nothing about LAMB financially except what they tell us. For all we know that could be Kingsbury and the broker making big $$ by pitching LAMB and the community to fight.

There's no way to know either because charter schools aren't subject to FOIA.

Sure we do. It's right on the DCPCSB website. Just like all the other schools. https://www.dcpcsb.org/sites/default/files/Latin%20American%20Montessori%20Bilingual%20PCS_1.pdf

Could you point me to the part where it talks about the financial viability of the deal?

See all that's done out of the public sight. You have no idea who is getting rich off it.

I don’t find this plausible but couldn’t you figure it out based on the sale value? Or approximate value?

And the current value of LAMB properties, the mortgage rate, how much the property dealer is taking, etc.

You don't find it plausible that someone is making money off it and leaving us to fight over the scraps? Have you dealt with real estate before?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Wow people are really nuts. I guess it’s possible some of the crazies on this lawsuit are on this thread. So let me get this straight: a few Lamb parents rubbed you the wrong way at a meeting, so now you have a personal vendetta against the whole school, and think it shouldn’t be allowed to buy a building which is already a school? Because some kind of “promises” won’t be kept? What exactly? Just basic montoeing of traffic flows and mitigation, really? Which will certainly be less bothersome than the traffic from the luxury condos you prefer, all because you decided a public SCHOOL is somehow just snobby and awful? I swear to god some people have some kind of autoalerts on certain schools on here and they pop up and trash talk any freaking chance they get.

You clearly have been to none of the meetings where residents voiced reasonable concerns and suggestions. LAMB has shown no interest in working with the community other than their token unenforceable "promises".
Thank you for showing your ignorance on the matter.

I am a NP and I am interested in hearing the reasonable concerns. I am being serious- I have never heard any of the concerns other than more traffic.

“Your Christmas tree sale will interfere with ours!” Yes, really.

Do you realize that the tree sale is one of the best fundraising activities for a title 1 school across the street? They don't have as many wealthy families as LAMB to chip in thousands of dollars. And they also don't have big financial backers like the Walton family to throw money around.

And it was brought up as a concern, not a deal breaker. It was part of a letter of support from the parents of the neighboring school.

PP, you are the type of LAMB parent that is the reason this isn't going smoother.

LAMB draws children from that same neighborhood and is likely to draw even more when it moves to Kingsbury, given that it will be inaccessible for Wards 6, 7 and 8 for most families. Denying another school their own fundraiser is the height of pettiness.

Folks. There will be no "denying another school their own fundraiser". Come on, this is crazy. This is not the reason - it's just one example of the many, many, many things that LAMB has already addressed.

I would like to point to the final list of "conditions" which are 35, proposed to address each and every concern. Where you may also read in detail about the lengthy process that LAMB has already gone through in order to appease mainly the neighbors (West already supported the move). Oh, and you can also watch all the proceedings, and read the transcripts: https://app.dcoz.dc.gov/Content/Search/ViewCaseReport.aspx?case_id=19581.

I am the poster who was called uninformed earlier. Nothing could be further from the truth, as I have in fact read through all of these pages of materials. The bottom line is that LAMB proposed a starting cap of 300 students until Kingsbury moves out, then increase up to 600 (not all at once). Prior to the increase LAMB must prove that it deserves the approval by adhering to these conditions, prior to being given the certificate of occupancy.

So, rather than simply disrespecting everyone and ignoring their requests, LAMB has by now bent over backward to accommodate every. single. request. And put a monitoring system in place. The one thing it's simply unable to do is return to the board and go through this process AGAIN in 2-3 years, to get the ceiling increased. It should be abundantly clear by now why the mortgage lenders would not be okay with this. Clearly, the aggrieved neighbors are going to do this all again, at every chance they get, and fight to the death.

Honestly, if anyone has another school property available for LAMB of similar size and amenities, in either ward 4 or 5, go ahead and suggest it. Otherwise, this property really needs to be used by a school, and a charter school is the best possible option. These neighbors need to be called out for their extreme pettiness, not LAMB.

Why does the building have to be in Ward 4 or 5? Because no where and no one made this a requirement. Oh right, to reduce the number of blacks.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Wow people are really nuts. I guess it’s possible some of the crazies on this lawsuit are on this thread. So let me get this straight: a few Lamb parents rubbed you the wrong way at a meeting, so now you have a personal vendetta against the whole school, and think it shouldn’t be allowed to buy a building which is already a school? Because some kind of “promises” won’t be kept? What exactly? Just basic montoeing of traffic flows and mitigation, really? Which will certainly be less bothersome than the traffic from the luxury condos you prefer, all because you decided a public SCHOOL is somehow just snobby and awful? I swear to god some people have some kind of autoalerts on certain schools on here and they pop up and trash talk any freaking chance they get.

You clearly have been to none of the meetings where residents voiced reasonable concerns and suggestions. LAMB has shown no interest in working with the community other than their token unenforceable "promises".
Thank you for showing your ignorance on the matter.

I am a NP and I am interested in hearing the reasonable concerns. I am being serious- I have never heard any of the concerns other than more traffic.

“Your Christmas tree sale will interfere with ours!” Yes, really.

Do you realize that the tree sale is one of the best fundraising activities for a title 1 school across the street? They don't have as many wealthy families as LAMB to chip in thousands of dollars. And they also don't have big financial backers like the Walton family to throw money around.

And it was brought up as a concern, not a deal breaker. It was part of a letter of support from the parents of the neighboring school.

PP, you are the type of LAMB parent that is the reason this isn't going smoother.

LAMB draws children from that same neighborhood and is likely to draw even more when it moves to Kingsbury, given that it will be inaccessible for Wards 6, 7 and 8 for most families. Denying another school their own fundraiser is the height of pettiness.

Folks. There will be no "denying another school their own fundraiser". Come on, this is crazy. This is not the reason - it's just one example of the many, many, many things that LAMB has already addressed.

I would like to point to the final list of "conditions" which are 35, proposed to address each and every concern. Where you may also read in detail about the lengthy process that LAMB has already gone through in order to appease mainly the neighbors (West already supported the move). Oh, and you can also watch all the proceedings, and read the transcripts: https://app.dcoz.dc.gov/Content/Search/ViewCaseReport.aspx?case_id=19581.

I am the poster who was called uninformed earlier. Nothing could be further from the truth, as I have in fact read through all of these pages of materials. The bottom line is that LAMB proposed a starting cap of 300 students until Kingsbury moves out, then increase up to 600 (not all at once). Prior to the increase LAMB must prove that it deserves the approval by adhering to these conditions, prior to being given the certificate of occupancy.

So, rather than simply disrespecting everyone and ignoring their requests, LAMB has by now bent over backward to accommodate every. single. request. And put a monitoring system in place. The one thing it's simply unable to do is return to the board and go through this process AGAIN in 2-3 years, to get the ceiling increased. It should be abundantly clear by now why the mortgage lenders would not be okay with this. Clearly, the aggrieved neighbors are going to do this all again, at every chance they get, and fight to the death.

Honestly, if anyone has another school property available for LAMB of similar size and amenities, in either ward 4 or 5, go ahead and suggest it. Otherwise, this property really needs to be used by a school, and a charter school is the best possible option. These neighbors need to be called out for their extreme pettiness, not LAMB.

Why does the building have to be in Ward 4 or 5? Because no where and no one made this a requirement. Oh right, to reduce the number of blacks.

Don’t be ridiculous. All three campuses are currently in Ward 4 and 5 (both majority black wards, by the way). The school wants to be in Ward 4 where two out of three campuses are.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Wow people are really nuts. I guess it’s possible some of the crazies on this lawsuit are on this thread. So let me get this straight: a few Lamb parents rubbed you the wrong way at a meeting, so now you have a personal vendetta against the whole school, and think it shouldn’t be allowed to buy a building which is already a school? Because some kind of “promises” won’t be kept? What exactly? Just basic montoeing of traffic flows and mitigation, really? Which will certainly be less bothersome than the traffic from the luxury condos you prefer, all because you decided a public SCHOOL is somehow just snobby and awful? I swear to god some people have some kind of autoalerts on certain schools on here and they pop up and trash talk any freaking chance they get.

You clearly have been to none of the meetings where residents voiced reasonable concerns and suggestions. LAMB has shown no interest in working with the community other than their token unenforceable "promises".
Thank you for showing your ignorance on the matter.

I am a NP and I am interested in hearing the reasonable concerns. I am being serious- I have never heard any of the concerns other than more traffic.

“Your Christmas tree sale will interfere with ours!” Yes, really.

Do you realize that the tree sale is one of the best fundraising activities for a title 1 school across the street? They don't have as many wealthy families as LAMB to chip in thousands of dollars. And they also don't have big financial backers like the Walton family to throw money around.

And it was brought up as a concern, not a deal breaker. It was part of a letter of support from the parents of the neighboring school.

PP, you are the type of LAMB parent that is the reason this isn't going smoother.

LAMB draws children from that same neighborhood and is likely to draw even more when it moves to Kingsbury, given that it will be inaccessible for Wards 6, 7 and 8 for most families. Denying another school their own fundraiser is the height of pettiness.

Folks. There will be no "denying another school their own fundraiser". Come on, this is crazy. This is not the reason - it's just one example of the many, many, many things that LAMB has already addressed.

I would like to point to the final list of "conditions" which are 35, proposed to address each and every concern. Where you may also read in detail about the lengthy process that LAMB has already gone through in order to appease mainly the neighbors (West already supported the move). Oh, and you can also watch all the proceedings, and read the transcripts: https://app.dcoz.dc.gov/Content/Search/ViewCaseReport.aspx?case_id=19581.

I am the poster who was called uninformed earlier. Nothing could be further from the truth, as I have in fact read through all of these pages of materials. The bottom line is that LAMB proposed a starting cap of 300 students until Kingsbury moves out, then increase up to 600 (not all at once). Prior to the increase LAMB must prove that it deserves the approval by adhering to these conditions, prior to being given the certificate of occupancy.

So, rather than simply disrespecting everyone and ignoring their requests, LAMB has by now bent over backward to accommodate every. single. request. And put a monitoring system in place. The one thing it's simply unable to do is return to the board and go through this process AGAIN in 2-3 years, to get the ceiling increased. It should be abundantly clear by now why the mortgage lenders would not be okay with this. Clearly, the aggrieved neighbors are going to do this all again, at every chance they get, and fight to the death.

Honestly, if anyone has another school property available for LAMB of similar size and amenities, in either ward 4 or 5, go ahead and suggest it. Otherwise, this property really needs to be used by a school, and a charter school is the best possible option. These neighbors need to be called out for their extreme pettiness, not LAMB.

Why does the building have to be in Ward 4 or 5? Because no where and no one made this a requirement. Oh right, to reduce the number of blacks.

Don’t be ridiculous. All three campuses are currently in Ward 4 and 5 (both majority black wards, by the way). The school wants to be in Ward 4 where two out of three campuses are.

You think that PK agreed children in Ward 4 are majority black in Ward 4? Near Kingsbury? Go take a walk in the neighborhood.

[Anonymous]

I live in the neighborhood and I oppose the charter school coming there for the following reasons: (1) the area has never probably been zoned for a school at the site. The current school there now is a much smaller population (2) The traffic problem and parking problem would be horrendous. We are still one of the few places left where its the equivalent of a true suburb for parking (3) If you want your kids to attend a well sought after school in the neighborhood why not move here so your child can attend West elementary? There's also Brightwood ES down the street. What we don't need is a bunch of NIMBY's wanting to move their ilk of charter schools here when there are perfectly acceptable public options.

[Anonymous]

Lol. NIMBY doesn't mean what you think it means.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I live in the neighborhood and I oppose the charter school coming there for the following reasons: (1) the area has never probably been zoned for a school at the site. The current school there now is a much smaller population (2) The traffic problem and parking problem would be horrendous. We are still one of the few places left where its the equivalent of a true suburb for parking (3) If you want your kids to attend a well sought after school in the neighborhood why not move here so your child can attend West elementary? There's also Brightwood ES down the street. What we don't need is a bunch of NIMBY's wanting to move their ilk of charter schools here when there are perfectly acceptable public options.

Hilarious that you are calling other people NIMBYs. If you want the suburbs, move to the suburbs.

[Anonymous]

Why does the building have to be in Ward 4 or 5? Because no where and no one made this a requirement. Oh right, to reduce the number of blacks.

Don’t be ridiculous. All three campuses are currently in Ward 4 and 5 (both majority black wards, by the way). The school wants to be in Ward 4 where two out of three campuses are.

You think that PK agreed children in Ward 4 are majority black in Ward 4? Near Kingsbury? Go take a walk in the neighborhood.

While this is true and I have kids at Powell, it's just the nature of the city at the moment. I'm black and in all fairness the new proposed location is still in the Ward where Lamb first started.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
Why does the building have to be in Ward 4 or 5? Because no where and no one made this a requirement. Oh right, to reduce the number of blacks.

Don’t be ridiculous. All three campuses are currently in Ward 4 and 5 (both majority black wards, by the way). The school wants to be in Ward 4 where two out of three campuses are.

You think that PK agreed children in Ward 4 are majority black in Ward 4? Near Kingsbury? Go take a walk in the neighborhood.

While this is true and I have kids at Powell, it's just the nature of the city at the moment. I'm black and in all fairness the new proposed location is still in the Ward where Lamb first started.



The point of LAMB is to serve a Latin American population, as well as the rest of the city. LAMB is not allowed to give any preferences to Spanish dominant. Therefore it needs to locate nearby to Hispanic populations as much as it can, given the limited options for buildings. Pretty straightforward.