Murch Boundary Change

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

But there are families that live in bounds for Murch, that purchased homes 2 blocks from the school but who don't have anyone there yet to get grandfathered in....

Then, they won't be sad about "disruption" in their morning commute, losing friends they've already made at Murch, having half the Boy Scout Troop #342 go to one school and half go to a different school etc.

It'll all be new to them, and the kids they'll conceive someday.

Actually you'll have kids who know each other in the same apartment building being sent to different schools.

School boundaries do change and communities continue to thrive. I really don't understand people continuing to give these rationalizations. Your above scenario will involve kids of different ages who will have new friends at their new school. They will be fine.

Should the boundaries be laid in a yellow brick road to never be moved? Or, after 40 years, should there be some minor adjustments? There really are bigger issues to be concerned about. I just wish all the DC parents could come together to focus on the big, important issues like the threat of a city-wide lottery. That is a real problem.

Whether minor or major, the adjustments should be logical - not capricious

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

But there are families that live in bounds for Murch, that purchased homes 2 blocks from the school but who don't have anyone there yet to get grandfathered in....

Then, they won't be sad about "disruption" in their morning commute, losing friends they've already made at Murch, having half the Boy Scout Troop #342 go to one school and half go to a different school etc.

It'll all be new to them, and the kids they'll conceive someday.

Actually you'll have kids who know each other in the same apartment building being sent to different schools.

You know what, I think that is actually great for kids. While we all hope our kids end up in a school that is idyllic and wonderful in every way where they have friends they would choose to be with 24/7 but reality is different - not even Murch is the perfect place for every kid all the time and even best school friends go through rough patches. How fortunate these kids would be to have friends that close by that are outside of their day to day school environment. We are fortunate to have this now with neighbors within 2 blocks that go to 5 different schools (3 publics and 2 parochial) and guess what - it's terrific and the kids all have a great time in the neighborhood. I for one am glad that even my kindergartner has a real awareness that there is a lot more to her neoghborhood and city than just the kids she goes to school with.

are you against neighborhood schools? Very few people are, but maybe you are the exception. Perhaps if there were a decent neighborhood school near your home (like Murch) you and your neighbors wouldn't be so sanguine about your situation.

[Anonymous]

OK folks-- it is simply dumb -- stupid--idiotic-- to rezone people who are 2 blocks away from one school to another school that is a mile away. That's all all tree is to it. Some of us don't even have a car, and yes, it will be impossible to walk the 12 blocks to Hearst. And what about the old grandmother who can currently easily walk the 2 blocks to pick up her grandchild, but won't be able to do the same with the rezone? For many people the rezone will severely affect their lifestyle.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:OK folks-- it is simply dumb -- stupid--idiotic-- to rezone people who are 2 blocks away from one school to another school that is a mile away. That's all all tree is to it. Some of us don't even have a car, and yes, it will be impossible to walk the 12 blocks to Hearst. And what about the old grandmother who can currently easily walk the 2 blocks to pick up her grandchild, but won't be able to do the same with the rezone? For many people the rezone will severely affect their lifestyle.

In case you have not been paying attention, no children currently enrolled in any school will be moved from his/her current school. So this walking grandmother can still walk to pick up her grandchild.

There is a bigger picture here and the fact that people keep harping on walkability as if it is the MOST IMPORTANT feature of a neighborhood school or the MOST IMPORTANT issue on the table is getting old. Some homes are going to have to be moved to different boundaries, because of how the schools are clustered it is going to be somebody close to the schools that likely can walk. No current child is going to be moved and it is likely that siblings of current students will be grandfathered as well. If any of that does not happen you have my extreme support to right such a wrong.

I am, as are others, much more concerned about students that have been proposed to be rezoned to failing schools such as moving Oyster-Adams out of the Wilson feeder path.

[Anonymous]

^^Amen.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

But there are families that live in bounds for Murch, that purchased homes 2 blocks from the school but who don't have anyone there yet to get grandfathered in....

Then, they won't be sad about "disruption" in their morning commute, losing friends they've already made at Murch, having half the Boy Scout Troop #342 go to one school and half go to a different school etc.

It'll all be new to them, and the kids they'll conceive someday.

Actually you'll have kids who know each other in the same apartment building being sent to different schools.

You know what, I think that is actually great for kids. While we all hope our kids end up in a school that is idyllic and wonderful in every way where they have friends they would choose to be with 24/7 but reality is different - not even Murch is the perfect place for every kid all the time and even best school friends go through rough patches. How fortunate these kids would be to have friends that close by that are outside of their day to day school environment. We are fortunate to have this now with neighbors within 2 blocks that go to 5 different schools (3 publics and 2 parochial) and guess what - it's terrific and the kids all have a great time in the neighborhood. I for one am glad that even my kindergartner has a real awareness that there is a lot more to her neoghborhood and city than just the kids she goes to school with.

are you against neighborhood schools? Very few people are, but maybe you are the exception. Perhaps if there were a decent neighborhood school near your home (like Murch) you and your neighbors wouldn't be so sanguine about your situation.

I am completely in favor of neighborhood schools, have signed every one of the neighborhood school petitions, given $ to Catania, gone to the DME and ANC meetings and been a broken record about neighborhood schools. I have great schools in my neighborhood - one them being Murch . I think it is quite possible to be for neighborhood schools and enjoy the fact we live in an area where we and our kids have the opportunity to be exposed to people with experiences different than our own.

[Anonymous]

I am concerned about Oyster-Adams and other proposed non-sense --reshuffling kids instead of actually working on improving failing schools is very upsetting. But, guess what people, for some of us WALKABILITY is one of the main reasons we live where we live. Yes, granted, it won't affect us personally but will affect the neighborhood as a whole and it is a concern. So, maybe Murch rezoning is not as tragic as some of the other nonsense and maybe you the (unaffected) people don't want to fight the fight, and that's fine, but those of us who think it's wrong will continue to try to reverse it, that's all there is to it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OK folks-- it is simply dumb -- stupid--idiotic-- to rezone people who are 2 blocks away from one school to another school that is a mile away. That's all all tree is to it. Some of us don't even have a car, and yes, it will be impossible to walk the 12 blocks to Hearst. And what about the old grandmother who can currently easily walk the 2 blocks to pick up her grandchild, but won't be able to do the same with the rezone? For many people the rezone will severely affect their lifestyle.

In case you have not been paying attention, no children currently enrolled in any school will be moved from his/her current school. So this walking grandmother can still walk to pick up her grandchild.

There is a bigger picture here and the fact that people keep harping on walkability as if it is the MOST IMPORTANT feature of a neighborhood school or the MOST IMPORTANT issue on the table is getting old. Some homes are going to have to be moved to different boundaries, because of how the schools are clustered it is going to be somebody close to the schools that likely can walk. No current child is going to be moved and it is likely that siblings of current students will be grandfathered as well. If any of that does not happen you have my extreme support to right such a wrong.

I am, as are others, much more concerned about students that have been proposed to be rezoned to failing schools such as moving Oyster-Adams out of the Wilson feeder path.

Don't have a dog in this fight, but it makes sense to support walkable density in the Murch example and also care about Oyster-Adams and EOTP. Walkability may not make sense in the latter 2 examples but it does makes sense in the first one.

[Anonymous]

NP here. Just a note that I don't think it's at all obvious that younger siblings will get to go to Murch, given the crowded quarters. This is a reason some people are understandably worried about having kids in 2 different schools.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:NP here. Just a note that I don't think it's at all obvious that younger siblings will get to go to Murch, given the crowded quarters. This is a reason some people are understandably worried about having kids in 2 different schools.

People on this thread keep saying that current students and siblings will not have to move but there are no guarantees on that at all. At the Coolidge meeting DME was vague on that point.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:NP here. Just a note that I don't think it's at all obvious that younger siblings will get to go to Murch, given the crowded quarters. This is a reason some people are understandably worried about having kids in 2 different schools.

People on this thread keep saying that current students and siblings will not have to move but there are no guarantees on that at all. At the Coolidge meeting DME was vague on that point.

Well then focus on that point/. Provide feedback through engagedc.org, send emails to the DME, demand that she put a grandfathering floor in writing.

What she said at both meetings was that current students will not be moved. What she said at the second meeting was that it was likely siblings would be grandfathered into a school if the siblings were at the school at the same time, less likely if the older graduated before the younger started at the school. Ask her to put a floor on sibling grandfathering in writing, have people interested I this topic write to her and the members of the advisory committee. Babe identified keeping families together as a guiding priority.

[Anonymous]

" Babe" should be "DME", not sure what autocorrect to was going on there.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:But why build another school in upper NW when there is already a very good (and getting better!) school that has additional capacity to serve some additional neighborhood kids.

You may be correct that going forward the population would justify another new elementary school in the neighborhood but why not first fully utilize the schools that are already here?

Just curious, why does PP believe it would "make people less upset" to move Murch kids to Lafayette than to Hearst?

Their perceptions or more likely, misperceptions of Hearst.

The Murch hysteria started out as somewhat comical and is now bordering on sad since--as the cries drone on-- everyone but these Murch posters seems to understand that current Murch students who live within in the areas affected by the boundary changes will be grandfathered in, and that no student will be forced to move to "scary" Hearst and God forbid, have to walk an extra 6 blocks or drive five minutes.

As another poster pointed out, in the vast scheme of the city's boundary changes, Murch's issues are really minor and will only affect incoming families.

If I were a renter in a appt. on Conn. Ave., I just move up the street to a different building - one still zoned for Murch. That's pretty easy when you're renting. Incoming families who are homeowners though, they are screwed.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The real solution to overcrowding at Murch is a Lafayette-Janney-Murch-Hearst choice set (with a sibling preference and some kind of proximity preference). That would allow the schools to assign new families to whatever school has the capacity for the kids.

Hearst has a new building? Boom, new families go in Hearst. Lafayette's population goes down? Boom, kids move to Lafayette with no need for redrawing boundaries. Much more sensible use of resources, really.

And as everyone keeps pointing out, all these schools are essentially the same. How can you complain about having to walk a few extra blocks or drive five minutes? The issues are really minor and will only affect incoming families. Ward 3 for choice sets!

But they're not all the same. People deliberate choose to live near Janney, Lafayette, or Murch. They just don't feel the same about Hearst. Sorry, but they just don't. Are the first three schools essentially the same? Yes performance-wise, and the differences are in the preferences. Some prefer the more international flavor of Murch. Some prefer the natural beauty and access to Rock Creek Park, some prefer the structure at Janney. All are great, the differences are around the margins. Hearst isn't in that group.

[Anonymous]

some issues are more important than others, true, but I think any issue that doesn't make sense and negatively affects families should be kept on the table.

When parents are urged by other parents to consider undesirable outcomes for their kids (and fight among themselves about who has it worse) it's a sign to DME that some of her bad ideas are likely to be accepted.