proof of residency question

[Anonymous]

Laws on domicile vary from state to state. DC is a jurisdiction where many resident maintain strong ties to states. This helps explain why DC domicile is more loosely constructed than in many states, both in the way law on domicile is written, and how it's enforced. For better or worse, DCPS looks at where you file DC taxes where school residency is concerned. As long as residency investigators find no evidence of a lease holder at a property you own, and where you claim residence, they leave you alone. The DC courts don't have a history of coming at DC residents for school residency fraud in cases where DC income tax has been filed. There aren't precedent cases.

When OSSE busted a couple DC police officers who reside in MD for residency fraud back in 2016, they found that the idiots were not only renting out their DC properties, they were taking their tenants to DC Landlord-Tenant court.

I'm not arguing that this is good, I'm explaining why what what is arguably school boundary fraud remains prevalent, at least in Upper NW.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:DC laws on domicile have traditionally been more flexible than in many states, to meet the demands of the political cycle.

As things stand, DCPS considers the address where a parent files DC income tax to be his or her domicile, e.g. where she lives. The rest of the story is immaterial under the law, as long as there aren't dual lease holders at a single residential property.

Boundary cheaters who own/rent multiple residential properties aren't prosecuted in DC partly because the law is on their side. Changing this will be difficult unless laws on DC domicile are tightened up. Highly doubtful. This is one reason that a good many affluent families IB for Hardy have been able to access Deal fairly easily for more than 20 years now. They traditionally rent IB studio apartments in the Deal district (and sometimes sublet them). Then they file taxes in the Deal district and are left alone by OSSE and DCPS.

https://otr.cfo.dc.gov/page/audit-division-frequently-asked-questions

That's not what that says ... it says a domicile is a "place of abode" -- ie where you ACTUALLY LIVE. I can believe that the IB rich parents are getting away with fraud/lying though.

Abode means a place where one lives. Doesn’t say one lives 181 days. Doesn’t even mean a place where YOU live.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:DC laws on domicile have traditionally been more flexible than in many states, to meet the demands of the political cycle.

As things stand, DCPS considers the address where a parent files DC income tax to be his or her domicile, e.g. where she lives. The rest of the story is immaterial under the law, as long as there aren't dual lease holders at a single residential property.

Boundary cheaters who own/rent multiple residential properties aren't prosecuted in DC partly because the law is on their side. Changing this will be difficult unless laws on DC domicile are tightened up. Highly doubtful. This is one reason that a good many affluent families IB for Hardy have been able to access Deal fairly easily for more than 20 years now. They traditionally rent IB studio apartments in the Deal district (and sometimes sublet them). Then they file taxes in the Deal district and are left alone by OSSE and DCPS.

https://otr.cfo.dc.gov/page/audit-division-frequently-asked-questions

That's not what that says ... it says a domicile is a "place of abode" -- ie where you ACTUALLY LIVE. I can believe that the IB rich parents are getting away with fraud/lying though.

Abode means a place where one lives. Doesn’t say one lives 181 days. Doesn’t even mean a place where YOU live.

oh ok, so DC can tax everyone who stays here for 2 weeks?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Laws on domicile vary from state to state. DC is a jurisdiction where many resident maintain strong ties to states. This helps explain why DC domicile is more loosely constructed than in many states, both in the way law on domicile is written, and how it's enforced. For better or worse, DCPS looks at where you file DC taxes where school residency is concerned. As long as residency investigators find no evidence of a lease holder at a property you own, and where you claim residence, they leave you alone. The DC courts don't have a history of coming at DC residents for school residency fraud in cases where DC income tax has been filed. There aren't precedent cases.

When OSSE busted a couple DC police officers who reside in MD for residency fraud back in 2016, they found that the idiots were not only renting out their DC properties, they were taking their tenants to DC Landlord-Tenant court.

I'm not arguing that this is good, I'm explaining why what what is arguably school boundary fraud remains prevalent, at least in Upper NW.

Nobody ever said that "domicile" has a unitary meaning. But I can say with certainty that anyone who thinks renting a studio they never stay in and reporting that as their home address to attend Deal is absolutely opening themselves up to fraud charges. DC is clearly getting serious about all of this stuff.

[Anonymous]

+100. PPs who don't know domicile laws, or the legal loopholes they can create, pitch fits about creative school boundary interpretation. Happens on every DC residency thread, year in and year out.

These are parents who are either determined to keep numbers down at their in-demand DCPS programs, or vent out of jealousy of parents who own multiple DC residents, or have nuclear family members in the District standing by to help out with school residency.

If the law were written differently, DCPS would be in a position to go at "boundary cheaters." It isn't, and they don't.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:+100. PPs who don't know domicile laws, or the legal loopholes they can create, pitch fits about creative school boundary interpretation. Happens on every DC residency thread, year in and year out.

These are parents who are either determined to keep numbers down at their in-demand DCPS programs, or vent out of jealousy of parents who own multiple DC residents, or have nuclear family members in the District standing by to help out with school residency.

If the law were written differently, DCPS would be in a position to go at "boundary cheaters." It isn't, and they don't.

Wow. Didn't the Emancipation Proclamation and the Thirteenth Amendment resolve this?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Laws on domicile vary from state to state. DC is a jurisdiction where many resident maintain strong ties to states. This helps explain why DC domicile is more loosely constructed than in many states, both in the way law on domicile is written, and how it's enforced. For better or worse, DCPS looks at where you file DC taxes where school residency is concerned. As long as residency investigators find no evidence of a lease holder at a property you own, and where you claim residence, they leave you alone. The DC courts don't have a history of coming at DC residents for school residency fraud in cases where DC income tax has been filed. There aren't precedent cases.

When OSSE busted a couple DC police officers who reside in MD for residency fraud back in 2016, they found that the idiots were not only renting out their DC properties, they were taking their tenants to DC Landlord-Tenant court.

I'm not arguing that this is good, I'm explaining why what what is arguably school boundary fraud remains prevalent, at least in Upper NW.

Nobody ever said that "domicile" has a unitary meaning. But I can say with certainty that anyone who thinks renting a studio they never stay in and reporting that as their home address to attend Deal is absolutely opening themselves up to fraud charges. DC is clearly getting serious about all of this stuff.

This is BS. DCPS hasn't changed their position on "boundary cheating," not at the top, or down at the school registrar's level. If you get investigated for cheating on residency, you submit a stack of residency docs and perhaps submit to a home visit. If you can clear the documents bar, particularly by providing DC tax returns with your IB address on them, you're cleared. Parents seeking OOB access to Deal, and desirable DCPS elementary schools all around the city, can find this out and get resourceful. But it'a hard work to play this sort of in-boundary residency game well, and costs plenty of money. Few parents can manage it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Laws on domicile vary from state to state. DC is a jurisdiction where many resident maintain strong ties to states. This helps explain why DC domicile is more loosely constructed than in many states, both in the way law on domicile is written, and how it's enforced. For better or worse, DCPS looks at where you file DC taxes where school residency is concerned. As long as residency investigators find no evidence of a lease holder at a property you own, and where you claim residence, they leave you alone. The DC courts don't have a history of coming at DC residents for school residency fraud in cases where DC income tax has been filed. There aren't precedent cases.

When OSSE busted a couple DC police officers who reside in MD for residency fraud back in 2016, they found that the idiots were not only renting out their DC properties, they were taking their tenants to DC Landlord-Tenant court.

I'm not arguing that this is good, I'm explaining why what what is arguably school boundary fraud remains prevalent, at least in Upper NW.

Nobody ever said that "domicile" has a unitary meaning. But I can say with certainty that anyone who thinks renting a studio they never stay in and reporting that as their home address to attend Deal is absolutely opening themselves up to fraud charges. DC is clearly getting serious about all of this stuff.

This is BS. DCPS hasn't changed their position on "boundary cheating," not at the top, or down at the school registrar's level. If you get investigated for cheating on residency, you submit a stack of residency docs and perhaps submit to a home visit. If you can clear the documents bar, particularly by providing DC tax returns with your IB address on them, you're cleared. Parents seeking OOB access to Deal, and desirable DCPS elementary schools all around the city, can find this out and get resourceful. But it'a hard work to play this sort of in-boundary residency game well, and costs plenty of money. Few parents can manage it.

you again. you've never quite gotten that having the money and "hard work" to commit fraud does not make it any less fraudulent. smh.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Laws on domicile vary from state to state. DC is a jurisdiction where many resident maintain strong ties to states. This helps explain why DC domicile is more loosely constructed than in many states, both in the way law on domicile is written, and how it's enforced. For better or worse, DCPS looks at where you file DC taxes where school residency is concerned. As long as residency investigators find no evidence of a lease holder at a property you own, and where you claim residence, they leave you alone. The DC courts don't have a history of coming at DC residents for school residency fraud in cases where DC income tax has been filed. There aren't precedent cases.

When OSSE busted a couple DC police officers who reside in MD for residency fraud back in 2016, they found that the idiots were not only renting out their DC properties, they were taking their tenants to DC Landlord-Tenant court.

I'm not arguing that this is good, I'm explaining why what what is arguably school boundary fraud remains prevalent, at least in Upper NW.

Nobody ever said that "domicile" has a unitary meaning. But I can say with certainty that anyone who thinks renting a studio they never stay in and reporting that as their home address to attend Deal is absolutely opening themselves up to fraud charges. DC is clearly getting serious about all of this stuff.

This is BS. DCPS hasn't changed their position on "boundary cheating," not at the top, or down at the school registrar's level. If you get investigated for cheating on residency, you submit a stack of residency docs and perhaps submit to a home visit. If you can clear the documents bar, particularly by providing DC tax returns with your IB address on them, you're cleared. Parents seeking OOB access to Deal, and desirable DCPS elementary schools all around the city, can find this out and get resourceful. But it'a hard work to play this sort of in-boundary residency game well, and costs plenty of money. Few parents can manage it.

If you got investigated for residency fraud by the AG, and then provided a "stack of documents" claiming that your DC residence was a place you never actually lived ... you'd be in a WORLD of additional trouble.

As much as you want to claim that there are "loopholes," it's lying on the forms to write down an address where the child's custodian doesn't actually live.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's not true because...you say so?

As a matter of fact, if there's no lease holder renting one of the residential properties you own, you can indeed choose that property as your DC tax and DCPS enrollment address under current DC law.

We recently hired a reputable real estate lawyer to research DCPS residency issues with DC tax authorities, OSSE and DCPS. What he told us was that while one can argue that a parent would not be respecting the "spirit of the law" in using an address where they don't sleep most of the time to enroll, you couldn't argue that they're breaking the law and expect to win the argument in court, given the way the relevant laws are written. This has been pointed out by lawyers posting on other residency related threads. The law even permits spouses to claim separate DC domiciles for tax and school enrollment purposes.

None of the residency vigilantes who like calling the OSSE tips line want to hear this. They wish that the law was written differently and love to claim that it is.

Why?

So you’re saying that DC law contains loopholes to facilitate cheating? Marion Barry may be dead and gone but in DC his ethics live on....

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's not true because...you say so?

As a matter of fact, if there's no lease holder renting one of the residential properties you own, you can indeed choose that property as your DC tax and DCPS enrollment address under current DC law.

We recently hired a reputable real estate lawyer to research DCPS residency issues with DC tax authorities, OSSE and DCPS. What he told us was that while one can argue that a parent would not be respecting the "spirit of the law" in using an address where they don't sleep most of the time to enroll, you couldn't argue that they're breaking the law and expect to win the argument in court, given the way the relevant laws are written. This has been pointed out by lawyers posting on other residency related threads. The law even permits spouses to claim separate DC domiciles for tax and school enrollment purposes.

None of the residency vigilantes who like calling the OSSE tips line want to hear this. They wish that the law was written differently and love to claim that it is.

Why?

So you’re saying that DC law contains loopholes to facilitate cheating? Marion Barry may be dead and gone but in DC his ethics live on....

"don't sleep most of the time" is pretty vague though ... if it's a parent with shared custody, then using that address is likely fine no matter the exact number of nights. If it's grandma's house and she does after-school care regularly and lots of overnights, probably ok too. If you rent a studio that stays empty except for the 2 nights a year you sleep there, then you're committing fraud if you list that as your address on the enrollment forms as where your family of 5 resides. If your lawyer gave you such vague advice without drilling down to actually how often you would sleep there, then it was bad advice.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's not true because...you say so?

As a matter of fact, if there's no lease holder renting one of the residential properties you own, you can indeed choose that property as your DC tax and DCPS enrollment address under current DC law.

We recently hired a reputable real estate lawyer to research DCPS residency issues with DC tax authorities, OSSE and DCPS. What he told us was that while one can argue that a parent would not be respecting the "spirit of the law" in using an address where they don't sleep most of the time to enroll, you couldn't argue that they're breaking the law and expect to win the argument in court, given the way the relevant laws are written. This has been pointed out by lawyers posting on other residency related threads. The law even permits spouses to claim separate DC domiciles for tax and school enrollment purposes.

None of the residency vigilantes who like calling the OSSE tips line want to hear this. They wish that the law was written differently and love to claim that it is.

Why?

So you’re saying that DC law contains loopholes to facilitate cheating? Marion Barry may be dead and gone but in DC his ethics live on....

"don't sleep most of the time" is pretty vague though ... if it's a parent with shared custody, then using that address is likely fine no matter the exact number of nights. If it's grandma's house and she does after-school care regularly and lots of overnights, probably ok too. If you rent a studio that stays empty except for the 2 nights a year you sleep there, then you're committing fraud if you list that as your address on the enrollment forms as where your family of 5 resides. If your lawyer gave you such vague advice without drilling down to actually how often you would sleep there, then it was bad advice.

How do you know what's "probably OK?" You use grandma's house for after-school care, and her address to enroll? You're a lawyer with a specialty in domicile matters? You've been investigated by OSSE? You rent a studio apartment that's IB for Deal just for the address?

Sheesh. PP's are really winging it on this thread. The best advice is don't come to DCUM asking what to do.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's not true because...you say so?

As a matter of fact, if there's no lease holder renting one of the residential properties you own, you can indeed choose that property as your DC tax and DCPS enrollment address under current DC law.

We recently hired a reputable real estate lawyer to research DCPS residency issues with DC tax authorities, OSSE and DCPS. What he told us was that while one can argue that a parent would not be respecting the "spirit of the law" in using an address where they don't sleep most of the time to enroll, you couldn't argue that they're breaking the law and expect to win the argument in court, given the way the relevant laws are written. This has been pointed out by lawyers posting on other residency related threads. The law even permits spouses to claim separate DC domiciles for tax and school enrollment purposes.

None of the residency vigilantes who like calling the OSSE tips line want to hear this. They wish that the law was written differently and love to claim that it is.

Why?

So you’re saying that DC law contains loopholes to facilitate cheating? Marion Barry may be dead and gone but in DC his ethics live on....

"don't sleep most of the time" is pretty vague though ... if it's a parent with shared custody, then using that address is likely fine no matter the exact number of nights. If it's grandma's house and she does after-school care regularly and lots of overnights, probably ok too. If you rent a studio that stays empty except for the 2 nights a year you sleep there, then you're committing fraud if you list that as your address on the enrollment forms as where your family of 5 resides. If your lawyer gave you such vague advice without drilling down to actually how often you would sleep there, then it was bad advice.

How do you know what's "probably OK?" You use grandma's house for after-school care, and her address to enroll? You're a lawyer with a specialty in domicile matters? You've been investigated by OSSE? You rent a studio apartment that's IB for Deal just for the address?

Sheesh. PP's are really winging it on this thread. The best advice is don't come to DCUM asking what to do.

That's the entire point. The gray area is "winging it." But a dwelling that you never actually dwell in -- while your child maintains a full-time home elsewhere -- is not a gray area. It's not the child's home address for any purpose.

[Anonymous]

So, the DC regulations specify that the student must be enrolled in the zoned school where the child "resides."

5-E DCMR § 2002.1 states "Application for admission to the D.C. Public Schools shall be made by registering at the school for which the student is eligible which is located in the attendance zone within which the applicant resides."

The 2022.12 goes on to state that "Any person who supplies false information to the D.C. Public Schools in connection with student residency verification shall be subject to a penalty not to exceed five hundred dollars ($500). The case of any such person may also be referred to the Office of the United States Attorney for the District of Columbia for consideration for prosecution."

"Resides" should be defined the same way it is defined for the DC residency purposes. Although that section of the regulation does not specifically state that it includes residency for the purposes of attendance zones, it is the most natural interpretation of the regulation to use the same definitions.

5-A DCMR § 5001.5 states that residency means "The person has established a physical presence in the District of Columbia.

Section 5009.1 then defines "physical presence" as "The actual occupation and inhabitance of a place of abode with the intent to dwell for a continuous period of time."

Thus, "resides" for the purposes of the enrollment paperwork you submit to the school to show your entitlement to enroll in an IB school means the address where your child actually occupies the home, and intends to stay for a "continuous period of time."

This does not, obviously, extend to a studio you rent IB for Deal while you live in your 2500 sq ft house in Petworth.

[Anonymous]

The vague language in the rules obviously provides broad scope for interpretation, e.g. stay for "dwell for a continuous period of time."

I see two major problems here: 1) lack of political will to prevent and prosecute boundary cheating, and, 2) the considerable skill, determination and resources boundary cheaters can and will bring to creatively interpret, or even bypass, rules.

In our EotP neighborhood, where real estate values have skyrocketed in recent years, it's not uncommon for early gentrifiers to trade up to bigger houses. Parents often keep small property #1 for school enrollment, quietly subletting the place to friends or relatives, then live in house #2, which is larger. DCPC leaves these longtime neighborhood families alone rather than play games of wack-a-mole with them, knowing that they can jump between local properties.

You have to pick your battles as a school system leader. As long as rampant out of state residency cheating is widespread in the District, and dozens of public schools fail, the lesser problem of boundary cheating is very unlikely to be addressed.