Worth Reporting - In-Boundary Fraud?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I’m sorry, are we opposing this because we value neighborhood schools or because we care about the at risk kids? There’s so much pearl clutching happening I’m starting to feel lost…

Because we care about neighborhood schools, dislike people who use their money to cheat (if the previous presidency hasn’t sensitized you to this, I don’t know where you’ve been), and because we would like those OOB spots that are available in our overcrowded schools to be distributed fairly.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Who cares? At least they OWN the property in-bounds. That is like 1 billion times better than all the rest of shady residency and boundary fraud that is going on all the time.

Seriously. They’re paying taxes and not renting it out, so presumably not double dipping on in bound seats (if another family moved in and took a second set of in bounds seats). How is that any worse than staying enrolled after a short term rental? If OSSE allows the latter, why does anyone think they care about the former?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’m sorry, are we opposing this because we value neighborhood schools or because we care about the at risk kids? There’s so much pearl clutching happening I’m starting to feel lost…

Because we care about neighborhood schools, dislike people who use their money to cheat (if the previous presidency hasn’t sensitized you to this, I don’t know where you’ve been), and because we would like those OOB spots that are available in our overcrowded schools to be distributed fairly.

exactly, if you can't afford to buy a lively house in bounds, then you can't afford to go to the school.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The only people mad about this are the ones that overpaid to live in-bounds and are equally mad at “those” OOB students taking up space in “their” schools. Or maybe charter lottery winners who don’t like thinking their kids aren’t in the best school possible. If you don’t like it, petition OSSE to change the policy. Don’t be petty and spiteful.

For real. This is an issue for the Wilson feeder schools. No one else cares.

Except the people who want into the Wilson feeders. They care. They care because they can’t get in because other people who are rich enough to afford it will lie.

I guess you don’t care about equity as much as you say you do.

When you trot out this little “as much as you say you do” line, who are you speaking to? The voices in your head.

Any actual response to the point that ignoring, if not encouraging people who have the money to cheat the system is not equitable? Anything? Do you think the rich deserve more just because they can afford it?

it sounds like they are following the rules and if the had more money, they would just buy an inbounds house. That's what the rich who want to stay public do- they purchase a house in an acceptable school district. It's not cheating, it's how the system was designed to work

It might not be technically illegal, but it certainly goes against what the system of neighborhood schools was designed to do. It is meant to allow kids who live near each other to go to school together, not to put those into the same school who can afford to own or rent a piece of real estate in the same neighborhood.

The spirit of neighborhood schools in the US is segregation. That’s why busing was a thing.

So now we desegregate by allowing affluent families get in by owning or renting extra real estate, and taking up the few spots that could go to at-risk kids?

I’m not saying working the rules is ok, I’m explaining why you’ll get the side eye for being so fired up about it.

I don’t think anybody is pretending to be fired up about this for the sake of at risk kids. It is more about general fairness and not gaming the system, in addition to caring about neighborhood schools.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’m sorry, are we opposing this because we value neighborhood schools or because we care about the at risk kids? There’s so much pearl clutching happening I’m starting to feel lost…

Because we care about neighborhood schools, dislike people who use their money to cheat (if the previous presidency hasn’t sensitized you to this, I don’t know where you’ve been), and because we would like those OOB spots that are available in our overcrowded schools to be distributed fairly.

exactly, if you can't afford to buy a lively house in bounds, then you can't afford to go to the school.

Here we go. This is the real concern. If you’re too poor to afford to live here, we don’t want you mingling with our kids. Save those OOB seats for the “real” poor kids that will self-segregate. The real concern is the other kids that blend in with “us” but aren’t reaaaally like us.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’m sorry, are we opposing this because we value neighborhood schools or because we care about the at risk kids? There’s so much pearl clutching happening I’m starting to feel lost…

Because we care about neighborhood schools, dislike people who use their money to cheat (if the previous presidency hasn’t sensitized you to this, I don’t know where you’ve been), and because we would like those OOB spots that are available in our overcrowded schools to be distributed fairly.

exactly, if you can't afford to buy a lively house in bounds, then you can't afford to go to the school.

Here we go. This is the real concern. If you’re too poor to afford to live here, we don’t want you mingling with our kids. Save those OOB seats for the “real” poor kids that will self-segregate. The real concern is the other kids that blend in with “us” but aren’t reaaaally like us.

No, that’s not what most people think. Trust me, nobody is worried about their kids mingling with UMC kids from EOTP. People just really don’t like cheaters, especially those with money. That’s a pretty widespread sentiment across all SES.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’m sorry, are we opposing this because we value neighborhood schools or because we care about the at risk kids? There’s so much pearl clutching happening I’m starting to feel lost…

Because we care about neighborhood schools, dislike people who use their money to cheat (if the previous presidency hasn’t sensitized you to this, I don’t know where you’ve been), and because we would like those OOB spots that are available in our overcrowded schools to be distributed fairly.

exactly, if you can't afford to buy a lively house in bounds, then you can't afford to go to the school.

Here we go. This is the real concern. If you’re too poor to afford to live here, we don’t want you mingling with our kids. Save those OOB seats for the “real” poor kids that will self-segregate. The real concern is the other kids that blend in with “us” but aren’t reaaaally like us.

No, that’s not what most people think. Trust me, nobody is worried about their kids mingling with UMC kids from EOTP. People just really don’t like cheaters, especially those with money. That’s a pretty widespread sentiment across all SES.

+1

[Anonymous]

Again, then just advise them to move in for a month so they can enroll by the book. Then nobody is cheating and everyone's happy. Problem solved!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Again, then just advise them to move in for a month so they can enroll by the book. Then nobody is cheating and everyone's happy. Problem solved!

Sorry, they will still be perceived as cheaters, even if what they did was technically legal. It’s called gaming the system, which in most people’s minds is pretty close to cheating. They would prefer to have a classmate who actually lives in that apartment.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Again, then just advise them to move in for a month so they can enroll by the book. Then nobody is cheating and everyone's happy. Problem solved!

Sorry, they will still be perceived as cheaters, even if what they did was technically legal. It’s called gaming the system, which in most people’s minds is pretty close to cheating. They would prefer to have a classmate who actually lives in that apartment.

Well can't please everyone. I guess it's a good way to weed out the pearl clutchers anyways.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Again, then just advise them to move in for a month so they can enroll by the book. Then nobody is cheating and everyone's happy. Problem solved!

Sorry, they will still be perceived as cheaters, even if what they did was technically legal. It’s called gaming the system, which in most people’s minds is pretty close to cheating. They would prefer to have a classmate who actually lives in that apartment.

Well can't please everyone. I guess it's a good way to weed out the pearl clutchers anyways.

People who would prefer friends who live in apartments over those who live in large houses across the park and only use their rental property to get into a neighborhood school aren’t pearl clutchers. Sorry, your stereotypical insults don’t stick here.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Again, then just advise them to move in for a month so they can enroll by the book. Then nobody is cheating and everyone's happy. Problem solved!

Sorry, they will still be perceived as cheaters, even if what they did was technically legal. It’s called gaming the system, which in most people’s minds is pretty close to cheating. They would prefer to have a classmate who actually lives in that apartment.

Well can't please everyone. I guess it's a good way to weed out the pearl clutchers anyways.

Wait, until they learn about how the economy actually works. The people who game the system are nearly always the winners.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Again, then just advise them to move in for a month so they can enroll by the book. Then nobody is cheating and everyone's happy. Problem solved!

Sorry, they will still be perceived as cheaters, even if what they did was technically legal. It’s called gaming the system, which in most people’s minds is pretty close to cheating. They would prefer to have a classmate who actually lives in that apartment.

Well can't please everyone. I guess it's a good way to weed out the pearl clutchers anyways.

Wait, until they learn about how the economy actually works. The people who game the system are nearly always the winners.

Sounds like something the Trumpers would say. Thanks for proving my point.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Again, then just advise them to move in for a month so they can enroll by the book. Then nobody is cheating and everyone's happy. Problem solved!

Sorry, they will still be perceived as cheaters, even if what they did was technically legal. It’s called gaming the system, which in most people’s minds is pretty close to cheating. They would prefer to have a classmate who actually lives in that apartment.

Well can't please everyone. I guess it's a good way to weed out the pearl clutchers anyways.

Wait, until they learn about how the economy actually works. The people who game the system are nearly always the winners.

Seriously, I'd be impressed if I saw someone beat the system. The lottery SUCKS for all of us that don't have the money for a house in Ward 3. Good for anyone that figured out how to make the system work for them.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Again, then just advise them to move in for a month so they can enroll by the book. Then nobody is cheating and everyone's happy. Problem solved!

Sorry, they will still be perceived as cheaters, even if what they did was technically legal. It’s called gaming the system, which in most people’s minds is pretty close to cheating. They would prefer to have a classmate who actually lives in that apartment.

Well can't please everyone. I guess it's a good way to weed out the pearl clutchers anyways.

Wait, until they learn about how the economy actually works. The people who game the system are nearly always the winners.

Seriously, I'd be impressed if I saw someone beat the system. The lottery SUCKS for all of us that don't have the money for a house in Ward 3. Good for anyone that figured out how to make the system work for them.

There’s always the option of actually living in an apartment in Ward 3 to access the schools, like many other families do.