Reply to Mary Cheh's letter about school boundaries

Forum Index » DC Public and Public Charter Schools

Reply to "Mary Cheh's letter about school boundaries"

Subject:

Emoticons





More smilies

Text Color: Font: Close Marks

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]
Provisions in the bill would ensure that students cur- rently enrolled in a school would be able to remain in that school and its current feeder pattern — even if they no longer live in the school’s boundary after any redrawing. Siblings of students already enrolled in a school would be similarly grandfathered.

[/quote]

This I really don't get. Yes, I understand why people want it. But isn't the point of redistricting to be able to respond to demographic shifts? With this provision you're guaranteeing that any response will be so incredibly slow that it can't have effect.  As an example, imagine that this law had been in effect forever, and that redrawing had been done in 2005, 1995, 1985, 1975, and so forth. The only kids who would be affected by the 2005 redrawing would be those who entered in 2006 or later -- today's fifth graders and younger -- who were the oldest member of their family attending. The rest of the kids would be using the 1995 map. Even since 2005 everything has changed. In 2005, Wilson and Deal had not been renovated, and they were not at capacity. Pretty much everyone who wanted to could get in out of boundary. Just about all of the Ward 3 elementary schools were under-enrolled then too. It's hard to imagine that anything would really be any different in this scenario.

I understand why redrawing hasn't been done since the 1970's -- nobody wants to be impacted by it. But Cheh's plan just makes permanent the idea that redrawing never actually affects anyone -- which is just like not having redrawing, only worse.[/quote]

Options

	Disable HTML in this message
	Disable BB Code in this message
	Disable smilies in this message

Review message

Search Recent Topics Hottest Topics