Reply to DCPS students shafted again - sign petition to keep Jelleff field public

Forum Index » DC Public and Public Charter Schools

Reply to "DCPS students shafted again - sign petition to keep Jelleff field public"

Subject:

Emoticons





More smilies

Text Color: Font: Close Marks

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]I don’t believe I said that. Can you point that out?[/quote]

I assume you are referring to:

But, why do you think an "other organization" couldn't, by dint of a special arrangement, also be a "partner with a written agreement?"

Because you said ". . . before you place this in that category rather than “other organizations, groups, or individuals for private use that are based in the District.” This much more clearly falls into the latter category."

"Rather than" suggests the thing can be one, but not the other.  "It is X, rather than Y," will commonly be understood to mean the thing is not Y.  TO put it is specific terms, according Webster's, rather than is used "to indicate negation as a contrary choice."

Also, "This much more clearly falls into the latter category" indicated that it does *not* fall into the former category.

So, you did say that.  Twice.  [/quote]

You originally offered an either/or choice and choose. Then you offered a choice of both but denied me the choice by assuming my answer. 
[/quote]

What on earth are you talking about?  Here is the entire discussion thread:

[quote][b]Post 1: [/b] By DPR's own policy concerning priority of use, DCPS and DCPCS should get priority over non-public users.

https://dpr.dc.gov/page/priority-use

"Throughout the year, permits are issued on a first come, first served basis. At times when DPR accepts applications during a "Permit Window," all applications during that time are considered concurrent and therefore are prioritized in the following order:

- DPR sponsored activities 
- Partners with written agreement 
- Athletic programs organized by DC Public Schools, District Public Charter School, or the DC State Athletic Association for competitive league pay (games only) 
- Youth non-profit organizations, including schools, principally serving District residents 
- Adult non-profit organizations principally serving District residents 
- Other organizations, groups, or individuals for private use that are based in the District; 
- and then others

Organizations that "principally serve District residents" are defined as organizations with over 75% of participants residing in the District. Roster or other proof of residency may be required."

I'm sure some defender of the lease will point out that this is pertaining to permits, rather than leases. But the conceptual intent of priority for public youth-related agencies is clear.

[b]Post 2 (me):  [/b]Based only on what I have read in this thread, this arrangement sounds like a partner with a written agreement, which is prioritized above DCPS. Though I agree, that does seem to violate the spirit of the prioritization.

[b]Post 3 (you): [/b] You are reaching again. You will need to find the definition of “partners with written agreements” before you place this in that category rather than “other organizations, groups, or individuals for private use that are based in the District.” This much more clearly falls into the latter category.

[b]Post 4 (me): [/b] Of course it falls into the later category. But based on the fact that Maret is providing funding for a new turf field, I expect there's more to the arrangement than the standard "fill out a form and reserve space" used by DPR. But, you're right, I don't know. I also am not going to research it, because I have no personal stake in this.

But, why do you think an "other organization" couldn't, by dint of a special arrangement, also be a "partner with a written agreement?"

[b]Post 5 (you):[/b]  I don’t believe I said that. Can you point that out?

[b]Post 6 (me): [/b] I assume you are referring to:

But, why do you think an "other organization" couldn't, by dint of a special arrangement, also be a "partner with a written agreement?"

"Rather than" suggests the thing can be one, but not the other. "It is X, rather than Y," will commonly be understood to mean the thing is not Y. TO put it is specific terms, according Webster's, rather than is used "to indicate negation as a contrary choice."

Also, "This much more clearly falls into the latter category" indicated that it does *not* fall into the former category.

So, you did say that. Twice.[/quote]

So, you are completely full of sh!t.  You posited it was one rather than the other.  Not me.  [/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