Reply to Renting but not occupying for DCPS in-boundary residency purposes?

Forum Index » DC Public and Public Charter Schools

Reply to "Renting but not occupying for DCPS in-boundary residency purposes?"

Subject:

Emoticons





More smilies

Text Color: Font: Close Marks

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]DCPS is supported by the DC tax base. When high SES parents flee the city, as they did en masse in the 80s and 90s, the tax base contracts. Parents who "work the system" generally can't afford privates, at least not easily, and aren't going to leave the Metro area.

Once overcrowded DCPS schools like Janney, Lafayette and Murch, and now Maury on Cap Hill, have seen their capacity increase substantially through building additions in recent years, financed with tax payers dollars.

My vote is for everybody high SES who elects to stay using an IB address for a DCPS school they're willing to use, whatever the hassle and risk involved in securing one, to continue to pay into city coffers, rather than running off to the burbs.

A low or middle-income SES earner who's renting can't expand the tax base like a parent investing in DC real estate and paying property tax, preferably on multiple properties. The larger the tax base, the more funds available for services to the poor. The more high SES families who stay, the more high SES classmates for low SES kids who benefit from having high SES classmates, and high SES parent watchdogs and fundraisers in DCPS schools. We gain nothing as a city when high SES parents hit the road for lack of schools they're comfortable with.

[/quote]

:roll: No.  How about -- if you're so high SES and so valuable to the city, just figure out a freakin' way to buy real estate zoned for a school you're willing to send your child to, instead of thinking you have the right to cheat because you're white and well-off.  [/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