There is a fairness reason under the DC zoning code for why a neighborhood preference for charters makes a lot of sense. DCPS schools were situated as neighborhood schools near residential areas years ago. Any major public school expansion or relocation, rare as that may be, involves a political process where the public can weigh in at various points, but as a zoning matter the public school is located "as a matter of right." For private schools to locate in residential zones, they must go through a "special exception" zoning process in which the community can participate, and impacts like traffic and parking are considered. As private schools typically draw from a wide area and many students and faculty may arrive by car, the process makes sense. They can not locate in residential areas as a matter of right. DC Charters are treated like DCPS schools under the law (i.e., matter of right) but typically have some of the same impacts as independent schools on a residential neighborhood. Becaue there is no hearing process to consider neighborhood impacts of such schools, it makes sense to mitigate their impact somewhat by providing a neighborhood preference of some scope of type.

How is the requirement for the schools to have neighborhood preference to be potential users of abandoned DCPS schools consistent with DCPS's own use of its property for application schools like Banneker? Just because it serves a particular type of student doesn't make it more or less worthwhile and needful of space.

Anonymous wrote:Neighborhood preference for charters taking over closed dcps buildings makes good sense to me. Neighborhoods whose schools have closed have been completely screwed over, and this proposal is a good step in mitigating that. (In addition to giving kids a nearby school, this should also cut down on traffic in places where no-one had planned for every kid being driven to school, as happens at many charters.)

And if a charter doesn't like the idea, they can just forego bidding on former dcps buildings.

It shouldn't necessarily be tied to providing neighborhood preference. Many neighborhood schools were closed due to underenrollment or other consolidations and changes, so the need may or may not already be served by another DCPS school - and students in ANY neighborhood are free to attend ANY charter. Some neighborhoods had things like two elementary schools just within a few blocks of each other, as an example - wasn't justifiable. And likewise, as PP pointed out, it depends on what grade ranges are being served and a number of other factors.

How would neighborhood preference really help more than just having a single charter school application? With a single application, parents can decide for themselves whether they value the commute or the program better. At this point, they can't do that, they just have to take what they can get, and that is a real problem. But, what makes you think that it wouldn't work itself out for the most part if the lottery included a ranking element?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:certainly not going to happen anytime soon---none of the existing charters (unless they are hard up for kids) will do this.

How would neighborhood preference help anyone when applied to schools that are underenrolled?

It could actually be a big help to the underenrolled schools themselves. Remember, what the Post article discusses is giving preference in cases where charters take over a recently-closed DCPS neighborhood school. So a population that needs a school meets a school that needs a population.

Anonymous wrote:certainly not going to happen anytime soon---none of the existing charters (unless they are hard up for kids) will do this.

How would neighborhood preference help anyone when applied to schools that are underenrolled?

Anonymous wrote: problems when parents are driving from all over the city to a school placed in a residential neighborhood, whose planners envisioned most kids would walk to.

definitely!

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Neighborhood preference for charters taking over closed dcps buildings makes good sense to me. Neighborhoods whose schools have closed have been completely screwed over, and this proposal is a good step in mitigating that. (In addition to giving kids a nearby school, this should also cut down on traffic in places where no-one had planned for every kid being driven to school, as happens at many charters.)

And if a charter doesn't like the idea, they can just forego bidding on former dcps buildings.

So if an elementary school takes over a middle school space, do neighborhood elementary aged get preference?

Why, no.

The thing is, it's not just about the displaced kids. There's also the logistical problems when parents are driving from all over the city to a school placed in a residential neighborhood, whose planners envisioned most kids would walk to.

Anonymous wrote:Neighborhood preference for charters taking over closed dcps buildings makes good sense to me. Neighborhoods whose schools have closed have been completely screwed over, and this proposal is a good step in mitigating that. (In addition to giving kids a nearby school, this should also cut down on traffic in places where no-one had planned for every kid being driven to school, as happens at many charters.)

And if a charter doesn't like the idea, they can just forego bidding on former dcps buildings.

So if an elementary school takes over a middle school space, do neighborhood elementary aged get preference?

The way I read the articles, they are ALLOWING charters that move into a closed DCPS building to do this, but not REQUIRING it.

I am actually undecided about it.

Can see both sides of the coin. On the one hand, as we keep closing DCPS (a trend sure to continue), don't you have to give people a school of right that is within a reasonable distance from their home?

On the other hand, charters are supposed to be equal opportunity, regardless of address...won't people start crowding into the 'popular charter x' district (if such exists), as they now move into a JKLM district. And, what happens when they move? Even the DCPS building takeovers are leases...long term but leases nonetheless.

Neighborhood preference for charters taking over closed dcps buildings makes good sense to me. Neighborhoods whose schools have closed have been completely screwed over, and this proposal is a good step in mitigating that. (In addition to giving kids a nearby school, this should also cut down on traffic in places where no-one had planned for every kid being driven to school, as happens at many charters.)

And if a charter doesn't like the idea, they can just forego bidding on former dcps buildings.

I would love it in so far as there is a charter middle school/HS moving to my area and proximity preference would help me get in. I can see why they'd stomp the idea as a threat to neighborhood schools, though.

certainly not going to happen anytime soon---none of the existing charters (unless they are hard up for kids) will do this.

the way I interpreted the article was different.

I read it that there was committee formed. they had some meetings. in the end they decided to drop the idea.

Here is the line from the article: "D.C. Council member Tommy Wells (D-Ward 6), who has been among the most vocal backers of a neighborhood admissions preference, said he would stop pushing for it."

I don't agree and this is why DCPS offers a neighborhood school for every student. I guess the council will but into law that if you move into a old DCPS building you will have to give neighborhood students preference? If that's the case there will not be a tradtional DCPS neighborhood school.


http://www.washingtonpost.com/local/education/all-dc-charter-schools-shouldnt-have-to-admit-nearby-kids-first-panel-says/2012/12/14/4f994144-461c-11e2-8061-253bccfc7532_story.html