Anonymous wrote:So, I will admit to being lucky enough to be a JKLMer but I love the community and ease of being in a neighborhood school. And while I completely understand the above stated point - part of me thinks that if the charters had neighborhood preference then more people could enjoy that. Then again...only those with money which is not really the point. Comes back to the fact that we really need to fix DCPS more...somehow.

That's exactly why I oppose a neighborhood preference for charters -- it would mean that property values go up around the best schools, and as a result it would be yet another educational option dictated by your ability to afford expensive property. If you want a neighborhood school, that's what neighborhood DCPS are for.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Because then you make it possible for rich people to buy into the best charter schools the way they can buy into the best public school districts. Some of us believe that random distribution of seats is more egalitarian.

Next question?

Surely there have to be some who are happy to keep out the low-income neighbors?

perhaps, but how long before even "bring your imagination and your contractor" is 750,000, pricing us out not just the poor but the middle class. There are way more rich people than houses in good school districts. How there are this many rich people in DC, I have no idea.

We attend a relative attractive DCPS (EOTP) and it is evenly split middle class / low-income.

Maybe it's just a coincidents, but every well off family we know from 1- and 2-yeard-old daycare (back when we were scraping to make that $1500/month payment) is in one of the highly-desirable charters.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Because then you make it possible for rich people to buy into the best charter schools the way they can buy into the best public school districts. Some of us believe that random distribution of seats is more egalitarian.

Next question?

Surely there have to be some who are happy to keep out the low-income neighbors?

perhaps, but how long before even "bring your imagination and your contractor" is 750,000, pricing us out not just the poor but the middle class. There are way more rich people than houses in good school districts. How there are this many rich people in DC, I have no idea.

This is exactly how it is for Oyster, right? If it has worked for DCPS for decades, then why not do it for charters? Seems like a good idea.

So, I will admit to being lucky enough to be a JKLMer but I love the community and ease of being in a neighborhood school. And while I completely understand the above stated point - part of me thinks that if the charters had neighborhood preference then more people could enjoy that. Then again...only those with money which is not really the point. Comes back to the fact that we really need to fix DCPS more...somehow.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Because then you make it possible for rich people to buy into the best charter schools the way they can buy into the best public school districts. Some of us believe that random distribution of seats is more egalitarian.

Next question?

Random? Only for the initial lottery and then charters conveniently help some kids determine that the school just isn't "the right fit".

So maybe rick kids could buy in, but depending on the neighborhood, poor kids can just show up. And there goes your "free private school atmosphere".

The neighborhood wouldn't be poor for long. I would buy in a second in Lamb's neighborhood if there was neighborhood preference (as long as there were house below 625 or 650).

+1 It's true. I guess you can buy into Oyster, but it seems like that is not possible under a million unless a tiny apartment.

Anonymous wrote:So let's pretend 25% of Latin's seats were for neighborhood kids, 50% are for sibling.

If I had the means, I would rent inbounds for neighborhood preferance for the period I would need to until I got in (a few months around the lottery) and not really move.

And after I am in, are they going to kick me out the following year when I went back to my previous address and no longer have neighborhood proximity?

These are the shenanigans DCPS is dealing with now- people renting IBs for the pref. and then rolling out once they're in. Why complicate charters with this nonsense?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Because then you make it possible for rich people to buy into the best charter schools the way they can buy into the best public school districts. Some of us believe that random distribution of seats is more egalitarian.

Next question?

Surely there have to be some who are happy to keep out the low-income neighbors?

perhaps, but how long before even "bring your imagination and your contractor" is 750,000, pricing us out not just the poor but the middle class. There are way more rich people than houses in good school districts. How there are this many rich people in DC, I have no idea.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Because then you make it possible for rich people to buy into the best charter schools the way they can buy into the best public school districts. Some of us believe that random distribution of seats is more egalitarian.

Next question?

Random? Only for the initial lottery and then charters conveniently help some kids determine that the school just isn't "the right fit".

So maybe rick kids could buy in, but depending on the neighborhood, poor kids can just show up. And there goes your "free private school atmosphere".

The neighborhood wouldn't be poor for long. I would buy in a second in Lamb's neighborhood if there was neighborhood preference (as long as there were house below 625 or 650).

Anonymous wrote:Because then you make it possible for rich people to buy into the best charter schools the way they can buy into the best public school districts. Some of us believe that random distribution of seats is more egalitarian.

Next question?

Surely there have to be some who are happy to keep out the low-income neighbors?

So let's pretend 25% of Latin's seats were for neighborhood kids, 50% are for sibling.

If I had the means, I would rent inbounds for neighborhood preferance for the period I would need to until I got in (a few months around the lottery) and not really move.

And after I am in, are they going to kick me out the following year when I went back to my previous address and no longer have neighborhood proximity?

Anonymous wrote:Because then you make it possible for rich people to buy into the best charter schools the way they can buy into the best public school districts. Some of us believe that random distribution of seats is more egalitarian.

Next question?

Random? Only for the initial lottery and then charters conveniently help some kids determine that the school just isn't "the right fit".

So maybe rick kids could buy in, but depending on the neighborhood, poor kids can just show up. And there goes your "free private school atmosphere".

we should maintain neighborhood preference for DCPS though.

Agree with PP -- I won't vote for any candidate who supports a neighborhood preference, even though I would personally benefit from such a policy.

Because then you make it possible for rich people to buy into the best charter schools the way they can buy into the best public school districts. Some of us believe that random distribution of seats is more egalitarian.

Next question?

...is to imply that you think any sort of neighborhood preference for charters is a good thing.

I'm confused as to why they are so threatened by this? I understand that for charters that differentiate by language immersion that it may be better to pull from a highly-motivated set of families from a citywide pool. But for everybody else?!?

And yes, I get it: Charters bop around neighborhoods in their early years, so an exception at that point in their life cycle might make sense to bring them to viability. But why -- when they're fully established -- why would it hurt to accept some limited number of neighborhood students?

Why does this freak them out so much?!?