Anonymous
06/13/2015 22:24
Subject: Re:AG Racine Sues Two MPD Officer for Residency Fraud
Anonymous wrote:I'm curious how many other fraudulent residency occurrances are happening in every school?
More than anybody thinks.
Anonymous
06/13/2015 21:47
Subject: Re:AG Racine Sues Two MPD Officer for Residency Fraud
I'm curious how many other fraudulent residency occurrances are happening in every school?
Anonymous
06/13/2015 01:14
Subject: AG Racine Sues Two MPD Officer for Residency Fraud
People always wanted Eaton's principal's head on a silver platter. What about the school's female business manager?
Anonymous
06/12/2015 23:15
Subject: AG Racine Sues Two MPD Officer for Residency Fraud
Residency is not simple because many people try and define it in a way that benefits them. But even if DC did not clearly define it on the paper, there is much precedent.
Where did the family live? They were not homeless so each night where did the children sleep? There are complexities where guardianship and homelessness come in but that was not a part of the issue for this family.
Where did the family live? They were not homeless so each night where did the children sleep? There are complexities where guardianship and homelessness come in but that was not a part of the issue for this family.
Anonymous
06/12/2015 22:25
Subject: Re:AG Racine Sues Two MPD Officer for Residency Fraud
Anonymous wrote:Hope they beat the case and get off scot-free. Parents who go the extra mile to get their kids into DCPS are like illegal immigrants who have anchor babies to get into the US -- they're strivers who are better than the complacent mediocrities we normally get, and we're better off having them than whoever we would have had in their place.
well i couldn't get my kids into eaton OOB and they are definitely not "complacent mediocrities". these people were taking spots away from DC taxpayers and they are certainly no better than the law abiding families who would have taken their place.
Anonymous
06/12/2015 22:20
Subject: AG Racine Sues Two MPD Officer for Residency Fraud
What I think the diligent researcher PP may be saying is that back when this family's kids started in a DCPS school the regulations were slightly different and residency wasnt as clearly defined as it is now.
I have to think the AGs office did some research too and felt they had a pretty solid case before filing and being so public about this case.
I have to think the AGs office did some research too and felt they had a pretty solid case before filing and being so public about this case.
Anonymous
06/12/2015 22:08
Subject: AG Racine Sues Two MPD Officer for Residency Fraud
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:You have to sign a statement every year saying you live in DC when you (re)enroll your child for the fall. Does not matter how DC defined "residency" in 2008.
It does matter if residency is not clearly defined.
They define "child" ... They define "guardian" ... It is odd they don't define residency and something a lawyer could use against the case.
I would be nice if there was 1 thing on the internet that is clear... Since in 2008 they decided to change the definition.
You have to write out the address you are claiming you reside, and then you sign that the statement is true. Then you provide your documentation that has to match the address you used. I don't know if residency is defined somewhere in the DC code, but I would be very surprised if this particular family could find a way to claim that any of them "resided" in DC.
Anonymous
06/12/2015 21:12
Subject: Re:AG Racine Sues Two MPD Officer for Residency Fraud
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Yes it is. Fraud is fraud. They all should be investigated and sued.
We all have to sign that piece of paper saying that we live at the address on the registration.
Any adult over 18 who can read and sign their name should bd held to what is stated on that form. 100%.
How do we get that to happen? I have called the fraud hotline a couple of time about definite md residents but nothing ever happened.
Let me try again. What, if any, would be the FINANCIAL penalty if the fraudster was a bonafide DC resident?
It would be very difficult for DC to claim a financial penalty. To claim a loss, they would have to claim that the system loses when a resident attends a school other than the one he is supposed to. That claim is laughable. The other claim might be unjust enrichment, claiming that the fraudster enriched himself through his fraudulent actions and has to return it. To claim that, they would have to claim that there is a financial benefit to attending one DCPS school over another. But the DCPS party line is that every DCPS school is good.
Anonymous
06/12/2015 20:48
Subject: AG Racine Sues Two MPD Officer for Residency Fraud
Anonymous wrote:You have to sign a statement every year saying you live in DC when you (re)enroll your child for the fall. Does not matter how DC defined "residency" in 2008.
It does matter if residency is not clearly defined.
They define "child" ... They define "guardian" ... It is odd they don't define residency and something a lawyer could use against the case.
I would be nice if there was 1 thing on the internet that is clear... Since in 2008 they decided to change the definition.
Anonymous
06/12/2015 19:47
Subject: AG Racine Sues Two MPD Officer for Residency Fraud
You have to sign a statement every year saying you live in DC when you (re)enroll your child for the fall. Does not matter how DC defined "residency" in 2008.
Anonymous
06/12/2015 19:22
Subject: Re:AG Racine Sues Two MPD Officer for Residency Fraud
Anonymous wrote:Come on, "residency" means you LIVE THERE, not that you own a property. Residency and ownership are two different terms that can overlap, but dont have to.
It did NOT mean that in 2008. I posted a non-public document that explains this. The proof of residency statue defines, parent, it defines child, but it does not define residency. I am not arguing the definition of residency, I am just looking for a place on the DC government web page where it is defined, since the definition has obviously been changed and non-public documents define it.
Anonymous
06/12/2015 19:14
Subject: Re:AG Racine Sues Two MPD Officer for Residency Fraud
Come on, "residency" means you LIVE THERE, not that you own a property. Residency and ownership are two different terms that can overlap, but dont have to.
Anonymous
06/12/2015 19:10
Subject: Re:AG Racine Sues Two MPD Officer for Residency Fraud
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Yes it is. Fraud is fraud. They all should be investigated and sued.
We all have to sign that piece of paper saying that we live at the address on the registration.
Any adult over 18 who can read and sign their name should bd held to what is stated on that form. 100%.
How do we get that to happen? I have called the fraud hotline a couple of time about definite md residents but nothing ever happened.
Can you provide a link to that form? I can't find it.
http://osse.dc.gov/sites/default/files/dc/sites/osse/publication/attachments/COS_DC_RESIDENCY_VERIFICATION_FORM_091714_0.pdf
Here is a section from the "Part C" that all DCPS parents have to sign:
Penalty for False Information:
Any person, including any District of Columbia public school or public charter school official, who knowingly supplies false information to a public official in connection with student residency verification shall be subject to charges of tuition retroactively, and payment of a fine of not more than $2,000 or imprisonment for not more than 90 days, but not both fine and imprisonment, pursuant to the District of Columbia Nonresident Tuition Act, approved September 8, 1960 and amended by the District of Columbia Public Schools and Public Charter School Student Residency Fraud Prevention Amendment Act of 2012 (D.C. Code ยง38-312). The case of any such person may be referred by the Office of the State Superintendent of Education to the Office of the Attorney General.
Where does it say residency means your primary residence is in DC? The definition in 2008 was that you owned property in DC but it did not have to be your primary residence.
I don't see where it is clear that the primary residence defines residency instead of owning property.
Anonymous
06/12/2015 19:06
Subject: AG Racine Sues Two MPD Officer for Residency Fraud
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:They aren't DC residents. They live in MD. Owning property in DC doesn't make you a resident.
It did make you a resident pre-2008. The rules changed. Where is that posted? It seems the public website aligns with the pre-and rules.
Every time you document your residency in DC for schools, you swear that you and your child reside at the address and that you are aware of the penalties of making untrue statements. They certainly were aware of the law.
No. The form does not ask you to swear, they ask for a pay stub.
Different poster: Actually by signing and dating the form, you affirm that your statements are truthful and the form is admissible evidence in court.
What form?
Anonymous
06/12/2015 19:05
Subject: AG Racine Sues Two MPD Officer for Residency Fraud
Anonymous wrote:Everyone knew Eaton had many students who were not resident during that time frame. The classic quote of what ward is Landover in comes from Eaton. Wasn't the Principal from Eaton at the time doing the same thing?
Interesting but it says that the family resided in Alexandria, VA for a period of time as well. Yea I know its easy to dump on PG but facts are facts