Anonymous wrote:Not all houses on the "Hill" are $1MM+

Anonymous wrote:THose are all good ideas. And those of us not rich enough to live on the Hill (our HH income is only 250k) would like to see those improvements implemented in Ward1. I don't even know where to start. our IB elem doesn't even have a PTA or enough interest to form one.

Anonymous wrote:I love how they want to make public charters keep bad students for a whole year -- do DCPS schools have to keep OOB disruptors for a whole year? Because that's the equivalent, since there are no boundary rights to the public charter schools. Does CHPSPO also want to change when private and parochial schools begin so that they can't take advantage of PS3 public programs?

Anonymous wrote:These are great points and well in line with what's needed to implement the Ward 6 Middle School Plan (I disagree with PP, a legitimate and public process went into it*).
However, I find the middle school tension with charter schools poorly framed. Calling it "poaching" is not only unwise but also misses the point. Rather, it should be framed as negatively affecting choice for parents and children, leading to suboptimal outcomes. For example, families that aren't in-boundary for a school they might actually prefer (e.g. Stuart-Hobson) but are not (yet) confident in their in-boundary option (Eliot-Hine, Jefferson) are forced to hedge their bets with charters rather than waiting out their lottery outcome for their true preference. Some parents and kids at Basis or Latin my truly have preferred an OOB shot at Stuart-Hobson but never got a chance to try. Sure, you can say, they can wait it out at Basis or Latin and then try for 6th but that's no good, neither for the kids nor the schools. That's the nature of suboptimal outcomes in a poorly implemented school choice model.

*"The rest of us" problem is endemic in democratic processes. I for one am one of the "rest of us" who wouldn't have gone to war with Iraq. And I'm the "rest of us" who wouldn't have raised a stink over the Hines expansion at Eastern Market (unlike the well-funded and vocal part of the community living right next to it). Not to mention "the rest of us" find all kinds of decisions made by past generations any place we move or find ourselves newly inserted in, be it as newly minted homeowners, as parents etc. Everyone is "the rest of us" in a lot of things.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:10:06 -- You can't possibly think that SH (and the Cluster) would rather have OOB students than Brent students at SH. The middle school feeder pattern change of a few years ago has been horrible for SH and it would be great if it was fixed so that all schools from 1st St. to 13th St. and G St. NE to G St. SE were in the SH zone.

It SH and the Cluster truly would prefer this, then it would be a relatively easy "ask" to seek support from the Maury and Brent communities. Instead, Maury parents have been left to work for improvements at EH and Brent parents left feeling isolated.

Anonymous wrote:10:06 -- You can't possibly think that SH (and the Cluster) would rather have OOB students than Brent students at SH. The middle school feeder pattern change of a few years ago has been horrible for SH and it would be great if it was fixed so that all schools from 1st St. to 13th St. and G St. NE to G St. SE were in the SH zone.

Anonymous wrote:These are great points and well in line with what's needed to implement the Ward 6 Middle School Plan (I disagree with PP, a legitimate and public process went into it*).
However, I find the middle school tension with charter schools poorly framed. Calling it "poaching" is not only unwise but also misses the point. Rather, it should be framed as negatively affecting choice for parents and children, leading to suboptimal outcomes. For example, families that aren't in-boundary for a school they might actually prefer (e.g. Stuart-Hobson) but are not (yet) confident in their in-boundary option (Eliot-Hine, Jefferson) are forced to hedge their bets with charters rather than waiting out their lottery outcome for their true preference. Some parents and kids at Basis or Latin my truly have preferred an OOB shot at Stuart-Hobson but never got a chance to try. Sure, you can say, they can wait it out at Basis or Latin and then try for 6th but that's no good, neither for the kids nor the schools. That's the nature of suboptimal outcomes in a poorly implemented school choice model.

*"The rest of us" problem is endemic in democratic processes. I for one am one of the "rest of us" who wouldn't have gone to war with Iraq. And I'm the "rest of us" who wouldn't have raised a stink over the Hines expansion at Eastern Market (unlike the well-funded and vocal part of the community living right next to it). Not to mention "the rest of us" find all kinds of decisions made by past generations any place we move or find ourselves newly inserted in, be it as newly minted homeowners, as parents etc. Everyone is "the rest of us" in a lot of things.

Anonymous wrote:OP, why is Capitol Hill Parents capitalized and why does CHPSPO seem to think that it is speaking on behalf of all Capitol Hill Parent?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Please be clear and say, Capital Hill request as Capital Hill by NO means represents all of Ward 6. as Im sure you know, the "rest of us" living in Ward 6, had no idea about this request, did not coordinate with this request and our schools (there are other schools in Ward 6) are not reflected.

Please revise this letter as you are misrepresenting the interests of the entire Ward.

Please re-read the first sentence in the OP.