Anonymous wrote:Guys, my understanding is that this is being done at the request of some ward 7 and 8 charter schools that have been requesting this for years and are expected to invoke this as soon as they are able. My understanding is that leadership at "hrcs"s are philosophically opposed to neighborhood preference and have always opposed this, which is why it is optional and not forced on any charters.

Anyone at LAMB YY etc can confirm this? Presumably school admins are making statements about whether they will or will not make use of this option.

It is premature. Council has not yet approved this.

Guys, my understanding is that this is being done at the request of some ward 7 and 8 charter schools that have been requesting this for years and are expected to invoke this as soon as they are able. My understanding is that leadership at "hrcs"s are philosophically opposed to neighborhood preference and have always opposed this, which is why it is optional and not forced on any charters.

Anyone at LAMB YY etc can confirm this? Presumably school admins are making statements about whether they will or will not make use of this option.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think this proposal is good intentioned but wrong headed. I live in Bloomingdale and I'm more than 1/2 mile from Langley. But there are no charters within 1/2 mile. I don't think we should be at a disadvantage in getting into a charter that's still walking distance, say 1 mile, from our house. This proposal will have unintended consequences and remove the feeling of "fairness" from the lottery.

+1

This proposal doesn't solve school "deserts" like it seems you are in. It is about access to walkable schools when there is one.

Anonymous wrote:I think this proposal is good intentioned but wrong headed. I live in Bloomingdale and I'm more than 1/2 mile from Langley. But there are no charters within 1/2 mile. I don't think we should be at a disadvantage in getting into a charter that's still walking distance, say 1 mile, from our house. This proposal will have unintended consequences and remove the feeling of "fairness" from the lottery.

+1

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I live in Ward 4 and there are five charters within .5 mile from my house. The closest DCPS school (my inbound school) is over a mile away.

I am very much in favor of this. The amount of traffic generated by parents driving their children to school is ridiculous.

Sorry, your convenience and your traffic challenges are NOT reasons to change a basic rule of equal opportunity to all applicants that charter rules in DC were founded upon. I understand why you want it, but it is wrong in so many ways for the Mayor to propose it and for it to be passed. I hope it gets nixed again, that would be the right thing to do.

NP, who is not affected by the proposal at all in Ward 6. I think you are wrong. I think the PP's convenience, to be more specific, PP's child's convenience and others similarly situated are exactly the reason IN FAVOR of the preference. The by-right school is not walkable and therefore getting the same right to walkability by a preference to a nearby charter is worthwhile, exactly for the convenience factor and so an already disadvantaged child (in terms of walkability to by-right school) isn't further inconvenienced because of traffic challenges.

Anonymous wrote:Why do pur city officials keep trying to break something good that works for dc kids? Big no for proximity pref.

Because it doesn't work for all families. This proposal will help the (few) families who are far from their inbound DCPS and close to a good charter (who, in some cases, took over the building of what used to be the neighborhood DCPS). It may help with neighborhood/charter relations where the neighborhood resents the charter families who clog their streets. It may help with racial diversity at schools like YY, ITS, others in Ward 2 or 5 who sit in a majority-minority neighborhood but draw a lot of white kids from all over the city. But . . . honestly, I think this proposal will not affect that many seats in the schools that want to opt in. Neighborhood preference will likely go below sibling preference. I think it's more of a PR effort by the mayor, trying to throw a bone to the neighborhoods whose inbound school was closed in the past 5 years and who are PO'ed about traffic from a charter school that took its place. For some of those schools in Ward 5 like ITS there is a racial dynamic as well -- a neighborhood school which served almost all black students (Shaed) was closed and now a charter school that serves a lot of white kids sits in that building. The families across the street can't send their kids/grandkids to the charter but they have people double parking in front of their house twice a day. I think Bowser is responding to complaints from those people.

Just saying. There definitely would be some in bound for Seaton that are way closer to Mundo Verde. But, who knows if MV would allow this preference.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There are a few blocks between Illinois and Upshur that would meet the test for CMi. >.5 mi from Barnard and Bruce Munroe but < .5 mi from CMI.
More for Yu Ying. I can see people targeting those blocks to get preference to their preferred school.

People seem to be forgetting that the charter school needs to offer this preference. I don't know enough about CMI, but I'm confident YY would never offer it.

My hunch is that this preference has a narrow enough scope that any effects will be fairly limited, due to not many addresses meeting the criteria, charter schools would have to opt in, parents would have to be interested in that particular charter AND have the means and luck to buy on that particular block, etc. I wish it would have a significant effect on traffic, but I don't think it will have much impact there either, unfortunately.

Now if they broadened the scope somewhat--say, > 0.5 miles from DCPS IB school but < 1 mile from a charter--that would be cause for more concern, obviously. But the way they've done it seems to prioritize walkability for the few families who are lucky enough to live within walking distance to the closest school, whether DCPS or charter.

Anonymous wrote:There are a few blocks between Illinois and Upshur that would meet the test for CMi. >.5 mi from Barnard and Bruce Munroe but < .5 mi from CMI.
More for Yu Ying. I can see people targeting those blocks to get preference to their preferred school.

People seem to be forgetting that the charter school needs to offer this preference. I don't know enough about CMI, but I'm confident YY would never offer it.

I think this proposal is good intentioned but wrong headed. I live in Bloomingdale and I'm more than 1/2 mile from Langley. But there are no charters within 1/2 mile. I don't think we should be at a disadvantage in getting into a charter that's still walking distance, say 1 mile, from our house. This proposal will have unintended consequences and remove the feeling of "fairness" from the lottery.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:For those of us who live in Ward 8, this sucks---big time.

this likely won't afftect the hrcs you might want to commute to since residents in these wards are within .5 of a school. I woudl love someone to do an analysis on google maps though. How many ward 5 etc residents aren't within .5 of their IB?

Wrong.

Given how few spots there are for the most HRCSs in the 1st place, if a preference is given for the above criteria, there are ALWAYS enough outliers who would be more than .5 miles from nearest IB but closer to HRCS. Enough to take up the open spots and shut out everyone further.

Fine, shut them out, putting real pressure on politicians and DCPS and DCPC to dramatically improve neighborhood schools. Something's gotta give in this hair-brained system.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Making it more complicated is going to benefit those who can navigate it best. I think this benefits the wealthy who can figure the system out and buy in specific locations to take advantage of it.

For example, there are going to be certain houses that are <.5 mi to a target HRCS and >.5mi from their DCPS. I could find those houses. I highly doubt those who are economically disadvantaged could.

but its up to the charter to evoke it or not. leading to much uncertainty. in that way, at least, you won't see housing prices affected

That's true in the short term. But if a place like LAMB decided to offer it, I think it would drive up prices in any areas that meet the two criteria. I'd certainly run the analysis if I were looking.

Offer it one year and not the next, which is their perogative. Housing prices need more stability that that to shoot up.

The bolded part is right on point.

The last comment about offering it one year and not the next makes no sense, mostly because most schools would never want to deal with the headache of cranky parents in the "off year" and the procedural cluster****s that would go along with that.

It absolutely gives a major advantage to the best resourced families interested for instance in immersion. That apartment building next to YY would suddenly turn into condos LOL! But in all seriousness, it's a proposal that only those who can afford to move homes to be strategic or those who already know this policy would apply to them. Totally DISadvantages the least-resourced and those far far away from the HRCSs.

Great, give "wealthy" families (households where parents earn six figures?) incentives to stay in the city because, when they bail from public schools for privates and the burbs, poor kids lose out. The "least resourced" benefit when DC expands its tax base by hanging on to well-heeled parent tax payers, enabling a municipality to afford better services for the poor. DC charters with long waiting lists have buildings in neighborhoods that would benefit from investment by home buyers seeking good schools.

What disadvantages poor kids in schools is myopic thinking about how to help them.

There are a few blocks between Illinois and Upshur that would meet the test for CMi. >.5 mi from Barnard and Bruce Munroe but < .5 mi from CMI.
More for Yu Ying. I can see people targeting those blocks to get preference to their preferred school. .

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I just mapped a half mile radius from CMI and it pretty doesn't pick up any residential. They need to figure out how to adjust for this in places that have enourmous campuses. Otherwise I will be working with my ANC to get my house included!!

It's a walkabilty initiative. If you can't walk to the school on a regular basis, than the initiative isn't for your school. Is it feasible to live .5 from the campus and still walk knowing once you get there, you have to walk another .5? Also, where is your IB school? >.5 from your house?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I live in Ward 4 and there are five charters within .5 mile from my house. The closest DCPS school (my inbound school) is over a mile away.

I am very much in favor of this. The amount of traffic generated by parents driving their children to school is ridiculous.

Sorry, your convenience and your traffic challenges are NOT reasons to change a basic rule of equal opportunity to all applicants that charter rules in DC were founded upon. I understand why you want it, but it is wrong in so many ways for the Mayor to propose it and for it to be passed. I hope it gets nixed again, that would be the right thing to do.

Can you see how some W7 and W8 residents would also want this? Maybe they want a KIPP. They get matched to KIPP Connect (W5), but not KIPP Leap (W7) because that's how their lottery draw places them. Meanwhile a W5 resident gets matched to KIPP Leap but not KIPP Connect. Presumably the programmatic offerings are the same, but we've got two families criss-crossing the city.

Anonymous wrote:I live in Ward 4 and there are five charters within .5 mile from my house. The closest DCPS school (my inbound school) is over a mile away.

I am very much in favor of this. The amount of traffic generated by parents driving their children to school is ridiculous.

Sorry, your convenience and your traffic challenges are NOT reasons to change a basic rule of equal opportunity to all applicants that charter rules in DC were founded upon. I understand why you want it, but it is wrong in so many ways for the Mayor to propose it and for it to be passed. I hope it gets nixed again, that would be the right thing to do.