Anonymous
Post 10/29/2017 12:50     Subject: Renting but not occupying for DCPS in-boundary residency purposes?
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:It’s fraud and if you get caught, you’ll be fined and forced to pay each years tuition for each child...


You have no idea what you’re talking about. Go away. Tuition only applies to non-DC residents. DCPS changed it policy last year and now students can continue at their school (and feeder path too) even if they move OOB. And it’s clear DCPS did this in response to IB Parents who incessantly complained that OOB got to keep their spot even if they move houses (so long as they stay in the District). I think the complaint was intended to argue why OOB practice need to be eliminated. But since that will never go away DC responded, “OK, nobody has to leave.” Big backfire.


They changed it to protect children who are housing insecure -- bouncing from mom to dad to grandma's etc.



Perhaps if the parents kept out of prison, the kids wouldn’t be so “housing insecure.”


I teach at a ward 8 school and three of my students are considered housing insecure and none of their parents are in jail.
Anonymous
Post 10/29/2017 12:29     Subject: Renting but not occupying for DCPS in-boundary residency purposes?
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:It’s fraud and if you get caught, you’ll be fined and forced to pay each years tuition for each child...


You have no idea what you’re talking about. Go away. Tuition only applies to non-DC residents. DCPS changed it policy last year and now students can continue at their school (and feeder path too) even if they move OOB. And it’s clear DCPS did this in response to IB Parents who incessantly complained that OOB got to keep their spot even if they move houses (so long as they stay in the District). I think the complaint was intended to argue why OOB practice need to be eliminated. But since that will never go away DC responded, “OK, nobody has to leave.” Big backfire.


They changed it to protect children who are housing insecure -- bouncing from mom to dad to grandma's etc.



Perhaps if the parents kept out of prison, the kids wouldn’t be so “housing insecure.”


More like perhaps if the city had affordable housing and jobs for working class folks.
Anonymous
Post 10/29/2017 12:12     Subject: Re:Renting but not occupying for DCPS in-boundary residency purposes?
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:DCPS Web Page
Click ENROLL
Click HOW TO ENROLL
Click RELATED FORMS (Bottom of page)
Click SY 17-18 ENROLLMENT & LOTTERY HANDBOOK
Page 8 of 41

Pretty clearly, some of the supposed cheaters are people who moved OOB during a school year from K+ and have stayed in the school as per the rules.





Exactly. People who get all wrapped around the axel about where in the District people live need to stop wasting their time. The vast majority of the time it’s legit and those families don’t owe you any sort of explanation. If you’re so desperate to play CSI then focus your knuckleheaded efforts on people who live outside DC but send their children to our public schools.


Doesn’t PG count as “Ward 9”?
Anonymous
Post 10/29/2017 12:11     Subject: Renting but not occupying for DCPS in-boundary residency purposes?
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:It’s fraud and if you get caught, you’ll be fined and forced to pay each years tuition for each child...


You have no idea what you’re talking about. Go away. Tuition only applies to non-DC residents. DCPS changed it policy last year and now students can continue at their school (and feeder path too) even if they move OOB. And it’s clear DCPS did this in response to IB Parents who incessantly complained that OOB got to keep their spot even if they move houses (so long as they stay in the District). I think the complaint was intended to argue why OOB practice need to be eliminated. But since that will never go away DC responded, “OK, nobody has to leave.” Big backfire.


They changed it to protect children who are housing insecure -- bouncing from mom to dad to grandma's etc.



Perhaps if the parents kept out of prison, the kids wouldn’t be so “housing insecure.”
Anonymous
Post 10/29/2017 11:53     Subject: Renting but not occupying for DCPS in-boundary residency purposes?
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:It’s fraud and if you get caught, you’ll be fined and forced to pay each years tuition for each child...


You have no idea what you’re talking about. Go away. Tuition only applies to non-DC residents. DCPS changed it policy last year and now students can continue at their school (and feeder path too) even if they move OOB. And it’s clear DCPS did this in response to IB Parents who incessantly complained that OOB got to keep their spot even if they move houses (so long as they stay in the District). I think the complaint was intended to argue why OOB practice need to be eliminated. But since that will never go away DC responded, “OK, nobody has to leave.” Big backfire.


They changed it to protect children who are housing insecure -- bouncing from mom to dad to grandma's etc.



Exactly. not to allow well off families to rent a studio in their preferred zone and pretend they live there.


But there's no way to write a policy to protect the housing insecure kids and eliminate the possibility of the well-off families taking that step. I think DCPS is willing to risk the latter to help the former.

Anonymous
Post 10/29/2017 11:40     Subject: Renting but not occupying for DCPS in-boundary residency purposes?
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:It’s fraud and if you get caught, you’ll be fined and forced to pay each years tuition for each child...


You have no idea what you’re talking about. Go away. Tuition only applies to non-DC residents. DCPS changed it policy last year and now students can continue at their school (and feeder path too) even if they move OOB. And it’s clear DCPS did this in response to IB Parents who incessantly complained that OOB got to keep their spot even if they move houses (so long as they stay in the District). I think the complaint was intended to argue why OOB practice need to be eliminated. But since that will never go away DC responded, “OK, nobody has to leave.” Big backfire.


They changed it to protect children who are housing insecure -- bouncing from mom to dad to grandma's etc.



Exactly. not to allow well off families to rent a studio in their preferred zone and pretend they live there.
Anonymous
Post 10/29/2017 11:17     Subject: Renting but not occupying for DCPS in-boundary residency purposes?
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:It’s fraud and if you get caught, you’ll be fined and forced to pay each years tuition for each child...


You have no idea what you’re talking about. Go away. Tuition only applies to non-DC residents. DCPS changed it policy last year and now students can continue at their school (and feeder path too) even if they move OOB. And it’s clear DCPS did this in response to IB Parents who incessantly complained that OOB got to keep their spot even if they move houses (so long as they stay in the District). I think the complaint was intended to argue why OOB practice need to be eliminated. But since that will never go away DC responded, “OK, nobody has to leave.” Big backfire.


They changed it to protect children who are housing insecure -- bouncing from mom to dad to grandma's etc.

Anonymous
Post 10/29/2017 10:58     Subject: Renting but not occupying for DCPS in-boundary residency purposes?
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:It’s fraud and if you get caught, you’ll be fined and forced to pay each years tuition for each child...


You have no idea what you’re talking about. Go away. Tuition only applies to non-DC residents. DCPS changed it policy last year and now students can continue at their school (and feeder path too) even if they move OOB. And it’s clear DCPS did this in response to IB Parents who incessantly complained that OOB got to keep their spot even if they move houses (so long as they stay in the District). I think the complaint was intended to argue why OOB practice need to be eliminated. But since that will never go away DC responded, “OK, nobody has to leave.” Big backfire.


The fraud here is writing a fake address on the enrollment forms.
Anonymous
Post 10/29/2017 10:28     Subject: Renting but not occupying for DCPS in-boundary residency purposes?
Anonymous wrote:It’s fraud and if you get caught, you’ll be fined and forced to pay each years tuition for each child...


You have no idea what you’re talking about. Go away. Tuition only applies to non-DC residents. DCPS changed it policy last year and now students can continue at their school (and feeder path too) even if they move OOB. And it’s clear DCPS did this in response to IB Parents who incessantly complained that OOB got to keep their spot even if they move houses (so long as they stay in the District). I think the complaint was intended to argue why OOB practice need to be eliminated. But since that will never go away DC responded, “OK, nobody has to leave.” Big backfire.
Anonymous
Post 10/29/2017 09:36     Subject: Re:Renting but not occupying for DCPS in-boundary residency purposes?
Anonymous wrote:What the Handbook says is ot consistent with the underlying regulation. It wil be interesting to see how many his evolves.


Can you link to the reg?
Anonymous
Post 10/29/2017 07:49     Subject: Re:Renting but not occupying for DCPS in-boundary residency purposes?
Anonymous wrote:DCPS Web Page
Click ENROLL
Click HOW TO ENROLL
Click RELATED FORMS (Bottom of page)
Click SY 17-18 ENROLLMENT & LOTTERY HANDBOOK
Page 8 of 41

Pretty clearly, some of the supposed cheaters are people who moved OOB during a school year from K+ and have stayed in the school as per the rules.





Exactly. People who get all wrapped around the axel about where in the District people live need to stop wasting their time. The vast majority of the time it’s legit and those families don’t owe you any sort of explanation. If you’re so desperate to play CSI then focus your knuckleheaded efforts on people who live outside DC but send their children to our public schools.
Anonymous
Post 10/29/2017 07:40     Subject: Re:Renting but not occupying for DCPS in-boundary residency purposes?
What the Handbook says is ot consistent with the underlying regulation. It wil be interesting to see how many his evolves.
Anonymous
Post 10/29/2017 07:03     Subject: Re:Renting but not occupying for DCPS in-boundary residency purposes?
DCPS Web Page
Click ENROLL
Click HOW TO ENROLL
Click RELATED FORMS (Bottom of page)
Click SY 17-18 ENROLLMENT & LOTTERY HANDBOOK
Page 8 of 41

Pretty clearly, some of the supposed cheaters are people who moved OOB during a school year from K+ and have stayed in the school as per the rules.



Anonymous
Post 10/29/2017 00:18     Subject: Renting but not occupying for DCPS in-boundary residency purposes?
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:I think this is actually allowed. You just have to live in the apartment at the time you register for school. Then you can “move” back and stay in the school through it and its feeder pattern. Someone posted the regs a while back.



Post-K. And that rule was just put into effect last year.


Can you clarify this? Meaning that the new handbook policy only works if an IB family moves OOB (but still within DC) after kindergarten? So moving the summer before 1st grade is ok, but not before?


The language below applies from K through 12.

If a family moves out of boundary during the school year, the student maintains the right to attend their current school through the terminal grade, and can continue to attend schools in the feeder pattern of the original school. They also have a right to attend their in-boundary school.

Sounds like it’s safer to move during the school year than over the summer according to the language but doubtful anyone is checking who moved in February vs. July.
Anonymous
Post 10/28/2017 23:07     Subject: Renting but not occupying for DCPS in-boundary residency purposes?
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:I think this is actually allowed. You just have to live in the apartment at the time you register for school. Then you can “move” back and stay in the school through it and its feeder pattern. Someone posted the regs a while back.



Post-K. And that rule was just put into effect last year.


Can you clarify this? Meaning that the new handbook policy only works if an IB family moves OOB (but still within DC) after kindergarten? So moving the summer before 1st grade is ok, but not before?