Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Trying to get back to the original question - I thought the reason the DCI funding was removed was because it was ILLEGAL. So not sure Bowser or Catania can do much about that except change the law addressing that - will they do this for such a small constituency?

The specific mechanism they planned to use to distribute the money was found illegal- a rather weak reason and money has been given to other non-profits using the same or similar mechanisms in the past, but nevertheless, yes it was found illegal and is unlikely to be reversed. However, there are many ways in which the city could distribute the funds including offering up a vacant DCPS building or co-locating at an under-enrolled school (like Roosevelt) instead. So what DCI is asking Bowser or Catania to do is to help find another mechanism or solution to help DCI secure a space. It will cost way more than $6 million so what DCI is requesting is a pretty small fraction of what the overall cost will be. But without a jump start, it will make raising the funds elsewhere very difficult since most banks want to see other skin in the game.

Or Dunbar. Letting DCI share the space with the existing school even temporarily will help and a better use of the taxpayer's money instead of having a brand new spanking 124 million building like Dunbar that is currently at less than half capacity.

What's your source that Dunbar is at "less than half capacity"?? I've been there in the last couple of months and the classrooms look plenty full to me. Where is your source on that?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My kid is not at a feeder and we'd have to luck out on one of the few spots to lottery in but I am still completely for the school. The more high quality middle school and high school spots there are in the city, the better the chance my kid will have to get one.

Otherwise, we'll be competing with all of these DCI feeder schools for the few good charter/DCPS spots currently available. More successful schools, even if your kid doesn't get in, is good for all of us. I don't understand how people can be so short-sighted to not see that.

Agree.

We are not at a feeder and not at a language immersion school. My child would never go to DCI, but I stand 100% in support of DCI. We need good programs and good public school seats for ALL of our kids. Yours, mine, and all DC kids.

And for ALL kids to have access to good programs and a good education, it shouldn't be left to chance -- that is, losing a lottery in first grade shouldn't deprive some of the city's children of a decent public, tax payer supported education. It doesn't make any sense at all.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Trying to get back to the original question - I thought the reason the DCI funding was removed was because it was ILLEGAL. So not sure Bowser or Catania can do much about that except change the law addressing that - will they do this for such a small constituency?

The specific mechanism they planned to use to distribute the money was found illegal- a rather weak reason and money has been given to other non-profits using the same or similar mechanisms in the past, but nevertheless, yes it was found illegal and is unlikely to be reversed. However, there are many ways in which the city could distribute the funds including offering up a vacant DCPS building or co-locating at an under-enrolled school (like Roosevelt) instead. So what DCI is asking Bowser or Catania to do is to help find another mechanism or solution to help DCI secure a space. It will cost way more than $6 million so what DCI is requesting is a pretty small fraction of what the overall cost will be. But without a jump start, it will make raising the funds elsewhere very difficult since most banks want to see other skin in the game.

Or Dunbar. Letting DCI share the space with the existing school even temporarily will help and a better use of the taxpayer's money instead of having a brand new spanking 124 million building like Dunbar that is currently at less than half capacity.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:DCI serves 5 charter elementary schools, each of which has about a 2% lottery admission rate. The school will already receive a capital allotment on top of its per pupil allotment, as do all charter schools.

I would be disinclined to vote for a mayor who would give this (unproven) school more of my tax dollars, given the paltry chance that most of the kids in DC could ever attend. I would also be disinclined to vote for a mayor that would get involved in the schools at this level of minutiae instead of figuring out how to fix the fire department so that it doesn't let people die in the streets.

I agree with you PP. I am also a YY parent who has a tix for the May 3rd event. However, unless one of the candidates ask me my thoughts on the subject (doubtful), I will remain silent on this matter at the Gala. But, I do agree with you. DC should treat all the charters equally. If DCI receives 6 million dollars, I think all charters with the intent of creating MS should also receive 6 million unrefundable dollars from the city.

You write this as if other charters have tried to get funding to start middle schools or expand and, after meeting the other PCSB requirements, somehow didn't get the funding. What charters have been in a similar position and met all the requirements but were somehow turned away from starting a middle school?

Unless you have an example of this, your post makes no sense PP. How is DC *not* treating all charters equally?

Other charters do not get $6 million grants for physical plant before enrolling a single student. They get a capital allotment, and save or rent out of that.

That's true, other charters don't get direct grants of that amount, but many do get old DCPS buildings for well below market rent. It's essentially the same thing. That said, I agree that a one off allocation is poor public policy. But this is the problem in DC- there is no way to create a coherent vision and policy approach to deal with things like funding, building allocations, etc, because of all of the disparate players involved. It's a fundamental structural problem, and I don't see any Mayor being able to change that too much unless he/she gets a lot of Council assistance. And something like schools is probably too dangerous for the Council to get involved with directly. They are taking the blowback on DME's proposals to heart.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My kid is not at a feeder and we'd have to luck out on one of the few spots to lottery in but I am still completely for the school. The more high quality middle school and high school spots there are in the city, the better the chance my kid will have to get one.

Otherwise, we'll be competing with all of these DCI feeder schools for the few good charter/DCPS spots currently available. More successful schools, even if your kid doesn't get in, is good for all of us. I don't understand how people can be so short-sighted to not see that.

Agree.

We are not at a feeder and not at a language immersion school. My child would never go to DCI, but I stand 100% in support of DCI. We need good programs and good public school seats for ALL of our kids. Yours, mine, and all DC kids.

And for ALL kids to have access to good programs and a good education, it shouldn't be left to chance -- that is, losing a lottery in first grade shouldn't deprive some of the city's children of a decent public, tax payer supported education. It doesn't make any sense at all.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My kid is not at a feeder and we'd have to luck out on one of the few spots to lottery in but I am still completely for the school. The more high quality middle school and high school spots there are in the city, the better the chance my kid will have to get one.

Otherwise, we'll be competing with all of these DCI feeder schools for the few good charter/DCPS spots currently available. More successful schools, even if your kid doesn't get in, is good for all of us. I don't understand how people can be so short-sighted to not see that.

Agree.

We are not at a feeder and not at a language immersion school. My child would never go to DCI, but I stand 100% in support of DCI. We need good programs and good public school seats for ALL of our kids. Yours, mine, and all DC kids.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Trying to get back to the original question - I thought the reason the DCI funding was removed was because it was ILLEGAL. So not sure Bowser or Catania can do much about that except change the law addressing that - will they do this for such a small constituency?

The specific mechanism they planned to use to distribute the money was found illegal- a rather weak reason and money has been given to other non-profits using the same or similar mechanisms in the past, but nevertheless, yes it was found illegal and is unlikely to be reversed. However, there are many ways in which the city could distribute the funds including offering up a vacant DCPS building or co-locating at an under-enrolled school (like Roosevelt) instead. So what DCI is asking Bowser or Catania to do is to help find another mechanism or solution to help DCI secure a space. It will cost way more than $6 million so what DCI is requesting is a pretty small fraction of what the overall cost will be. But without a jump start, it will make raising the funds elsewhere very difficult since most banks want to see other skin in the game.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Trying to get back to the original question - I thought the reason the DCI funding was removed was because it was ILLEGAL. So not sure Bowser or Catania can do much about that except change the law addressing that - will they do this for such a small constituency?

The specific mechanism they planned to use to distribute the money was found illegal- a rather weak reason and money has been given to other non-profits using the same or similar mechanisms in the past, but nevertheless, yes it was found illegal and is unlikely to be reversed. However, there are many ways in which the city could distribute the funds including offering up a vacant DCPS building or co-locating at an under-enrolled school (like Roosevelt) instead. So what DCI is asking Bowser or Catania to do is to help find another mechanism or solution to help DCI secure a space. It will cost way more than $6 million so what DCI is requesting is a pretty small fraction of what the overall cost will be. But without a jump start, it will make raising the funds elsewhere very difficult since most banks want to see other skin in the game.

Anonymous wrote:Trying to get back to the original question - I thought the reason the DCI funding was removed was because it was ILLEGAL. So not sure Bowser or Catania can do much about that except change the law addressing that - will they do this for such a small constituency?