Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Question - from a "cash cow" perspective, who is the ideal newcomer to DC? I would have thought it was a single person or childless couple in good health with well-paying jobs. I don't find such cities enormously appealing, but it might be that, from a fiscal perspective, such residents are the types some cities would want to attract. Maybe that's just the same-old Richard Florida, "creative-class" stuff (putting aside the typical snarks as to how "creative" DC residents are).
The irony is that, if there are enough residents who can afford the tax burden, the cities can then afford to build new schools that, in theory, ought to start attracting families. Families will care more about the performance of the students at a school than the state of the facilities, but the combination of poor student performance in crumbling buildings can be a death spiral in urban schools.
The main thing I'd like to see in DC if it attracted more residents, though, is better retail. DC already struggles with retail due to the height restrictions, and so much of what is here now seems to fall into niche categories (healthy take-out; frozen yogurt; expense-account restaurants, hipster bars). If adding some people and density managed to make the DC street scene come a little closer to what's found in cities like Boston, SF or Montreal, that would be great.
from the cash cow perspective, the higher the tax you pay, and the less services you use (which mainly means public schools) the better. Anyone who doesnt have kids in public school adds - whether they are young singles, DINKs, empty nesters, homeschoolers, or private school families. OTOH if the property taxes they pay are high enough, it doesnt matter (for example DC will soon have a Hebrew language immersion charter school - that will, I suspect, in addition to providing access to the Hebrew language for many members of historically african american churches, also draw new families from MoCo and NoVa (you can buy a lot of incremental house for the price of a jewish day school education) and while those families will use education funds from the DC budget, I expect their taxes will contribute more) The real danger to jurisdictions, is things like aging 1970s 300k houses with 4 or 5 bedrooms - thats why outer jurisdictions are addicted to new construction, whatever rural preservationists may want - thats even in jurisdictions relatively favored with employment)
As for retail, theres more and more in DC - the big box retail in Columbia Heights, the new Walmarts coming (one of which will sit on top of a new Home Depot) - there are isnt nearly as much in the newly transitioned areas of course, and the entire mix of shopping is evolving, an issue that faces suburbs as well. For some really good stuff on the retail marketplace, its effect on RE, and on urban development, I suggest reading Richard Laymans blog Rebuilding Place in the Urban Space
I think DC schools are in for a long haul. Maybe an expanded tax base can help WMATA's capital program, but DCPS is not an issue that money alone can fix. DC spends more per-pupil than just about any major city; it's on par with the wealthiest NYC suburbs. If educational quality was tied directly to spending, our DCPS students should be receiving a Sidwell-like education at $28,000 in total annual spending per student.
In my opinion, it's a cultural issue and environmental issue, not a money issue. When you have schools that even have a significant minority of students that don't have the support of their parents, don't value their education, don't see a future in it and are disruptive to the learning and social environment at the school, it has deleterious affects that money can't fix.
there are loads of schools in NYC with those kinds of problems, yet there are also schools (in Park Slope for example) that parents fight to get their kids into. IIUC there are already several elementary schools that are considered "desirable" and no longer just west of Rock Creek Park, but also in Capitol Hill.
In my opinion, it's a cultural issue and environmental issue, not a money issue. When you have schools that even have a significant minority of students that don't have the support of their parents, don't value their education, don't see a future in it and are disruptive to the learning and social environment at the school, it has deleterious affects that money can't fix.
Three of my friends/roommates were one-time DCPS teachers that came here with all the good intentions in the world. They were dedicated to teaching, but all three of them burned out after three or four years of dealing with kids that had no parent or peer support systems.
It's not so much that there is a "significant minority" of students that fall into that category as that there has been an "overwhelming majority" of students that fell into that category in many DC schools, accompanied by school administrators who have sent out very mixed messages as to whether were prepared to clean things up and hold students to higher standards or, conversely, make more changes in a brief time period than the system could tolerate.
There are many schools in both Montgomery and Fairfax Counties that have significant numbers of students who come from challenged backgrounds, but which continue to retain families from more stable backgrounds because they generally meet the needs of those students as well. You can't do that so easily at a DCPS public school where the schools hit a tipping point decades ago.
But the growth of charter schools in DC has been a positive development. And, in a way, the obligation to navigate the different options in the DC public/charter system can force parents who want to send their kids to public school in DC to play a more active role in their childrens' education, whereas parents who live in jurisdictions with stronger neighborhood schools arguably may be more inclined to just assume the schools will take care of everything.
BBD is correct that there are now elementary schools east of Rock Creek Park that are now considered "desirable" - Brent in Capitol Hill being the best-known example. What would really cause people to view DCPS in a different light, however, would be a middle school with a similar reputation. Right now the current perception is that DC has a single good middle school - Deal - which is west of the park.
But, again, increasing the city's population need not necessarily depend on gaining more families with school-age children.
to summarize I'd say the school issue is a function of three variables
1. Money
2. the educational attitudes of families
3. The school system culture/competence
factor 1 improves with new "cash cow" households, even if they are young singles.
2 could improve with change of attitudes of existing families - but to stay on topic, it will usually change as new families come in, and more stay for longer. That is, as has been said, a lagging variable. The "good" schools were west of RCP when Capitol Hill and Adams Morgan were hot, and now the core of Capitol Hill has a "good" school when the hot areas are north, south, and east of Cap Hill. Theres no particular reason to see that upward trend stopping any time soon
3. is an issue that has had prominent media play, and has been at the center of DC politics. Ive seen some people say its actually moving forward even post Rhee/Fenty, but more slowly. Its certainly an issue that will be impacted by new residents, whether they have children or not.
if you have a lot of dysfunctional families
in any one area, you will have to use more
psychology to teach the majority of children
in that area, so they can learn. otherwise
the schools and the communities will never
excel.
The problem with the school system (which is really nationwide) is that it seems more of a 12 step program more than an actual education. Most of the stuff you learn in High School is a joke. I've noticed you don't really start getting educated until you reach college. Personally though, in a city like DC, the schools should take initiatives to offer programs that can put students on the track to success beyond high school. I know Fairfax County and Arlington County in Virginia do this. They have "elective courses" which tie in to careers. You choose a class that teaches you the basics and it opens the door to actually get certified or pursue a career in what you studied. I've seen some schools in Virginia offer classes like let's say... Cosmetology,where the student learn the basics of beauty and as time goes on, the students compete or take tests which lead to their ultimate certification or boost to pursue the career beyond H.S. I've seen the same thing done with automotive technology, or child development, etc. DC is a city with a vast amount of resources, and they should use them to their advantage. I mean if DC schools could actually (as an example) get their students to pursue politics, we wouldn't see the issue where there is no motivation and the subsequent "bad school system". Where I'm trying to get at is young people in the city see the streets as a better source of income and a better lifestyle than one that comes with an education. I mean lets be real, one of the main things people like to put school aside for; drug dealing is portrayed as an easy way to make enough money to buy a luxurious car, get as many dates as one wants, the power that comes with it, the flash, etc and that becomes more attractive than learning algebra and world history. While it's good to know those things, the truth of the matter is that nobody starts using those things right off the bat after receiving their diploma, that's where the issue really lies in. They say education opens doors, but there's really no other motivation since you're told, get through high school to get to college, complete your associates to get your bachelors, and so on till you get your PhD. But then what? At this point you're 30 years old looking for employment. The streets all you have to do is be savvy. Of course that issue shows up. The system doesn't show the students that there's opportunities in education, of course the streets will show them opportunities, even if it is illegal. It's just how life works. If that ever gets fixed, then the school issue wouldn't get to be a big deal but if we keep the system where school is nothing but standardized tests and the better the school does, the more money it gets, then this will never get fixed and of course the DC Charter schools will be doing better than DCPS because the Charter schools get more money to begin with.
One thing I've been thinking about is what happens to affordable housing in DC? That one is pretty scarce right now.
Is DC destined to become like Arlington where the majority of the middle class is priced out?
I don't particularly see why it's necessary or even desirable to have school-age children in DC. It doesn't seem problematic in NYC for attracting families and the school system isn't exactly great in most places; high-income families can usually afford private school or just temporarily move to the suburbs. If we had even more students in the system it would be harder to manage and more costly considering how ungodly expensive public education has become on a per capita basis.
One other question I have is why exactly we need to preserve affordable housing. I've said this countless times, but doesn't anyone stop to think that all these laws and regulations that require AH simply make the problem worse? They stall development because it makes it harder to profit, and by stalling development prices are artificially driven up as demand increases for fewer units. I understand the high-income earners have more options, but even so, no one has the right to live in a neighborhood because they've lived there longer. Rent control and stabilisation have wreaked havoc with the rental market in basically every city they touch by limiting the overall available supply of housing. DC needs to make it far easier to develop in the city without all the bureaucratic red tape, endless community meetings (just abolish the damn ANCs already), and a wealth of complex and absurd procedures from developers who are actually investing in neighborhoods, even if for profit. That's the only way we can even get up to 250,000 more residents in the city.
If we had even more students in the system it would be harder to manage and more costly considering how ungodly expensive public education has become on a per capita basis.
If we're having a discussion about attracting/keeping the families that prioritize their children's education enough to move away in search of better education options for their children, I'm not sure I agree with that.
The difficulty of management, per-student cost and educational outcomes hinge on a lot of factors, but I think a student's family and peer commitment to education is a major one.
All-in, DC spends over $28,000 per student annually. That's more than LA or NYC. Chicago spends less than $16,000. I think there is plenty of room to reduce costs there and increase performance if the culture of our public school system is changed. I think attracting students and families that do more than just pay lip service to the value of education would go a long way to changing that culture.
Quote:
Originally Posted by geoking66
One other question I have is why exactly we need to preserve affordable housing. I've said this countless times, but doesn't anyone stop to think that all these laws and regulations that require AH simply make the problem worse? They stall development because it makes it harder to profit, and by stalling development prices are artificially driven up as demand increases for fewer units. I understand the high-income earners have more options, but even so, no one has the right to live in a neighborhood because they've lived there longer. Rent control and stabilisation have wreaked havoc with the rental market in basically every city they touch by limiting the overall available supply of housing. DC needs to make it far easier to develop in the city without all the bureaucratic red tape, endless community meetings (just abolish the damn ANCs already), and a wealth of complex and absurd procedures from developers who are actually investing in neighborhoods, even if for profit. That's the only way we can even get up to 250,000 more residents in the city.
I tend to share your questions. Additionally, I don't know that living in a more desirable location with more amenities than you can afford is an essential social safety net.
I don't particularly see why it's necessary or even desirable to have school-age children in DC. It doesn't seem problematic in NYC for attracting families and the school system isn't exactly great in most places;
actually NYC has several areas with good neighborhood schools, as well as very distinguished city wide magnets. They do play an important role in attracting and retaining families with choices, as well as providing good education to those with less choice.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
