The AJC reports that House Bill 881 has got the City of Decatur’s school board up in arms and threatening to withdraw its charter school application in protest.

The bill before the House would effectively give the state a second “body” that could approve creation of a charter school district without consent of the local school board and “force school systems to pass on full per-pupil funding, including federal, state and local tax dollars, to charters even if the local board did not approve them.” Right now some of those funds can be retained for administrative fees.

As one of the first potential charter schools in the state, Decatur seems to be using its potential poster child status for charter schools in the state to influence possible tampering at the state capitol.

According to the AJC, the issue has been placed on next Tuesday’s school board agenda at Westchester starting at 6:30p.

A tipster who attended an affordable housing forum at City Hall last night reports on a very interesting comment made by the owner of Icehouse Lofts during the meeting. Apparently the owner made mention “that between 5 and 10 percent of the residents who live [at Icehouse Lofts] in Braden-Fellman properties are people who own homes and rent out apartments just to send their kids to school in Decatur’s school system. Some use them [are used] as “crash pads,” and some don’t even bother to decorate them at all.”

What an odd practice.

So, why would anyone do this when CDS already provides an option of paying “tuition” for families that live outside the city limits?

Here’s what I can think of…

1. Tuition for K-12 is $643 a month for non-resident families. At first glance, it seems cheaper than renting an apartment, right? But what if you have more than one kid? Then you ARE talking more money.
2. Even if you are willing to fork over tuition as a non-resident, your kid still might not get into CDS. Residents obviously get priority over non-residents when it comes to admission into the school, plus non-resident students are vetted to make sure they are in good academic standing and don’t have a disciplinary record.

Though I’ve never thought or heard of this rather shady (but, as far as I can tell, not illegal) option to get your kids into a better school system, it seems like it would be a rather common practice in areas where people with money are looking for better schooling options for their kids, but don’t want to pay for private school.

Regardless, at best this practice is dishonest. Though an argument could be made that since they pay rent (and in effect help pay the taxes of the landowner) this is a perfectly legitimate practice. However, is it fair to pay rent on the smallest apartment you can find and ship 4 kids into the school system?

This is a very apt question during a time when the city is in a hold pattern over annexation, due in large part to a crowded school system.

What can be done? Is there any legal recourse?