CSD To Set Aside Up to 10 Tuition Slots for Children of Decatur Employees
Decatur Metro | December 23, 2010Included in a “Memorandum of Understanding” between the City Schools of Decatur and the city of Decatur primarily focused on the joint maintenance facility that will be built at Talley Street in the coming months is an agreement between the two parties that CSD will “set aside ten spaces for use by non-resident City employees at the same tuition rate as children of CSD teachers.”
According to a letter from City Manager Peggy Merriss (page 59 of the meeting materials) to the City Commission the agreement will “address a long-standing request by our employees to be able to send their children to City Schools of Decatur and will provide a recruitment and retention incentive for our employees.”
That is indeed a good incentive!
Latest from Decaturish
This little ol’ memorandum is actually a “BIG CELEBRATION!” accomplishment! While crafting it, the City & Schools seem to have really embraced a spirit of cooperation for future projects. (Very inspiring discussion at the Commissioners Meeting the other night!) Big Props to all!
bravo!
Guess, it’s all part of the collaboration and compromised between the two parties…. Especially, considering the city owns the land many of the schools are actually on.
Does the MOU indicate if there are specific slots for specific grades? Hope the savings due to this partnership is saving CSD more than the $55K the coveted tuition slots would bring to the budget annually. Decatur and CSD on the surface seem very by-the-book. But, there are many exceptions made for certain situation. The current Decatur High police officer has her daughter at Decatur High similar to CSD teachers. Even thought the officer is technically a contracted employee of the Decatur City Police. Will this now count as one of the ten slots? Will those city slots be made public? I won’t even bring up how many non-Decatur students recruited athletes are also attending Decatur High. I always wondered if they were extended the tuition-free courtesy or if the Decatur Ed Fund or Decatur Booster group could cover their tuition expense.
officer taylor lives in city of decatur.
Have you seen our sports record? Who are these non-res athletes? Shouldn’t we be winning state championships?
I’m not sure the non-resident, non-tuition paying athletes exist. If they do, it’s news to those of us who were following the residency status policies and enforcement.
I applaud this! But let’s work on incentives for affordable housing so our city employees can LIVE in the city!
@Amanda, Thanks for the clarification. That shows that a police officer can afford to live in the city of Decatur. What about all those athletes?
Yeah! Even though this effort to smear a city resident (and employee) fell flat, I’m sure we can still find ample malfeasance if we just dig deep enough and throw out enough vague innuendo!
I hope my own use of the school system isn’t publicly questioned. I have a water bill with a local address, I swear!
My understanding is that CSD is quite strict now with requiring proof of residence from all families for all children every year. That’s been my experience even though the school secretaries know me and where I live by heart. I know it was different in the distant past, but it’s not true now, is it? I remember a school board meeting at least 4-5 years ago at which it was brought up that the residency rules were going to be enforced strictly. Some parents spoke up that they were concerned about students already attending CSD schools, especially some high school athletes, whose families were no longer true residents, no fault of the students. While the CSD administration and School Board were sympathetic to students who cannot help their parents’ choices, they felt that the burgeoning student population and budget constraints called for impartial enforcement of residency rules. And I know of at least two families in which single Moms and children moved in with their parents, who were Decatur residents, to be sure that they were complying so their children could attend CSD. I know of another case in which the Decatur resident grandparents gained legal custody of their grandchild to make sure that there was no question of residency status. I’ve heard that other families started paying tuition because it was only the grandparents, not the parent(s), who were Decatur residents. Given that some folks are bending over backwards to be true to the spirit of the residency requirements, I think all have to be held to the same impartial standard.
There’s a rumor, but no idea if it’s true, that the worst offenders are folks who can afford to rent a condo in Decatur just to claim residency but actually reside in a home elsewhere. May be an urban myth.
Involved Parent, if you really think something nefarious is going on, as a taxpayer I’d encourage you to approach CSD directly. Of course, if you don’t really have any evidence, just ill will, then anonymously casting aspersions here is probably the more comfortable choice.
Excellent. These parents should certainly take precedence over families who are out of district!
Interesting wording “at the same tuition rate as children of CSD teachers.”, given that teachers don’t pay tuition, right? Maybe it’s a hedge in case CSD ever has to charge teachers some tuition? Maybe it applies to the College Heights 0-3 program or the Frasier Center which do have a charge?
Agree that increased cooperation between the City and CSD is a good thing. Certainly the City/DEF/CSD collaboration on CSD 101 seems to have been fruitful. And I always thought that the City should have a little more input into reconfigurations given that it owns the land on which the schools reside. I have heard Commissioners or officials quietly express preferences or reservations but then maintain that they had no role in School Board decisions. Since what the City chooses affects schools (e.g. annexation, road construction, water main breaks, emergency siren drills, etc.) and vice versa (lockdowns, traffic patterns, need for crossing guards, land values, tax revenues, etc.), not to mention the fact that one party owns the land that has buildings over which the other has jurisdiction, it makes sense for the two to develop open consensus on issues that affect the whole community. Ditto for the Decatur Housing Authority. Emphasis on the word “open” since residents and taxpayers need to know what consensus is developing.
Welcome news! Good for both the City and CSD.