SCHENECTADY Board eyes requiring residency of teachers Union: Community ties don’t rely on addresses BY KATHLEEN MOORE Gazette Reporter
Fewer and fewer Schenectady teachers are living in the city, with that figure falling to a low of just 16 percent last year, according to the school district. Now the Board of Education is trying to reverse the trend, but board members can’t agree on whether to enforce a residency rule, encourage residency through monetary incentives or simply fi nd qualifi ed teachers among candidates already living here. The teachers union president says they’re all wrong. “Our job is to educate kids,” Juliet Benaquisto said, arguing that residency has nothing to do with the job. “Recognizing someone just because they’re a resident of the city — it’s implying you’re doing a better job,” she said. “I don’t think that where someone resides truly indicates how they’ll be as a teacher.” But school board members disagree. They noted that teachers often cite the community as a major factor — and often a serious problem — in their students’ development. In particular, teachers have said that students need more role models in the community to teach them to behave appropriately. In short, a stronger middle class would improve the city’s “health and well-being,” board member Andrew Chestnut said. He said he was disturbed by the district’s statistics, which show a steady downward trend of teacher residency. At the start of last decade, about 21 percent of the city’s teachers lived here. If nothing is done, Chestnut said, he expects the percentage to continue to fall from its current 16 percent. “The community needs more of its residents with good-paying, stable jobs,” he said. “I think the school district has a role to play in that.” Board President Cathy Lewis doesn’t want to require teachers to live here. But she, too, thinks the city needs more resident teachers. “It’s important to have teachers that are involved in the community,” she said. .............>>>>........................>>>>................http://www.dailygazette.net/De.....r00101&AppName=1
Stratton better start taking notes. The leader of the teachers union makes excuse upon excuse as to why teachers won't live in the City (she can't keep horses in the City, the teachers do alot for the community). Come on!!! Teachers don't want to live in Schenectady because:
1) Schenectady taxes are triple that of the towns teachers are currently living in; 2) Schenectady has more violence and crime; and most importantly, 3) Schenectady has the lowest academically achieving schools in the area and teachers want their children in a better school system (not the one they teach in).
Just like the non-resident City workers, there is no vested interest in where these teachers work. Their kids are in Burnt Hills, Ballston Lake, Scotia and these teachers don't contribute to the tax base in the City. It won't change, the Union will see to that.
Her kid is out of mohonasen now...right? And she fled the city and moved to rotterdam 5 years ago to give her kid a better life in a better school system. Well, mission accomplished so I'm sure she would move back to the city now......yes?
When the INSANE are running the ASYLUM In individuals, insanity is rare; but in groups, parties, nations and epochs, it is the rule. -- Friedrich Nietzsche
“How fortunate for those in power that people never think.” Adolph Hitler
It is an absolute necessity that teachers employed by the city school district live in the city. They need to feel the pain they inflict on the taxpyaers by forcing huge raises and opposing any cuts at a time when the taxpayers are losing jobs, being furloughed, taking pay cuts and cannot afford it.
Teachers need to pay the taxes in the school district in which they work.
And retired teachers of the Schdy shool district also need to move into the city - they are living high on the hog off the public dole with pensions that are twice what the total household income of the typical taxpayers is. I mean really! For individual retired teachers to be raking in $60,000, $70,000, $80,000 a year while a married couple homeonwer with two or three incomes makes only $30,000 are expected to pay that outrageous pension, for shame. Most retired people get less than $20,000 WITH social security
As people are losing jobs, experiencing pay cuts, being furloughed, the government pensions should be subject to the same cuts that the taxpayers experience
Optimists close their eyes and pretend problems are non existent. Better to have open eyes, see the truths, acknowledge the negatives, and speak up for the people rather than the politicos and their rich cronies.
Although I agree with MC1, I'm kinda torn on this issue.
With the current inbreeding in the city, do we really want the cream of the schenectady (city) crop teaching the kids? We've got supposedly adult people throwing lye/bleach in others faces, drug deals on the corners nearly everywhere (including the miracle mile), welfare motels, rapes, shootings, violence - is this what we want as a pool to pull teachers from?
Are there any teachers in the schenectady school district that are actually residents of the city now? And isn't this requirement going to have to be in their union contract first?
When the INSANE are running the ASYLUM In individuals, insanity is rare; but in groups, parties, nations and epochs, it is the rule. -- Friedrich Nietzsche
“How fortunate for those in power that people never think.” Adolph Hitler
I have some concerns about this concept. If all school districts did this - could you imagine a teacher who loses their job due to cuts, and has to move just to be in a district that is 10 mins away?
I think tenured teachers should live in the city... But frankly I think getting rid of tenure would be more important.
I have some concerns about this concept. If all school districts did this - could you imagine a teacher who loses their job due to cuts, and has to move just to be in a district that is 10 mins away?
I think tenured teachers should live in the city... But frankly I think getting rid of tenure would be more important.
That is where the personal investment is.....they became icons with guaranteed pensions/wage increases with tenure without the personal investment...if you teach a demographic you should live the demographic.....
by no means is teaching easy....but it's more than just the title......I think it isn't just at the teachers either....I think ALL public jobs just became a right of some sort over a period of time.....and at the same time a generation became 'all about me', look what I do/did Hollywood freaks.......we have lost our foundation....the failure not being in the government,,,we just kept giving the government more food for fodder, the "THEY need to do something" crap line........and no one wants to hear it from the Hiltons or the Kardashians or Brangelina, those folks dont lead regular lives...yeah, they can give give give and do do do because everyone else is taking care of their sh!t.....
...you are a product of your environment, your environment is a product of your priorities, your priorities are a product of you......
The replacement of morality and conscience with law produces a deadly paradox.
STOP BEING GOOD DEMOCRATS---STOP BEING GOOD REPUBLICANS--START BEING GOOD AMERICANS
I have some concerns about this concept. If all school districts did this - could you imagine a teacher who loses their job due to cuts, and has to move just to be in a district that is 10 mins away?
That's what parents that live in failing school districts have to do. Teachers should put themselves under the same constricting rules families are put under. OR, if a teacher lives outside the district, they should have to pay taxes in the district they are working in, as well as the district they live in. We would see vouchers quick if that were the case.
Logged
