Quoted from bumblethru

Lets see the superintendent, principles, vice principles, secretaries, councilors, food service, janitors and the rest of the staff live in the city FIRST!!!....k?

This definitely should be the starting point. Have the Super, Assistant Super and all the other high paid admin live in the City. They set the example (and they're getting most of the tax money). This is a MUCH better proposal.

BTW, there are many teachers who live in Schenectady and use a different residence to have their children go to other districts. This residency requirement would be circumvented - it already is.

Wouldn't it be interesting to mandate teachers and staff to have their children attend the district they are employed? The Union would declare war! I mean, how unfair that a teacher would put their children in the sub-par system they teach in??

Fact is, the City School District is in turmoil. You won't change that with residency requirements, you'll change that when you place more value and money in educating kids rather than padding teacher pensions and medical benefits.

Quoted from JackBauer

I think tenured teachers should live in the city...  But frankly I think getting rid of tenure would be more important.

The asst superintendents do live in the City. The superintendent should move if made permanent. Jack has this right. It is a way to remove some higher paid teachers/administrators. Rachel is also right-where is a similar fight to make the Mayor observe City codes on residency for City workers?

     Bravo to Andy Chestnut for at least suggesting reform. It's funny to hear the nit wit objections. Maybe if more lived in the City they could finally find savings, go back to neighborhoods schools and object to the "more taxes solves everything" approach? This is going nowhere but is a prelude to massive layoffs which have been postponed for years. There's just so much that can be raided from reserves. The State is cutting $7 MILLION where are your cost cutting proposals? Stop telling us you're working on it.

Quoted Text

Teacher performance matters, not residency

    Re Feb. 4 article, “Board eyes requiring residency of teachers”: What does where you live have to do with how you teach? To factor in a potential teacher’s place of residence when hiring is nonsensical. In Niskayuna, where I reside, there are streets that are divided, so that if you are in one house you are considered a Schenectady city resident, and those in the house next to that are considered Niskayuna residents.
    By such reasoning, if two potential teachers lived on the upper and lower parts of the same block, one would already have a rating above the other having nothing to do with their teaching credentials.
    Of all things that go into making a teacher a success within their profession, where they reside has absolutely no weight at all. It should never be considered when deciding who could best serve students, who deserve the best teachers the board can provide.

    SALLY MAGID
    Niskayuna
The writer is a retired teacher who taught in the Schenectady school district.

http://www.dailygazette.net/De.....r00706&AppName=1

What a shocker-a City teacher who lives in Niskayuna is against residency requirements for teachers! Here's the problem Sally, since teachers don't pay taxes they have no interest in moderating spending demands. They don't pay. They don't send their kids to these schools. But they refuse to find any savings.

     Andy Chestnut has opened a can of worms. By the idiotic responses he is making head way. Applicants from the City should have preference at the schools and at City Hall. It's absurd that secretary positions have to go to connected suburbanites with no skin in the game.

Quoted Text

Of all things that go into making a teacher a success within their profession, where they reside has absolutely no weight at all. It should never be considered when deciding who could best serve students, who deserve the best teachers the board can provide.

bull-hhhmmm-sh*t!!!!!