Post by LoveTrains on Aug 19, 2014 16:29:27 GMT -5
In some major cities, it is required that public employees - and sometimes that extends to public school teachers, cops and fire fighters - are city residents (or establish residency within six months or a year after getting hired).
What do you think about this requirement?
My city did away with the residency requirements. Some people have now stated that this means that those type of city workers - teachers, cops, fire fighters etc - are less invested in the city because they don't live here. Like for example, they are less bothered by declining school scores and rising crime rates because it doesn't effect them at home (only at work). Some people are suggesting that they bring back the residency requirements and that it will make these types of workers more connected to the city, know the neighborhoods better, etc.
Just curious to know what you all think about these types of requirements and if they are good or bad. It's become an issue in our upcoming mayoral election.
We are required to live in-county for Calvin's position, so it's not quite as limiting as city but same idea.
Back when he started (6 years ago), you didn't need to live in-county to be hired, but you had to move in within a year. We went under contract the same month he started, and closed on our house and moved in 4 months later. I thought a year was generous to fair, and 6 months would also be reasonable to me.
Now I understand that they require that you actually have to live in-county to be hired. I'm less ok with that. Talk about artificially limiting your applicant pool.
I am ok with residency requirements when you are an emergency responder, or any other type of position where speed of getting from your home to the job duties is important. Highway superintendent comes to mind too, for winter road maintenance. I'm not sure how much I buy the "invested in the community" angle. I'm just glad we were able to align a county office that he wanted to work in, and a county we were willing to live in. All the counties in the area have similar residency restrictions for his line of work.
I think in larger metro areas it is silly and restricts your applicant pool. You may not be a resident of that city but you are still part of that community as a whole.
Even if you do live there does that automatically mean you are invested in things like school scores?
I for one would be scared to take a job that forced me to move. What if it didn't work out and I have uprooted my family?
Post by LoveTrains on Aug 19, 2014 16:48:46 GMT -5
It is just an interesting topic that has come up as crime is up in city and our schools are terrible. I don't really know how I feel.
I do get the sense that the cops could give a shit about the crime in my neighborhood and that is incredibly frustrating.
My house was broken into on July 3rd and I have been unable to file an official police report because the cop won't call me back. They don't fingerprint because they don't care. There are break-ins every night in my neighborhood and its very frustrating. A neighbor of mine recently came out to find his car up on milk crates and all four tires stolen. Meanwhile this is the nicest neighborhood in the city. I get that they have more serious issues to deal with involving crime - violent crime etc - but it is frustrating nonetheless. People in my neighborhood shoulder the burden of property taxes and car taxes in the city and there is a sense that we get nothing for it.
They were paving my street the other day and my road was closed and the cop on the detail was a dick to me about it.
It is just an interesting topic that has come up as crime is up in city and our schools are terrible. I don't really know how I feel.
I do get the sense that the cops could give a shit about the crime in my neighborhood and that is incredibly frustrating.
My house was broken into on July 3rd and I have been unable to file an official police report because the cop won't call me back. They don't fingerprint because they don't care. There are break-ins every night in my neighborhood and its very frustrating. A neighbor of mine recently came out to find his car up on milk crates and all four tires stolen. Meanwhile this is the nicest neighborhood in the city. I get that they have more serious issues to deal with involving crime - violent crime etc - but it is frustrating nonetheless. People in my neighborhood shoulder the burden of property taxes and car taxes in the city and there is a sense that we get nothing for it.
They were paving my street the other day and my road was closed and the cop on the detail was a dick to me about it.
Is a residency requirement going to fix that? I would think there needs to be bigger changes than that made.
A cop not calling you back? The fact that you have to even have one call you back boggles the mind.
Get major enough, though, and you're likely going to have quite a diversity of citizenship. An NYPD officer from Belle Harbor serving in a precinct in Hunts Point isn't necessarily going to know his precinct better or relate to it any better than a random from outside the city would.
Same with a teacher from Tribeca teaching in the South Bronx.
And if you want to make the requirement more local -- like, saying that you should hire people from Hunts Point to be officers in Hunts Point -- you're going to have major recruiting issues.
Post by LoveTrains on Aug 19, 2014 17:05:55 GMT -5
Oh yeah, I'm not suggesting that a residency requirement will change the general crumbling infrastructure and general fuckery that is my city and state. I have called in regards to this incident numerous times, I have to call dispatch and then they say they are going to send an email to the cop who came when the incident happened. He will need to call me in order to finish filing my report.
Supposedly if I call my city council person I will get quicker action, but now its like a game. How many times can I call and be promised a call back before one actually - if ever - comes?
It is just an interesting topic that has come up as crime is up in city and our schools are terrible. I don't really know how I feel.
I do get the sense that the cops could give a shit about the crime in my neighborhood and that is incredibly frustrating.
My house was broken into on July 3rd and I have been unable to file an official police report because the cop won't call me back. They don't fingerprint because they don't care. There are break-ins every night in my neighborhood and its very frustrating. A neighbor of mine recently came out to find his car up on milk crates and all four tires stolen. Meanwhile this is the nicest neighborhood in the city. I get that they have more serious issues to deal with involving crime - violent crime etc - but it is frustrating nonetheless. People in my neighborhood shoulder the burden of property taxes and car taxes in the city and there is a sense that we get nothing for it.
They were paving my street the other day and my road was closed and the cop on the detail was a dick to me about it.
I would be surprised though if the issue was that the cops aren't from the area or don't take their jobs seriously enough. They probably just have bigger fish to fry.
Shouldering the tax burden for others is a cost of being a privileged citizen of an economically diverse city. If that's too frustrating, move somewhere more homogeneous.
Post by LoveTrains on Aug 19, 2014 17:23:20 GMT -5
I get that they have bigger fish to fry, but its a little disheartening to be the victim of a crime six weeks ago and not be able to file a police report. Frankly the problem is that we don't have enough officers right now, IMO. I plan on voting for a mayoral candidate that will increase the amount of officers on the street and I will happily pay for it. I don't mind paying for services and I'm as liberal as they come. I think we have a poverty and lack of opportunity issue in the my city. But it's still frustrating to be a crime victim and unable to even file a simple report. I am told that my other way to file is to march down to the central station - between the hours of 10 am - 3 pm only - but I don't really have time for that. Nor should I have to, IMO.
I understand the thinking both ways. In theory, you want the people in power to reflect the community. You don't, for instance, want an all-white, heavily militarized police force in a predominantly black city. And I get that.
In my neck of the woods, we usually have the opposite problem of public servants like teachers and firefighters who can't afford to live in the community -- not that they don't want to. So there has to support bolstering the requirement (though I actually think a little diversity would be GOOD for my city and we SHOULD bring in people from elsewhere.)
It's a tough one and I think you have to think about your particular community and whether the requirement is the only way to achieve your objective.
Post by pinkdutchtulips on Aug 19, 2014 17:41:49 GMT -5
living in HCOL Nor Cal has made me side eye a lot of residency requirements for public service/first responder positions. SF is experiencing a teacher shortage bc they don't pay teachers enough to live in SUPER expensive SF.
its not just limited to SF, even the suburban districts are having a hard time keeping teachers close to the schools in which they teach.
its just not limited to teachers either .. I know members of SFPD who live an good hr away from SF ... all bc they cannot afford to live in the city they serve.
Post by citrusmint on Aug 19, 2014 17:52:26 GMT -5
I can't live in Manhattan with the money that I make. I mean I guess I could, but I'm not willing to give up the comforts of my own parking spot and a large condo for a studio apartment in a far less desirable neighborhood.
A cop who lives in the Bronx might not have any knowledge about midtown Manhattan, or a cop who lives in the "burbs" in Queens might not know anything about Harlem.
ETA: Just because you live in NYC proper doesn't make you an expert in all of NYC, the neighborhoods are just too diverse.
But I'm talking about major cities. Say 150,000 or more people.
a lot depends on that pay .. if you pay them enough to live where they serve, they there shouldn't be a problem. SJPD is having a hell of time retaining officers because once they get some experience they're BOLTING to a higher paying PD like Oakland or SF but they're not moving to SF or Oakland.
But I'm talking about major cities. Say 150,000 or more people.
a lot depends on that pay .. if you pay them enough to live where they serve, they there shouldn't be a problem. SJPD is having a hell of time retaining officers because once they get some experience they're BOLTING to a higher paying PD like Oakland or SF but they're not moving to SF or Oakland.
The pay issue is a good point. I think my city pays fairly compared to the suburbs. Many of our city cops do detail work and earn considerable overtime doing so. For any road work or project that involves the road there is a police officer who stands there - theoretically directing traffic but in reality texting and looking bored.
The affordability thing isn't an issue in my city - cops and teachers could afford housing. But the problem is the public schools are terrible and affording private school would be challenging. So I guess that is tied into it.
In a way, I get it, but I feel that if you're going to implement those requirements you need to make sure you're paying people enough to live comfortably in the city/town/district. I've seen very few instances where the municipalities were offering that. Providing affordable housing for public servants is another option.
ETA - I believe Philadelphia did away with their residency requirement in the last few years. It might be worth taking a look to see if any studies were done. People there were getting hit with an additional city income tax and HCOL (if they wanted to live in the nicer/safer areas). I think they were having trouble getting police officers.
I work in the same city as my house but in a totally different area. Think .manhattan vs Staten Island (i dont know NYC but i think this works) Since I work in the city centre, I still care about that area. I commute there daily, I have lunch there, I use transit there. I probably care about the infrastructure there more than by my house. I am not a public worker but I imagine most people are a little vested in the area they work.
I don't feel that way as a random office worker, but for people who serve the community, I'd imagine that's very true.
And hey -- I know people who have commuted to work as teachers in underprivileged communities because they wanted to serve that particular population. They're very invested in those communities. Requiring people to live in those neighborhoods would sure hurt recruiting. (Likewise, finding natives with the requisite degrees and such might be difficult).
Post by maddiepaddy on Aug 19, 2014 19:17:59 GMT -5
I think that ideally, cops, teachers, etc would live in the communities they work in. My hometown has had an issue with this recently. Most cops do not live in my town, and it is clear that while they work there, they do not typically share the values of the community. Having people in these so-called positions of power that actually reflect the community would be highly beneficial, however there are often many reasons why it's not feasible. COL and issues of a small recruiting pool of course are the big ones.
Take Ferguson for example, the community is almost 70% african american, yet their PD has 50 white officers and only 3 african american officers. I, of course, don't claim to know how many of these officers actually live in Ferguson, but this is a (very extreme) example of the PD not reflecting the community and the problems that can cause.
In some jurisdictions police must carry their weapons at all times off duty in that jurisdiction (outside of some situations) and respond to all emergency situations. While on one hand that is helpful for a community it can be incredibly draining on an individual. It can make those workers want to live out of the city (even five minutes out) just to be able to relax every once in a while. It sucks to have to carry a weapon in 90 degree weather and make sure it is concealed at all times. This is a trivial problem, yes, but combined with increased housing costs and poor schools it can be a tipping point.
I can kind of understand them. I live in an urban area that is mostly very affordable, and city police, teachers and firefighters, for example, can all easily afford to live here on their salaries. But there previously was serious middle-upper class flight from the city spanning decades, and they didn't WANT to live here. Schools were bad, neighborhoods were not desirable, and things in the city were tough. Things have been turning around over the past handful of years though, and I can understand the frustration of people in the city wanting their various public workers to have a little more invested in the area. These are good jobs and the kind of people/income that are needed to uplift the demographics here and help continue the upswing. The geographic area of my city isn't huge though, and population is about 250k.
As a teacher who lives in district it doesn't bother me. However, I have several teacher friends who refuse to live in the district they teach in for privacy purposes. It may be different for elementary and middle school teachers though.
I won't be surprised when my house gets rolled or egged one night since most of my students know where I live.