A new bill pending in Jefferson City would end city residency requirements for firefighters after they've put in seven years of service. The bill mirrors a law passed a few years ago relieving veteran city police officers of city residency requirements. The stated purpose for the change is to give families of firefighters the freedom to move out of the city so their children have the opportunity to enroll in higher performing public school districts.
Does this mean that soon the state will follow the same logic and propose the end of residency requirements for all city employees? If the goal of the state is to offer city school-aged children better educational options, why should the effort be limited to children of city employees?
Aside from the irony that city employees are relieved of residency requirements to seek better public school options (while non-government employee city residents are given no special consideration), shouldn't the goal of the state be to ensure that all its residents have the best educational opportunities, regardless of where they live or for whom they work?
Rather than lift city residency requirements for city employees, what about changing the rules so that all city residents are allowed to enroll their children in schools outside the city? That single change to public policy would answer once and for all the decades old objection that "we'd love to live in the city except for the public schools".
For parents of city school children who enroll their kids in private schools (while paying taxes to fund the city schools), why not allow some or all of private elementary and high school tuition to be tax deductible for families living in school districts with underperforming public schools?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
2 comments:
"For parents of city school children who enroll their kids in private schools (while paying taxes to fund the city schools), why not allow some or all of private elementary and high school tuition to be tax deductible for families living in school districts with underperforming public schools? "
Rick - I for one would love to see this happen. As much as I love the city and living here, I am finding myself discouraging friends and relatives from living here longterm if they are of "child bearing/rearing" years for just that reason. Don't want them falling into the trap that we fell into, thinking that the SLPS's will get fixed "soon." It ain't gonna happen - and it's too late for us.
The St. Louis Charter School on the Hill had it's charter renewed for 10 years by UMSL.
It's got easily the best elementary school library in the city (including parochial), offers a foreign language starting in Kindergarten and an energetic- well educated staff. There is a low staff turnover rate- many teachers have been there all ten years.
An additional Kindergarten and First Grade classes are being added next year.
I've worked at a well-known, highly regarded parochial school and was surprised to find the St. Louis Charter School Kids are as well-behaved as the parochial kids.
It's too late for us, but a charter high school would keep more families in the city.
Post a Comment