Voters will decide residency issue

[denise]

www.uticaod.com/news/x418528617/Utica-residents-to-decide-on-citys-residency-requirement

Ironically, the people that it will affect don't get a say in matter.

I don't think that it is a bad idea to put this issue to a vote. Maybe it can be put to rest once and for all.

Funny item is article: True to form Roefaro places blame on previous administration leaving this issue for him to deal with.
Hello! City employees have been living outside the city for more than 30 years!!

[frankcor]

This is just a ploy by the mayor and council to sneak a new grandfather clause into the law.

Note the provision in the referendum legislation that any current employees will not be affected by the outcome.

[snickers]

I've always thought this was such a silly and parochial law. If I am an employer and I want to hire, say, a butcher - do I really care that he's a vegetarian? No. I want to hire someone with good skills at cutting meat to make it very appealing to my customers. If I need a mechanic for my Ford truck garage, I do not CARE if he walks to work, or even if he drives a Prius. I just want a qualified and skilled mechanic who will get the trucks fixed quickly and accurately.

This is the same thing. I need a good cop (or firefighter). I need someone well-trained in the skills of their trade, someone who will respond quickly when needed and handle his/her duties with great efficiency, dependability and honesty. If the job is performed well, the compensation is earned. And once that happens, it is NOT my business how or where the employee - whether pizza delivery guy, clinic nurse, truck mechanic or city cop - spends his/her compensation. Sure, it would be fine if the employees spend their EARNED money at my pizza place, or bought from my butcher shop, or brought their truck to my garage, or decided to live within city limits because they decided it's a place they WANT to live. But ultimately, it is the employee's decision what they do with THEIR hard-earned money.

Some years ago, a major American auto maker tried this foolishness. They were going to ban parking for employees who didn't drive THEIR brand of vehicles. Then, when they realized that wasn't going to work (this IS America, after all) they figured they'd just allow "our autos" to park in a close lot, and banish "other autos" to a lot further from the factory. That didn't fly either.

Now, I can see having an area within which we expect our firefighters and cops and snow plow drivers to reside. A radius, or a reasonable commute time. It there's a five-alarm fire or a major prison riot or 57 inches of snow of the main street of town, I don't wanna hear that my needed savior can't make it in to work from frikkin' Watertown or Buffalo!

But at any rate, I'm glad the matter will be put on the ballot for The People to decide. The People, after all, keep whining that "they" are not properly represented, and that "they" are ignored. Well, here ya go. Here's your chance. Speak now, or forever hold your piece. VOTE.

And then, for the love of Pete!, Move On.

[Ralph]

Summed up nicely Snickers, couldn't have said it better myself.

[tanouryjr]

I guess my take is that in private business, all of those things hold true. But as an employee of a municipality, I believe, one should reside within that municipality that pays their check. It's not uncommon. I had a friend in Florida that was a cop, he worked for the Clearwater PD and got a job with the St. Petersburg PD. Before he could transfer he had to move to St. Petersburg. It just seems that people are starting to equate government jobs with private business too much. We are getting so used to the terrible economy in Oneida County that we actually consider creating government jobs as "economic development." That's sad, in my opinion.

[clarencebunsen]

Snickers is spot on, I don't really care where the hired help lives.

If it becomes a problem, I think the question should be put to the elected help, "Why can't you make my municipality a desirable place to live?"

If the answer is unsatisfactory, it's time for new elected help.

[lilbump1980]

I believe that if the city of utica is your employer you should reside in utica. This holds true for police dept, dpw, teachers etc. I am sick if the crap (sorry) that people say well why would cops want their children to go to school with people that they arrested or their children. that is just ridiculous.
I am definately voting YES to the residency law..
also, i am sick of people saying why would they want to live in utica... IF UTICA IS GOOD ENOUGH TO PAY THEIR PAYCHECK, THEY SHOULD BE PROUD TO LIVE IN UTICA, NOT SAYING THEY HAVE TO LIVE IN CORNHILL, THERE ARE MANY MANY NICE PARTS OF UTICA...

[denise]

I think any employer would like to have the most qualified individual for a position they are attempting to fill. It should not matter where the person happens to live.

[dgriffin]

But as an employee of a municipality, I believe, one should reside within that municipality that pays their check. It's not uncommon.

But Larry, you haven't offered a logical reason for it. There is no other parallel that I can think of. I certainly owe no further allegiance to a business employer than my best efforts toward his endeavor. I can guess at how the tradition got started, but what is the reason to continue it? "It's only fair," doesn't cut it for me. OK, so folks disagree on it and that's the best reason to put it up to a vote. After all, if I lived in the city and voted my thinking, but the majority voted the other way, so be it.

[corner]

living in the community espcially you are policing puts police officer in danger at times from those he has arrested etc they could be followed home their familys put at stake etc..It also puts undo restriction on peoples private lives what if some body wanted to raise horses have a small farm or inhereted the family castle in Saquoit.. so long as the person hired is the most qualified and are doing there jobs residency shouldnt matter....now on the other hand if you choose to run for an elected office thats a horse of a different color you should at least own some property in town and pay taxes here you dont necessarily have to reside here but at least have somevested interest .

[dgriffin]

Aug 13, 2008 20:36:05 GMT -5 snickers said:

... a major American auto maker tried this foolishness. They were going to ban parking for employees who didn't drive THEIR brand of vehicles.

That's what GM in Syracuse did in the 1960's in regards to foreign cars and employee parking. They allowed only American cars in the main parking lots and forced foreign cars into a lot at the very end of the property. They also ran photos of the lots and cars in their plant newspaper, and featured any worker who bought an American car in a special section of their paper. I was told management wanted to run photos of employees near their foreign cars in the lot to harass them, but was prevented by legal counsel.

[lilbump1980]

Corner, to your theory on the people you arrest can follow you home.. They can follow you home at anytime.. anywhere..
A lot of my friends and family members are Utica Police Officers.. And they always lived in Utica and remain in Utica. they take pride in the city that they work and protect..

My vote will be YES...

[Clipper]

Heck Lilbump, your friends and family members already have their jobs. I am sure they appreciate your loyal thoughts, but with only one high school in town, I would not want to be a cop and have my kid assaulted because he was forced to go to school with the kids of the dirt bags I put away.

I believe in a regional restriction, that they have to be able to respond to their place of duty within a half hour or an hour of being recalled in an emergency.

Any reserving of jobs strictly for residents, is discrimination, and patronage. It opens the door for even more of the same old shit that has made Utica politics infamous, and for the nepotism we all bitch about.

I would be in favor of leaving the following items off of an employment application: 1. address, 2. gender, 3. religious affiliation, 4. race, 5. any reference to political affiliation.

AFTER one is hired, the address can be provided when filling out the employee personnel package with next of kin, etc. It should make no difference it they are a black budhist lesbian from Osceola, and a registered libertarian with a communist wife, as long as they have the qualifications to do the job that they are hired to do.

[lilbump1980]

There are cops in this city, that their children went to public school and had NO problem at all, and if they are scared or don't want their kids going to proctor, they can pay to have their children go to Notre Dame.
I just am for it, I know a lot of people that are for it. Utica is a great city, every city has their drugs, prostitution, and crime and violence, however at least Utica has a great community and they have very very nice parts of utica. I just feel that if the City of Utica is good enough to pay someone's paycheck, then they need to pay taxes in the city. I have a lot of friends that became cops a couple of years ago say 5 and they had to move to utica right away to get the job.. and they have stayed here ever since. I know a lot of people aren't for the residency law and that is fine, we all have our reasons and our opinions, however I am for it 100% --- it is like saying that Roefaro wants to move out of utica, b/c his daughter is getting picked on at Proctor b/c her dad is mayor.... The Mayor is employed by the City of Utica ,,, and lives in the city of utica.. end of story... so should all city employees

[corner]

Aug 14, 2008 9:44:04 GMT -5 lilbump1980 said:

Corner, to your theory on the people you arrest can follow you home.. They can follow you home at anytime.. anywhere..
A lot of my friends and family members are Utica Police Officers.. And they always lived in Utica and remain in Utica. they take pride in the city that they work and protect..

My vote will be YES...

keep in mind its a job not involuntary servitude im more concerned about professioanlism in city goverment not necessarily where one sleeps at night.. in this day and age it should be anon issue and the council should do what we elected them to do, make a damn decision and stop referring things to the voters that could and should be handled in the council chambers...