FALLS SCHOOLS: Residency policy goes to court

By Nick Mattera

Six former Niagara Falls School District employees fired for violating a controversial residency policy have filed lawsuits against the district in New York State Supreme Court.

In December, suits were filed by former English Teacher Roxanne Adrian, Guidance Counselor Keli Koran-Luchey and the Civil Service Employees Association filed on behalf of district employees, Karrie Beck-Nichols, Vincent Gigliotti, Randy Krajkowski and Judith Smith, against the Niagara Falls Board of Education.

Niagara Falls Teachers Union President Joseph Catalano confirmed the suits adding that he does not believe the terminated teachers were afforded due process.

“I don’t like the fact that the school board acts as judge, jury and executioner,” Catalano said. “If you think someone is not in compliance, there is a procedure and it is our stance that one was not followed in these instances.”

In September, seven school district employees were fired after a Probe Services investigation initiated by the district determined that they were not in violation of the district’s residency policy. At the time, the terminated employees vowed to take legal action, which they have now done.

Catalano said that these cases have just begun, adding he expects an expensive, bitter fight.

“No matter which way the court rules, there will be appeals filed until we reach the highest court in the state,” Catalano said. “There is no easy fix to this problem.”

If the employees win their respective cases, Catalano said they would most likely be entitled to their previous positions with the district and back pay to the date of their termination.

CSEA Union President Diane Spacone said that information has been collected to ensure that the cases have merit, and now the union has moved forward in representing the former civil service employees.

Facts of the case

Catalano outlined in a sworn affidavit his concerns with the residency policy.

He stated it is his belief the district superintendent has not issued any administrative procedures and guidelines that are consistent with the residency policy. Catalano added that on several instances he had sought clarification on the policies definition of “principal domicile.”

According to the policy, “Residency shall mean for all purpose of this policy, an individual’s actual principal domicile and which he or she maintains usual personal and household effects.”

School Board President Russell Petrozzi said the term is quite clear and it is the district’s stance that all terminated employees were in direct violation.

“A principal domicile is a place where you keep your prized possessions, your wife, your children,” Petrozzi said. “Based on all of the data given to us, we have determined that these individuals violated the policy, and now it’s up to a judge to make his ruling.”

Adrian, a former high school English teacher, outlined in her affidavit that she had submitted a voter registration card, a copy of a Time Warner Cable Bill and a copy of a lease for her address located within the boundaries of the Niagara Falls School District. Adrian said in her statement that after submitting all of the above information that School Board Attorney Angelo Masaro informed her attorney that the information was insufficient.

Catalano said the details of the policy violate the basic spirit of the constitution.

“I do not believe that any government body, let alone nine school board members can dictate where a person must live,” he said. “It is a direct violation of the Bill of Rights.”

Petrozzi said when the employees sign to accept the benefits and pay rate they also sign to abide by the residency requirements.

“You can have a residence in Florida or out-of-state, but the government says you must have one domicile, and to be an employee of the Niagara Falls School District that home must not violate the residency policy.”

Catalano said that as much as there is to argue regarding the policy’s definition, the biggest fault lies in its implementation.

“If you think someone is not in compliance, our stance is very simple, follow a due process,” Catalano said. “Gather your evidence and give it to a third party to intervene.

“In this case the board gathers the evidence, than gives it to themselves, there is no impartiality there. All we ask is these teachers are given a fair shake.”

Residency Revisited

The district’s residency policy has been a subject of debate between school officials and the teachers union ever since it was established in 1994. Catalano said the teacher’s union collective bargaining agreement expires June 30 and the residency policy is something that he expects to be altered.

“We are definitely going to propose amendment’s to the policy,” Catalano said. “Do we think it will be rescinded completely? No. But, we are confident changes will be made.”

Petrozzi was quick to strike that idea, saying, “it’s a policy, not a negotiated item.”

Catalano said that four years ago during the last collective bargaining agreement, they came close to finding suitable modifications to the policy, however, the district was unable to muster enough votes for passage.

Spacone said that she too would like to see modifications to the policy but wouldn’t confirm that her union would be bringing it to the table.

The Niagara Falls School District boasts a unique residency in that all employees are required to abide by it, not just tenure track teachers as is seen in other districts. The only local school system to use a residency policy are the Buffalo City schools, but its policy is less strict, allowing the board to make exceptions for teachers that have unique qualifications.

Petrozzi said the Niagara Falls policy does not limit the quality of teachers or staff hired.

“Ever position we advertise for produces a large pool of candidates,” Petrozzi said. “Do I think it is a hindrance? No.”

If an employee was hired prior to 1994 they are “grandfathered” into the school district and are not required to maintain residency within district boundaries.

More to come

The Niagara Gazette has learned that district is in the process of finalizing another round of residency investigations. They have identified employees that they believe are not in compliance and have sent them letters informing them to show evidence they have a domicile within the district.

The district has a contract with Probe Services paying them around $900 to $950 per-person to investigate residency issues. In November, District Human Resources Director Phil Mohr said that around 20 employees had been investigated putting the cost at that time to taxpayers at around $19,000.