Busing forum

Parking lots at Central overflowing.
Super promises that maps showing bi-secting Riverside is no longer under consideration
School age population up 12%, Riverside experienced much larger increases in this cohort”
So how much of an increase? Doesn’t say. Claim that Riverside’s enrollment “will decrease significantly”. Again, no expiation for this conclusion except that “the experts who figured this out are really, really good”. That’s reassuring.
My three points: the legal basis for Blumenthal’s opinion that supports the state law requiring busing is suspect.
Second, no data supports the theory that busting up neighborhood schools improves academic performance,
Third, breaking up Riverside school will cut real estate values in half
Question: what happens if we tell state to piss off? Ans: loss of $8 million in funds. This is probably not true- state owes the money to individual “special needs” kids- sue.
Teachers will lose state certification. Laughable.
Moriarty answering question about challenging state law:”what lesson would it teach our kids if we defied the state?”
Some rude audience member (ahem) yelled that it would teach the children history: this country was founded on rebellion. The audience member was suitably chastised by the superintendent
Two residents demand that any decision on this be deferred until at least the upcoming election when 3 board members will be replaced..
Q: BOE says all this planning for redistricting is caused by two problems, race imbalance and over crowding, but the pressure for speed comes from deadline to address race. Facility usage is a bogus excuse.
How is there growth in western side of town when no new housing?
Q- there will always be racial economic disparity – how do you propose to address that next year , the year after that, and in perpetuity?
Q- Riverside school, according to you, will have excess capacity going forward, and is racially balanced. If there’s plenty of room and no racial problem to address, why are you even considering breaking it up?
Answer from Super; Ah, good question.
Former BOE whatshername is reading some lengthy question re: student population, public vs. private school. I didn’t follow it.
Cos Cob resident, NY lawyer asks if Board has made a decision to challenge the law. They have not. Urges board to make a decision to aid the parents in challenging this unconstitutional law by allowing us to have standing to sue them.
Super says, legal counsel has advised districts not to challenge the law.
Questioner reads the holding of the Parent’s case: may a school district reassign children solely because of racial demographic changes? NO!
Disappointed that of the 15-20 speakers, all but 2 are from Riverside. Every taxpayer in town has a stake in the BOE’s plans- Riverside is not the only potential target here- in fact, we probably are less likely to be screwed by the BOE now than other less vocal neighborhoods. June 6th is the next meeting – oops! Riverside resident just asked where the residents from areas are and a large number of audience members said, “we’re here”! Good.
Q- why is board making this decision being rushed through in 4 months?
Leslie Moriarty says “I’ll take that as a rhetorical question”. Audience disagrees. (Super does attempt an answer)
Cos Cob resident asks about 20 NYC license plates at New Lebanon School (total enrollment 200). Residents must prove residency every year to obtain a beach card, students are asked for proof of residency only twice, kindergarten and 9th grade. Why?
Second question: with limited funds how much will busing cost?
Super-22 license plates all traced back to Greenwich residents.
Also doesn’t rule out busing, by the way.

Central Middle has lousy wireless, delaying regular updates.

Parkway parent wants more input from parents- what about non-parents?

Maria pons Cohen back for a second bite of the apple, this time without notes. Much better. Concurs with previous speaker: board must decide, one way or the other, whether to challenge the state law. If they challenge, fine; if they decide not to challenge, that decision will give parents legal standing to sue on their own.

Q: what are you planning for middle schools? Answer, “we will look at that issue but haven’t yet”. Why don’t I believe him?

Q: 4 options all involve redistricting. When are you going forward to pick one to meet state’s demand we have a racial ly based plan?
Ans.Maybe more options, maybe not. June 20 is not our deadline..

I’m done here. Main impression I’m taking away? We have an incredibly articulate group of parents in this town. Having suffered through many public hearings in other towns when I was lawyering, the intelligence of parents here is astonishing.
Summary, until I get back to a real keyboard, the BOE is going to be forced by citizens to challenge this law. I think we’ll win, we might lose, but the political pressure will make that challenge inevitable. I was chatting with Peter Tesei in the hall afterwards (where were the Democrats?) and while I certainly wouldn’t put words in his mouth, Peter’s a politician, and he was impressed , I think, by the passion and intensity displayed in that auditorium, from parents from all areas of town: New Lebanon to Parkway, North Street to Old Greenwich. This is the hottest issue to hit the town in my memory – 50 years or so- and it won’t go away. Too much money in the form of property values, and the huge attachment to neighborhood schools to let this go away.


Filed under Uncategorized

61 responses to “Busing forum

  1. It might not be as bad as a 50% drop in house values in Riverside. It might only be a 30-35% loss.

    When I lived in Briarcliff Manor, we were in the Briarcliff school district. The next street over was in Ossining schools with a Briarcliff mailing address. The Briarcliff school district was very, very good and the Ossining schools were just okay. The houses on my street and the next street over were all built by the same developer at the same time, so not much variation there. Houses on my street went for a 30-35% premium compared to the next street over.

    Briarcliff also had a “nothing is too good or two expensive” for the schools attitude and one reason we sold and left was the fact that school taxes went up 10 to 15% per year like clockwork and anyone who questioned why was told to move. So we did.

    • M

      Oh, “only” 30-35 percent?


    • GreenITCH

      hmmm with that thinking then if this were to pass , further reducing riverside addresses that get to attend riverside schools … should we presume then that this would then put further upside pressure on riverside housing market as there would be even less inventory to choose from ?

  2. Born, raised and still living in Riverside

    Really appreciate the updates, Chris. Thanks so much!

  3. Sanjay Bigglesworth

    C’mon on up to New Canaan where we’s all pasty white. Nantucket reds and popped collars mandatory.

  4. LAK

    Is anyone (besides you) taking to twitter?

    What’s the hashtag? Anyone?

  5. George W. Crossman

    They always get this process going at beginning of summer when people goin
    1. We spend 3x the money to educate our children in Byram than we do in Riverside or Old Greenwich.
    2. There is a state statute that requires equal distribution of funds that our board of education has flaunted and twisted to justify this inequality of expenditures.
    3. Correcting that imbalance would provide plenty of funding to expand the Old Greenwich and Riverside Schools so they are not over crowded.
    4. Hamilton Ave got a new school while Riverside has plywood painted white to cover water stains in the halls created by a leaking roof.
    5. Where is the letter from the State Dept of education requiring that lack of equal distribution be corrected?
    6. Why is it ok to break that State Statute but not the racial balance statute?
    7. If racial balance is so necessary why is it that Wilton, New Canaan, Darien and Redding are allowed to remain totally white strongholds?
    8. Greenwich should challenge the State of Connecticut and fight instead of rolling over. I am personally tired of Greenwich being the whipping boy for the State of Connecticut.
    9. We should also root out the numerous children who use a Byram address to attend Hamilton Ave, New Lebanon , western middle school and GHS. Our efforts are shameful in this matter and because of this we do not know the true racial makeup of western Greenwich or Greenwich for that matter. And yes landlords should be required to verify the children living in their apartments as they were before.
    10. The board of ed is constantly seeking a sliver bullet to make up for educational failings.
    11. Juian Curtis is a magnet school and we were sited by the state for failing.
    12. Hamilton Avenue is a magnet school and has not provided the desired result and both programs should be un wound.
    13. IB is the last silver bullet that has been foisted on us and we send money to Switzerland for administration and we don’t get to even reduce our own administrative STAFF IN RETURN. What are we paying for?

    • anonymous

      “landlords should be required to verify the children living in their apartments as they were before.” Landlords provide leases now, as they did before and for decades. Just like banks provide mortgage statements that are used by homeowners. Not sure what you’re talking about here.

      • Anonymous

        as a greenwich landlord, i’ve never been asked anything by anyone from the city, school board, or any local goverment official pertaining to residency status of a tenant. so yeah, while i’d love to rat out a ny resident using greenwich schools on the sly, ummm…..i rent to people who actually live in greenwich, and who are therefore entitled to enroll in school here. as anon at 10:01 said, i literally have no idea what george crossman is talking about in his #9 example above.

  6. Cobra

    Excellent reportage, Chris. Scary proceedings.

  7. burningmadolf

    I guarantee you will be hearing a lot about Sheff vs. O’Neill, CREC and more magnet schools that will make up the minority difference by busing kids from out of town.

  8. For the Record

    Just for the record, the red-haired guy from Riverside (Rogodinzki I think?) was incorrect in saying that the political parties in Greenwich never give anyone any choice. The Republicans did in 2011- they ran 4 candidates for the 2 Republican spots and the public got to choose. They chose Barbara O’Neill and Peter von Braun. If he wants to shake up the system, he has two options – hire a lawyer and a bunch of people with pitchforks to change the town charter OR run a slate as Independents. Nowhere does it say 1/2 the board has to be R or D it just says ‘no more than 1/2 from any one party’. 90% of this town goes through life blissfully ignoring the political process and hoping it all turns out right for them. When it doesn’t, we get nights like tonight.

    • Duly noted – I will admit my mistake on that front for the 2011 election. But probably the only exception for a long time. I’m not a pitchfork kind of guy, so I guess its door number two.

      • For the Record

        I loved everything about your first public comment though. Thank you very much for taking the time to articulate what so many of us in Riverside feel about this situation. Didn’t mean to nitpick.

        • No offense taken. Just remember the name when you see it on the Libertarian line in November. Changing my voter registration on my next trip to Town Hall to start the 90 day clock ticking just in case.

      • For the Record

        Before you look to toss out the Republicans, they are the ones who voted to take redistricting OFF the table. It’s not easy being a Republican in education (especially in CT) but they are trying to fight the good fight. Hope you win and knock off the lowest-vote-getting Democrat!

        • hmmm

          the republicans are to blame as well…they voted for that music palace when we should have been focused on funding new schools to handle the overflow. instead we focused on the need of 500 students at a cost and counting of 45 million…shut it down and redirect the money

  9. anonymous

    Hows my friend Lord Sir Count von von Braun doing?

  10. Long Time Central Greenwich Resident

    Any correction would be better if it racially/ economically balanced all of the schools, not just Riverside and schools on the western side of town. The question is how we do that transportation-wise and how we can diversify the schools in everyone’s interest.

    As a resident of the North Street School district, I believe that my district should be balanced as well. This should not be just Riverside. Any fix that fixes on a few schools is not in the interests of the town.

    Racial and economic imbalance in the Greenwich schools may seem to give people who are in the schools with low minority percentages advantages now, but these are mirages in the long run. People should focus on raising successful children, and in the current world, being educated in a racially and economically balanced school system is better. If your kid is applying for a job down the road, and lords it over people who came from economically or racially disadvantaged backgrounds, the Greenwich school system will not have served your kid well in life.

    The top levels of education and the top levels of business, government and non-profits are now more racially balanced than ever in the United States. Why not all of our schools in Greenwich?

    • Anonymous

      Well said!

    • Cos Cobber

      Because there is no way to do this kind of social engineering without a complex race based gerrymandered solution. If you are sincerely interested in a seeking increased diversity at the k-5 level, why not just enroll your child at Hamilton or Julian Curtis? Afterall, that was the whole point of opening up the enrollment in these schools.
      Look at the % the BOE is reporting; Cos Cob is 29% minority, Riverside 24%, the town average 34%. These schools are already showing diversity greater than the American population as a whole and well beyond what most American’s experienced in suburban schools just 10 years ago, let alone 30 years ago.
      We all go to three middle schools and the same high school. No one is looking to change that (and make the less diverse).

    • Why do you assume that amore affluent person automatically ”lords it over” a less affluent person of a different race?? Shall we have families report their income yearly to the BOE in case we need to shuffle their kids to another school because their income fluctuated up or down that year?
      This is getting sillier by the minute.

      • Long Time Central Greenwich Resident

        This is an economic issue at the core – dealing with people who are economically disadvantaged to the point where their children’s performance in school is impacted adversely. However, race and economics are unforturtunately tied in our society.

        It would benefit the Greenwich school system to have diversity in each of the lower schools and also the middle schools, although we may not be talking about middle schools right now. The end result is going to help the town, not hurt it, because having each school diverse economically and racially will enable us to raise the level of our schools to a uniformly high level. There will be no schools that are rated better or worse than other schools if we can achieve the desired result.

        The question is how to go about this in a way that maximizes the benefits for our families. We need to hear about the solutions here and consider them carefully.

        However, the town has a burden of proving that they there are not taking people out of highly rated elementary schools into less highly rated schools in the long term. The town needs a plan so that all the schools move up in their ratings and achievement. It may take a few years, but the long and short of it is that this problem has to do with unequal elementary schools, and we should not have unequal elementary schools (or unequal middle schools) in our town.

  11. anonymous

    The saddest part of this whole story is that NL and Ham Ave. do the best job in the state, by a wide margin, educating ELL students and diluting those students around town will make it more difficult to continue that performance. The very people they want to help will suffer the most. We can’t maintain banner ELL programs at more schools, so we will just let them perform at a Bridgeport or New Haven level. Thanks liberal whiners, you might succeed in your white-hatred agenda, but this time it will hurt your precious ELL kids more because, frankly, I’m pretty sure a kid from Riverside bused to NL will have some great experiences that will serve him or her well in life. Not so sure the kid who moved here from El Salvador in 2010 will fare as well in Riverside without a very strong ELL program.

    • Long Time Central Greenwich Resident

      That is not a good reason for keeping anyone who does not ELL in a segregated school. The teachers can travel too you know, as it is not that far between Greenwich schools.

  12. Data driven

    As the saying goes, there are lies, damn lies and then there are statistics. I don’t know how the vaunted consultants are generating their numbers, but I find them inscrutable. Using the birth rate, which seems to be their strategy, to predict enrollment at Riverside, makes no sense. People move here with at least one kid, if not two or three, already born. (Why pay for the real estate and the taxes before you need the schools?) In 2004 there were 64 babies born in Riverside, but there are 80 children currently registered for kindergarten next year. Interestingly the DOE statistician projected 64 students, apparently based on birth rate, just like the 3rd party consultants. But hey, being off by 20% is not that bad, right!?!?!? And actually they would be off by a lot more if so many kids in Riverside did not go to private school.

    Also interesting that New Lebanon is massively over capacity and the last 2007 plan was to send more kids there from Riverside and other areas, clearly that would have been a disaster. I know hindsight is 20/20, but these guys are not even bothering to look back and extrapolate from actual historical data.

    And of course the law is completely unconstitutional anyway.

    • Cos Cobber

      Excellent point about births by district vs reality. Certain districts have very high move in rates and particularly Riverside and OG where few in their 30s own a home ahead of bearing kids. Most bear the kids elsewhere and move in.

  13. Riverside Chick

    So what happens when the kids miss the bus? Mom and Dad are at work, before re districting they could have walked to school . Now they miss school. District is now making education not accessible . Same for bus home, kid stuck across town with no way to get home.

    • Long Time Central Greenwich Resident

      Get a second bus for the older kids. Below middle school, the kids are not supposed to be left by themselves anyway because you are playing with fire. Before or after school programs are another answer.

      • Riverside Chick

        Reality, kids are left by themselves all the time even here in Riverside! Are you kidding???? It seems to me the the bussing would really negatively effect the minorities with regard to school access.

      • Anonymous

        I guess living in Central Greenwich you don’t grasp why so many move to Riverside- it’s for the community feel, to be able to walk or bike with your kid to school. Plenty of other families feel that way about OG school, and other speakers tonight felt that way about their respective schools. Busing takes that away.

        • Long Time Central Greenwich Resident

          Riverside is pretty big, and not everyone in the district is in walking distance. Hard to believe people walk in the cold, snow and rain if they live at least a half mile from the school. Hard to believe that kids under 10 walk more than half a mile to school. An excuse to keep Riverside as is.

          • Long Time, I grew up in Riverside and I can assure you that at least in my time, every home in Riverside was within walking distance of school and my peers and I did it, even from the very tip of Indian Head, which is the farthest point I’m aware of from Riverside School. Not quite uphill, both ways, through 5′ of snow, but we did walk. If children don’t do that now it’s because of helicopter parenting, not a sudden geographical change.

            And by the way, you’d be very hard pressed to find any home in Riverside except the aforementioned Indian Head Road that is farther than a 1/2 mile from school.

            UPDATE: And what on earth is wrong with keeping Riverside as it is? The incredible strength of Riverside real estate prices clearly shows a preference for the neighborhood among home buyers. If that’s what people want, who, other than Democrats, would force them to forego their choice in favor of some social engineering scheme?

        • Anonymous

          People in Riverside really do walk and bike to school, even those of us that are furthest away. We live almost a mile from school and it takes my 8 year old and I eight minutes to bike to school. We also walk the dogs there frequently which takes 20 minutes. People move here so they can do that. It is definitely not the culture of Central Greenwich, which is exactly why we moved to Riverside and not to a less pedestrian friendly area.

    • Anonymous

      I have never seen more than four kids get off the Riverside bus. Ever. An yes, my son walks close to a mile (beyond St Paul’s Church) to and from school. With Ada’s on the way home!

    • Grr Mom

      Do you think kids at NSS, Parkway, kids 3-4 miles from Glenville are walking to school if they miss the bus? Greenwich already has a huge population of kids who cannot safely walk to school if they miss the bus so that argument is swiss cheese.

  14. Anonymous

    Tuition students (teacher and town employee children) should not be given CHOICE of schools. Whose idea is to bus our children all over town while non-tax payers get to hand pick the school they want their children to attend? There are roughly 50 elementary age children and 20 middle school children that are from out of town. Possibly enough to create racial balance at one of these elementary schools.

  15. Anonymous

    I was at the meeting tonight and I, too, was very impressed with the parent speakers. They weren’t the normal ranting PTA crowd…rather they were parents who thoughtfully posed questions seeking to have a collaborative, productive dialogue on this massive change being introduced— and decided on basically overnight.

    I thought that McKersei and Moriarty were caught flat footed on many of the well put questions. Ito does sound from tonight’s dialogue that racial balancing and half empty schools are being “conveniently” combined.

    It will be interesting to see how this unfolds.

  16. Anonymous

    Riverside Chick, I am sure the Car Service that takes Daddy into the city can swing back and pick up Jr. Better yet go together, it’s on the way right off Exit 2 🙂

    • Anonymous

      Actually, most of the commuters in my Riverside (and previous Old Greenwiwch) neighborhood, walk or bike to the train. You should try it! Works wonders for you physical and mental well being.

    • Riverside Chick

      I’m really referring to the kids on the other side of town where maybe grandma or grandpa watches the kids and they don’t drive. It would directly discriminate against the kids who were bussed for example they could not be in involved in after school activites a lot of which are enrichment programs also chorus and band.

  17. Cos Cobber

    Can we get FF and Blumenthal to weigh in on this?

  18. Anonymous

    Anyone else think its odd that the BOE hire a consulting firm, Milone and MacBroom, that are civil engineers, surveyors, landscape consultants, etc and NOT management consultants that would normally analyze these kind of matters? Do you think these “specialized” consultants might favor a certain kind of outcome? hhhhmmmm

  19. Anonymous

    sweet, byram prop values will go up! thanks b.o.e.!

  20. Anonymous

    I’m not sure why so many people commenting think this is a Riverside Problem – it is a Greenwich Problem. A district with wiggly districting line & institutionalized busing means a lack of transparency for home buyers. If you don’t know what school you are districted for when buying your home, you limit your pool of buyers. Everyone can’t go to private school or frankly, should want to go to private school. There were some really smart guys who brought up a case that a group of parents ( I believe in Seattle?) who fought racial balance on constitutional grounds and won. Another really smart woman brought up a point later in the night – “what’s next? Are they going to ask us to bus kids based upon their religion?”

    I hope these parents chime in so a group can be organized to discuss the viability of this option. I think it is time that we challenge the state on these silly laws and get back to the business at hand – educating our children. The combined resources of Greenwich should be able to educate all our residents & create educational achievement instead of busing routes. Who else never wants to hear the words – Milone & MacBroom again?

    • LAK

      Silly laws is right!!
      It’s all about Sheff vs. O’Neill
      I said this before….the people of Rowayton were in the same situation a few years back.
      Wanting to bus Rowayton kids across town.
      Rowayton families won!

    • Anonymous

      No one said it was a Riverside problem, but at least 50% of the attendees last night were from Riverside and that’s who chose to speak up. The majority of Riverside students walk or bike to school, a huge reason why we choose to live in Riverside, so the busing issue hits a nerve for us. I’m also guessing a large chunk of Chris’s blog readership resides in Riverside and the comments reflect what hits home for us.

  21. This entire discussion is predicated on a state mandate that doesn’t make sense. It must be challenged. I have watched this process in Greenwich grind on to the inevitable spot we are caught in today for years. Forced bussing to achieve ”diversity” has been rejected all over the country after decades of terrible outcomes. When it was implemented in the southern U.S. in the 1960’s and 1970’s, most white families simply formed private academies (of dubious educational quality) and withdrew en masse from the public schools, making most public school systems close to 100% black and poorer than ever before. It also segregated communities even more than they had been. In northeastern working,middle and upper middle class communities, there was white flight to surrounding smaller towns that were lily white due to their boundaries (Larchmont vs. New Rochelle, Darien vs. Stamford, Wilton, New Canaan, etc.) In the midwest, in integrated towns such as Shaker Heights Ohio, most whites retreated to private or parochial schools, or to the smaller nearby burgs that had no minority population to speak of (Chagrin Falls, Solon), again stranding a poor population with even less resources than before. Same story in Kansas City, Chicago, Detroit and Milwaukee. Its not an anti-minority vote with their feet mentality. Its an anti- diminishing quality of education vote. In this day and age it is disgraceful that we treat individuals as mere ciphers to achieve racial body counts. My children who attended Greenwich High School found it disgusting to even contemplate basing their opinions and friendships on race. Of course problems of poverty still exist, but they won’t be solved by considering ”diversity” to be a skin color issue. Socio-economic class distinctions in the U.S. are real, but the lines are blurry and not exclusively race based. Our kids’ generation is way ahead of the state of Connecticut on this issue. They are incredibly post racial in their outlooks. Greenwich is too large a geographic size to make bussing practical even if its citizens were in favor of it. If this happens, Darien, New Canaan and Westchester County will see an influx of younger homebuyers and our public schools will continue to deteriorate in quality and resemble our balkanized southern cities — families embracing private, or less expensively, parochial schools who can possibly afford these options,, and a poorer, lower achieving school district left behind. All to move around probably well less than 50 to 100 children’s bodies to different school buildings around town in search of some state education committee’s desired color checkerboard. It is disgraceful and embarrassing and a step backwards to regard a human being solely based on their skin color rather than the content of their character, to paraphrase Dr. King.

  22. Seriously?

    just speaking with a teacher who raised her kids in greenwich and they attended New Lebanon – she is enraged and has been for years that getting a beach card is much harder to obtain than getting your kid into school here. She sees numerous out of state plates and knows of many two-family homes with six families living in them to take advantage of our schools, esp the service provided for special ed. WHY IS NO ONE CHECKING RESIDENCY – I am happy to volunteer as I am sure many others would be – they only have two people handling beach passes which is a much more rigorous process. As this teacher suggested, do it school by school so BOE doesn’t have to look like a complete failure on this issue. And house by house, year by year. Her children went through all school years in town at public and were checked only once for residency in Kindergarten?!?!

    • The BOE has backpedaled on this issue because it looked so bad. Said they didn’t want to create undue hardship and suspicion so they did not do more than cursory checks. Some families do use relative and friend addresses in town. I met a high school student about 10 years ago who had recently graduated from GHS, who told me his family rented a room in in a house in central Greenwich that was carved up into a number of small rental units, many just one room spaces, and affixed the family name to the mail slot area. The kid stayed there a couple of nights a week and returned to his family in Port Chester on weekends. A nice boy and a compelling story of a family wanting a better education for their son, but its too expensive a burden when replicated as much as it is.

    • LAK

      Yes, thats true. The only time residency is checked is at kindergarten registration.

      There needs to be a better way checking residency every year for every child!

      • Anonymous

        Not true. I just submitted 4 bills and mortgage statement to register for GHS.

      • Grr Mom

        LAK – there is now a mandatory residency check for incoming 9th graders at GHS.
        Its not enough. We need at least another verification during k-5 – maybe 2nd grade or 3rd? and upon entry to middle school.
        Personally, I think every year for every family but the BOE is claiming that it will take too much money away from education.

        • LAK

          Wonder if Volunteers would do the leg work, the BOE would except it?

          Also, where is the fire chief? Shouldnt they be checking illegal apartments?

    • Grr Mom

      Recently, the district tried to do residency verification (kindergarten, entry into the schools and entry into 9th grade) with a notarized landlord statement. That was removed because it was too much of a burden.
      The problem is Granny moves to Florida and rents out her house in Byram to a nice family and has no idea who is actually living in her house. That family then sublets bedrooms in the house to friends/families and gives them a “lease” to use to register their kids (and lets them switch some of the utilities in their name for a month to get a bill to use for residency). They are all living in Greenwich – they live and sleep here. Its a zoning issue in many cases versus an actual residency.