But experienced teachers have been around for a while, and they have usually accumulated spouses, children, mortgages and other obligations. Do we want to say that a high-needs school should not try to hire these people unless they have a good way to get to work without a car?

If there's a superabundance of qualified teachers in every neighborhood in New York that sort of rule might make sense.

My own inclination would be to give parking permits to teachers who can demonstrate a need to drive, and free or discounted Metrocards to the others. That's not what UFT wants, but it makes sense to me.

At the risk of pointing out the obvious, the reason subsidizing transit for teachers costs but reserving them parking is free is because the parking is free to everyone. So everyone wants it -- the uncivil servants and the loal residents. If local residents and teachers had to pay for on-street parking permits -- say $25 per month or so -- then handing out the "free" permits to teachers would cost, just like transit.

But this gets back to another issue -- residency. Civil servants who live near where they work are more valuable that those who live far away, and not just due to transportation.

First year teachers are bad, and the more turnover you have, the more first year teachers you have. So it is a real loss if a teacher who has already climbed the learning curve departs for a suburban job. Some do it for the money. Many do it for the commute.

None of the teachers who live in my neighborhood and ride the subway to work have left for a suburban job. It would be bad for child care.

It may not be fair for force teachers, cops, sanitation workers etc. to live in the city. But if it were up to me, those who lived in the borough where they worked -- or, if working in Manhattan, in proximity to rail transit -- would be paid significantly more than those living farther away.

At my school the administration is bike friendly, and I can bring my bike inside. But when I'm asked to travel to another site, I always have to phone ahead and find out the situation. Many places are downright bike hostile, including my own district headquarters.

I'd like to see the UFT take a pro-active position in support of alternative transportation incentives for their members. Currently, bike accessibility is determined on a site-by site basis according to the whim of the site administration. An across-the-board policy supporting secure bicycle parking at all the public schools - for teachers and students - would be a good start (and would not be inconsistent with either of their resolutions).

Her company allows free parking in the building. But if you want to take the train? The best they can do is transitchek. That's even though rail riders reduce congestion on I-95 and reduce pollution, and reduce the expense of building the building in the first place.

So I say, the teachers union should be paying for metrocards and/or commuter rail tickets for its members instead of demanding free parking. Oh wait, that costs money instead of just demanding a freebie at the public expense.

As long as we give teachers incentive to drive, they'll do it at the expense of using mass transit. Sure, some schools are poorly served by transit, but who wants to bet that there are a good number of DOE permit parkers who could easily commute by bus or subway?

Does this mean that parking permits for teachers should be limited to those underperforming schools?

Heck, the UFT refuses to allow those teachers with the toughest jobs to be paid more, relative to similar teachers with easier assignments. It wants early retirement for those with seniority instead -- so they can be paid for nothing.

The average pay of teachers in the city is not very high compared with the rest of the region. But the cost of "perks" sucks up a massive amount of money here.

As I look for a place to put the car before using other means to get to work during an alternate side day, large sections of my neighborhood are off limits. That is a partial privitization of a section of the street.

Once we move beyond the technological fix and start talking about simpler living, we will have a real chance of dealing with global warming - but the Teachers' Union has not done that.