Rural pubic schools are mandated by federal and state laws to provide all necessary educational services for their constituents including the therapy services rendered by speech-language pathologists (SLP). However, due to extensive competition for these professionals in the last decade, rural public school administrators have experienced considerable difficulty in recruiting and retaining SLPs. The purpose of this investigation was to identify reasons why SLPs employed in rural public schools opt to remain in that employment setting. A 32 item questionnaire was developed and used to survey SLPs employed in rural public schools in a mid-south state. Of the 169 respondents, 93 reported having been employed in the same rural public school for four or more years. These 93 respondents were chosen as subjects for this investigation. Respondents chose the following seven factors as the most important reasons for continued public school employment: salary, vacation, support for continuing education, satisfaction with types of clients, caseload selection, the school's reputation for providing quality services, and relationships with other professional staff.
This Article proposes a paradigm shift in takings law, namely "inclusionary eminent domain." This new normative concept serves as a framework that molds eminent domain takings and economic redevelopment into an inclusionary land assembly model that is equipped with multiple tools to help guide municipalities, private developers and communities construct or preserve affordable housing developments. The tools to achieve this include Community Benefits Agreements ("CBAs"), Land Assembly Districts ("LADs"), Community Development Corporations ("CDCs"), Land Banks ("LABs"), Community Land Trusts (CLTs) and Neighborhood Improvement Districts ("NIDs"). The origins of the concept derive from the zoning law context, where exclusionary zoning in the suburbs excluded affordable housing for lowincome residents. Courts intervened, applying exclusionary zoning doctrines, which led to the enactment of inclusionary zoning programs to achieve a fair share of housing. Exclusionary eminent domain in urban areas, similarly, has displaced and decreased the stock of or denied access to affordable housing through the power of takings. Under an exclusionary eminent domain doctrine, courts would apply heightened review to condemnations in a locality that has less than its fair share of affordable housing. But in a post-Kelo era of takings, doctrinal solutions may not be enough. Analogous to inclusionary zoning, inclusionary eminent domain helps us rethink how to fix these ubiquitous land problems. Indeed, this Article moves us beyond the doctrinal muddle and instead incorporates both the intellectual musings of takings and zoning law with an assessment of how
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.