Required to live where you work

   Many local municipalities require that their employees be residents of their town or city. As taxpayer-supported positions, officials argue, these employees should have a vested interest in the communities they serve.

   But while these rules are on the books, they aren't often enforced. This year marks the first year Amherst has actually terminated any employee for the offense, under new pressure from the Town Board.

   Some local governments are reluctant to invest the time and money necessary to track down offenders who might otherwise be doing a good job at work, but happen to sleep in another town.

   That leaves many to wonder whether residency rules are worth the paper they're written on.

   --- Sandra Tan

Comments

[Theresa]

Residency requirements should be removed from the books everywhere. They provide a marginal benefit to the communities and an undue hardship upon the employees.

If each family had one wage owner who worked at the same job for 30 years, they would be great!

But if a family has multiple workers in teaching or another job with a residency requirement, they severely limit job opportunities.

Also, if a worker is laid off, it limits where they can work based upon if they are willing to uproot their family to move 3 miles away.

[James Drozdowski]

Residency requirements for local employees should be used when the local agencys give up their Federal, State, and County funds. If I am paying for your operation, I want to have an accessibility to my tax dollars.

[BobbyCat]

(I've waited until this blog topic is inactive before posting.)

Why is there no blog topic on the 'historic' downsizing votes in two suburbs, Evans and W.Sen? The voting is on June 3rd. Shall we wait until AFTER the vote to opine?

Downsizing town government will be on the ballot in EVERY Buffalo suburb, beginning day after tomorrow, this fall and in the future, yet "The Burbs" blog is oblivious to it. What's up with that??

Frustrated taxpayers are looking to sound-off and find a way to send their bloated governments a message. It's happening NOW!!!! Are you guys asleep? Or - if it's not happening in Amherst, it's off your radar screen.

BTW, I'll be voting in favor of downsizing, for various reasons, if anyone cares to discuss it.

[olaffub]

The city has a population of 292,000 (2000 census) and drastically shrinking. If the city only hires its own residents that is a small pool to draw from. My suggestion put every healthy adult of working age to work for buffalo in the fire, parks, schools, police, city hall, etc.
Go to city hall or visit the BPS and see what a stagnant pool we have.

[don]

The cost of rent in Amherst is ridiculous; if the officials want employees to live in Amherst they will have to pay more, or exempt those earning below 40 grand. If this man truly did tell his superiors he was not living in Amherst, then instead of lulling him into a state of false security should have given him a warning and a firm date to get it done

[GW Plunkett]

If you work for a municipal entity, you should live in that municipality.

If Buffalo fired non-compliant residents like amherst: over half of the Police, Fire, and BPS employees would not have a job.

[Buffalo Libertarian]

Rules, laws, regulations, etc. are meaningless if they're not enforced. If they're not being enforced, either start enforcing them or get rid of them.

[Don H]

Municipalities would improve their efficiency if they hired the best qualified with prference given to local residents when they met that standard.

[ChrisP!]

How about Buffalo finally growing a set and using that extra box on the W2 for suburban employees on the city's tax rolls!!

[my2cents]

What if someone works in the city - owns 2 or more houses in the city and lives in the burbs?

As someone else also stated - will where employees live improve any thing other than taxes - will it reduce crime in the city - will it create more jobs, how.

Will these transplants bring malls and stores with them?

How about a tax on city dwellers who shop in the burbs ?

[ChrisP!]

@Steve in Wheatfield

I like that novel idea Steve!! Then all of these taxes and excessive fees go away too!!!

[Mark]

I have worked for a place in the past that had a residency requirement. As an employee, you have to submit certain documents for payroll. It is not that hard to track this down, though lately everything in Buffalo seems to be hard. The disfunction has been there for decades.

[Steve in Wheatfield]

Here's a novel idea. How about we just merge Erie and Niagara County into one metropolitan area and this issue goes away?

[Lydia Bezou-Hojnacki]

All people paid through tax dollars should be required to live within the community they serve--teachers, included, regardless of "shortage specialty."

There is no excuse for not living within the jurisdiction that pays the salary.

[Dave]

How hard can it be to figure out where somebody lives? Generally, everybody knows every body in these small towns so this isn't rocket science that needs some special investigators, etc. Ask the people around where the person says they live. Those are the ones that would know...

[ChrisP!]

If you are a City of Buffalo or Buffalo Public Schools civil servant, you should be required to live in the City of Buffalo. It is grossly unfair that Buffalo residents cannot become police officers or firefighters of the surrounding suburbs yet we see a mass exodus of our tax dollars leaving our city everyday between 3:30pm and 5:30pm. If they lived where they worked perhaps Johnny would be able to read and Johnny would probably have a daddy too!!!

[Greg]

Your tax dollars at work, is it really worth the time and money at tax payers expense to investigate employee residency? Especially when we are in an economic downturn. The costs doesn't justify the means in my opinion.