An appellate court sided a third time with cities in their battle to enforce laws requiring municipal employees to live in the cities for which they work.
Ohio's 6th District Court of Appeals in Toledo struck down a 2006 state law prohibiting cities from imposing a residency requirement as a condition of employment.
The appellate court called the state law "an obvious attempt to circumvent constitutional municipal home rule authority."
The 2-1 decision was released yesterday. It was a victory for Toledo, which has been sued by employees who have been disciplined for not living within the city limits.
http://toledoblade.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20080426/NEWS02/804260370
The court ruled correctly. This is not a private-sector issue, after all. City of Toledo employees more than adequately compensated by City of Toledo taxpayers should have a vested interest in the city, including by property ownership. Like the rest of us, they are free to move elsewhere and work elsewhere. And given that they receive disproportionately high salaries, compared to equivalent private-sector jobs, they are more than able to afford homes in Toledo's better neighborhoods. It's too bad TPS doesn't have "home rule" authority to require its teachers now residing in Sylvania, Wood County and Michigan to live in the city whose taxpayers provide their ample salaries.
NormCash1
given that they receive disproportionately high salaries, compared to equivalent private-sector jobs, they are more than able to afford homes in Toledo's better neighborhoods
So why not just pay them a fair wage and let them live anywhere they want?
It's too bad TPS doesn't have "home rule" authority to require its teachers now residing in Sylvania, Wood County and Michigan to live in the city whose taxpayers provide their ample salaries.
There's a sure way to lower the quality of education our kids are getting even further.
I'm sorry, but were you trying to express a thought? Please try again.
NormCash1
TPS has a piss poor record. Imagine a hypothetical teacher who's currently teaching out in some successful school out in the burbs - lets say out at Anthony Wayne just for our little experiment.
Lets say this teacher has advanced degrees, teaching awards, and 20 or so years experience. She sees the problems with TPS and thinks "hey, I can help. A.W. schools are doing fine, and I'm more needed in the city.
Lets also imagine that this hypothetical teacher has a husband with a business in Waterville, and two hypothetical kids who have been attending school out there all their lives and are now in senior high school.
Would it be a smart move for TPS to hire this award winning teacher to educate Toledo's children, or should they take a "home rule" stance and tell her she's not wanted because she simply wants to commute the 40 minutes to work and stay in the home she's made over a number of years, and not uproot her kids?
What would be better for Toledo's kids?
let me know if you dont get my point, I know hypothetical is a 5 syllable word.
To take your argument a step further, will you get better teachers at Pickett if you require them to reside in the Pickett district? If you want the best candidates for a position, you cast the net as far as possible. There are many reasons for poor performance in TPS, but residency is not one of them. Do Ottawa Hills, Sylvania or Toledo Catholic Schools have such a requirement?
And to think I used to wear your number on my jersey in little league.
Billy is a 2 syllable word. So is teacher. So is suburbs. Caucasian is, oops, 3 syllables. But a 2 syllable greeting to you, as famously stated on this site by Starling to another, is Bite Me.
NormCash1
And darnwart goes down to defeat -- LMAO