Court: Milwaukee can’t enforce worker residency requirement

MADISON, Wis. (AP) — Milwaukee can no longer enforce a long-standing requirement that public workers, including teachers, live within city limits, the Wisconsin Supreme Court ruled Thursday.

The court ruled 5-2 that Milwaukee’s residency rule is subject to a state law barring such restrictions. It’s a win for Gov. Scott Walker and fellow Republicans who control the Legislature and passed the requirement three years ago, overcoming opposition from Milwaukee’s Democratic leaders and others who warned the change would devastate the city’s economy.

The ruling reverses a state appeals court decision that the residency requirement could not be superseded by the 2013 state law. Milwaukee has required its more than 7,000 employees to live within the city boundaries since 1938.

The state law prohibits local governments from enforcing any residency requirements beyond requiring police and firefighters to live within 15 miles of the government unit. It applies statewide, but Milwaukee officials, a bipartisan group of lawmakers and other opponents argued that Milwaukee was clearly the focus as Wisconsin’s largest and mostly Democratic city and the loudest defender of the residency requirement.

The police and firefighter unions that challenged Milwaukee’s refusal to follow the law backed Walker in his gubernatorial campaigns, including the two times he defeated Democratic Milwaukee Mayor Tom Barrett.

A call to Barrett’s office for comment was not immediately returned Thursday morning.

Walker supported the law as a way to give public workers more freedom on where they live. But supporters of residency requirements generally argue that there is a benefit to having public workers live in the communities they serve. They say it increases response time and ensures the workers have a vested interest in the area.

Opponents say employees shouldn’t be denied the right to live where they like. And they say a residency requirement could limit applicants and inhibits promotions.

Republican Glenn Grothman, now a congressman whose district includes Milwaukee suburbs, argued against the change as a member of the state Senate in 2013. He warned that middle class city residents will flee to the suburbs.

“If this doesn’t work out right, we’re not going to be able to take it back,” he warned three years ago.

The city argued before the Wisconsin Supreme Court that the state law could not be enforced in Milwaukee because it did not affect all cities, towns, counties, villages and school districts in the state equally. That’s a violation of Wisconsin’s “home rule” amendment in the state constitution, Milwaukee argued.

But unions representing police and firefighters in the city that brought the lawsuit argued that the state law trumps the “home rule” authority, and the residency requirement is applied uniformly statewide.

Justice Michael Gableman, writing for the court’s conservative majority, agreed with the unions and state law takes precedent over the city’s residency requirement because it applied equally statewide.

“The Legislature has the power to legislate on matters of local affairs when its enactment uniformly affects every city or every village,” Gableman wrote.

The two dissenting justices — Ann Walsh Bradley and Shirley Abrahamson — disagreed, saying the state’s “home rule” amendment gives cities such as Milwaukee the power to self-govern, allowing them greater autonomy over local affairs.

The Supreme Court’s decision reverses a state appeals court ruling that found there was no evidence that the state law barring local residency requirements had an equal effect statewide. It is expected to affect only Milwaukee because its residency requirement was uniquely tailored to the city.


Follow Scott Bauer on Twitter at and find more of his work at

comments powered by Disqus