Rymer Automotive in Wilkes-Barre Township burglarized overnight

Automobile sales increase nationally; local sales follow suit

A residency requirement makes sense for Luzerne County government&#8217;s top dog and department heads, ensuring they feel a real stake in the place.County council next week could take a final vote on a proposed change to the county&#8217;s personnel code. If approved, the update will require future county department and division heads to live in Luzerne County &#8220;throughout their employment.&#8221;The requirement would not apply to current managers. It also would not extend to current or future rank-and-file workers.Supporters convincingly argue that public employees who call the county home will be more committed to it. If they pay property taxes to Luzerne County, for example, they&#8217;re more likely to be sensitive to government spending increases that might compel taxes to go up. Similarly, they and their families probably will buy houses here, patronize businesses, attend schools and get involved in civic life &#8211; all good for the betterment of the area.In a poll conducted of the Times Leader&#8217;s online readers, a large majority of respondents said they preferred that the next county manager put down roots here.Our poll asked: &#8220;Should the person hired as Luzerne County&#8217;s manager be required to live within the county?&#8221;Eighty-two percent of respondents answered &#8220;Yes, absolutely.&#8221; Fifteen percent said, &#8220;No, that&#8217;s unnecessary.&#8221; And 3 percent chose &#8220;Not sure. Never thought about it.&#8221;Based on legal advice, county officials wisely expanded their proposed ordinance to include not only the manager, but all department heads. Singling out one office would have been unlawful; a Luzerne County judge last year shot down a city of Nanticoke residency requirement that seemingly applied to only one city employee.Also, an absurd suggestion that the county manager be required to own a home here, rather than rent, fell by the wayside. One wonders where that overreach might have gone next; were some council members planning to dictate what color curtains the employee could hang?Certain council members have expressed legitimate concerns that a residency policy might exclude viable job candidates who live nearby, for instance, in Lackawanna and Wyoming counties.Elsewhere, opponents of similar provisions have argued it infringes on free choice. They&#8217;ve claimed it can be unfair to dual-career couples, locking them into a geographic area, or prevent a government worker from living close to extended family members, such as a parent in need of care.Expect Luzerne County&#8217;s policy, if approved as expected, to one day be challenged.But, as written, it appears to pass muster and not place undue hardship on people who one day hope to help manage the county&#8217;s operations. It&#8217;s a big county, after all, with a range of housing options &#8211; rural, lakeside, suburban and downtown living &#8211; and no shortage of available properties.Why wouldn&#8217;t a county government boss choose to live here?

Our Opinion: Want a top-level job in Luzerne County government? Then live in Luzerne County