3756 ORDINANCE NO. 3756
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF SANFORD PROVIDING
FOR A REQUIREMENT THAT DEPARTMENT DIRECTORS
IN THE EMPLOY OF THE CITY HAVE AND MAINTAIN
RESIDENCY WITHIN THE CITY LIMITS OF THE CITY;
PROVIDING FOR LEGISLATIVE INTENT; PROVIDING FOR
RESIDENCY REQUIREMENTS AND EXEMPTIONS;
PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY; PROVIDING FOR
CONFLICTS; PROVIDING FOR CODIFICATION AND
PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
WHEREAS, In the case of McCarthy v. Philadelphia Civil Service Commission, 424
UoS. 645 (1976), the United States Supreme Court determined that the City of
Philadelphia's regulation requiring its employees to live in the City of Philadelphia did not
violate the employees' constitutional rights to; and
WHEREAS, tie United States Supreme Court noted in the McCarthy decision that
"a public agency's relationship with its own employees .~. may justify greater control than
over the citizenry at large."; and
WHEREAS, in Opinion of the Attomey General of the State of Florida ("AGO") 76-
86, dated Apdi 19, 1976, to Representative Jerry Melvin, Chairman of the F!odda House
of Representatives Committee on Retirement, the Attorney General stated that "It]he State
may require residence within a given geographical areas as a condition of public
employment so long as a rational basis exists for imposing such a requirement"; and
WHEREAS, the Attomey General of the State of Florida also opined in AGO 76-86
that "... the State may lawfully give preference to bona fide Florida residents in the hiring
of public employees"; and
Page I of ~
WHEREAS, in AGO 86-7, dated January 22, 1986, to the attorney for the Holiday
Park and Recreation District, the Attorney General of the State of Fiodda was asked
whether a governmental entity may reject an applicant for employment solely upon the
basis of the applicant's residency within the jurisdictional limits of the governn'ental entity
and the Attorney General opined that"... the... District may reject an applicant for
employment based solely upon his or her status as a resident of the... District, provided
that a rational basis exists for imposing such a restriction;" and
WHEREAS, Section 153, 12A Flodda Jurisprudence 2d, Counties and Municipal
Corporations (2002), recites black letter Florida law as being "[municipal regulations
requiring municipal employees to be residents of the municipality are not unconstitutional";
and
WHEREAS, Section 171, 9 Florida JurisprudenCe 2d, Civil Servants and Other
Public Officers and Employees (2002), recites a similar statement of black letter Flodda
law in stating that "[a] regulation requiring that city employees be residents of the city is
not violative of the employees' constitutional right to interstate travel;" and
WHEREAS, the above statements of the law are consistent with the statutory
provisions of FIodda law set forth in Section 110.105(3), Florida Statutes, which provides
that there shall be no Florida residence requirement for any person as a condition
precedent to employment by any county which statutory provision is not applicable to
municipalities and, in any event, many Florida counties require their
managers/administrators to be county residents by Charter mandate or other provision of
local law; and
WHEREAS, it is, therefore, the law of the United States and the State of Florida
that, in the absence of a statutory restriction to the contrary, a local governmental entity,
such as the City of Sanford, may constitutionally reject an applicant for employment based
Page 2 of (,
solely upon his or her status as a resident or nonresident of a given geographical area so
long as a rational basis exists for such residency requirement; and
WHEREAS, the City Commission of the City of Sanford, based upon an evaluation
of the needs of the City and the City Commission's desire to protect the health, safety and
welfare of the citizens of the City of Sanford has determined that certain administrators,
department directors, in the employ of the City of Sanford should reside within the City
Limits of the City of Sanford in order that such employees will be better able to provide
essential public services to the citizens of the City of Sanford on the basis of establishing
and maintaining residency within the City Limits of the City of Sanford; and
WHEREAS, the residency of City department directors within the City Limits of the
City of Sanford will better enable such employees to respond to emergency and exigent
circumstances that occur or develop involving their areas of public responsibility; and
WHEREAS, it is, additionally, recognized by the City Commission of the City of
Sanford that residency requirements pertaining to public employees encourage public
employees to maintain a c, ormlment and involvement with the jurisdiction which employs
them; and
WHEREAS, for the reason stated above, the City Manager of the City of Sanford
is required, under the provisions of the Charter of the City of Sanford, to reside within the
City Limits of the City of Sanford; and
WHEREAS, the above reasons and rationale constitutes a rational basis for
requiring that department directors employed by the City of Sanford live within the City
Limits of the City of Sanford; and
WHEREAS, it is the desire of the City Commission of the City of Sanford to dedve,
for the benefit of the citizens of the City of Sanford the advantages and enhanced public
service that will be attained by requiring certain employees of the City of Sanford to reside
within the City Limits of the City of Sanford.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ENACTED BY THE PEOPLE OF THE CITY OF
SANFORD, FLORIDA:
SECTION 1: I eqislatjive Intent.
The City Cornmission of the City of Sanford hereby adopts the recitals set forth in
the preamble to this Ordinance (the whereas clauses) as the legislative intent of the City
Commission relative to the enactment of this Ordinance.
SECTION 2: Residency Requirement~ Relating to City Departnient
DirectoreJEXempUons.
(a) Commencing on the effective date of this Ordinance, any and
department directors hired by the City of Sanford must become residents of
the City of Sanford within one hundred and eighty (180) days of the
commencement of employment with the City unless such time pedod is
extended by action of the City Commission.
(b) Department directors who are in the employ of the City of Sanford on
the effective date of this Ordinance shall not be required to be residents of
the City dudng such period of time that the said department directors retain
their current positions of employment with the City.
(c) City employees who are in the employ of the City of Sanford on the
effective date of this Ordinance shall not be required to be residents of the
City during the term of their employment with the City if they are promoted
to the position of department director.
Page 4 of (o
~ECTION 3. SeVerability. If any section or portion of a section of this
Ordinance proves to be invalid, unlawful or unconstitutional if shall not be held
to impair the validity, force or effect of any other section or part of a section of
this Ordinance.
SECTION 4. Conflicts. All ordinances or parts of ordinances in conflict
herewith shall be and the same are hereby repealed.
~I=CTION 5. Codification. The provisions of this Ordinance shall be
included and incorporated within the City Code of the City of Sanford, Florida;
provided, however, that Sections 3, 4, 5 and 6 shall not be codffied.
SFCTION 6. Effective Date. That this Ordinance shall become effective
immediately upon its passage and adoption,
BRADY L~ MAYOR '
ATTEST:
As t!-~ City Comrnission of the
City of Sanford, Florida
Page 5 of {~
CERTIFICATION
I, Janet R. Dougherty, City Clerk of the City of Sanford, Florida, do hereby
certify that a true and correct copy of the foregoing Ordinance
PASSED and ADOPTED by the City Commission of the City of Sanford, Florida,
~rrthe ?/~. day o~~, 2002, was posted at the front door of the City Hall
in the City of Sanford, Florida, on the/'-5~day of L~ ~ ,2002.
Sanford, Florida
Page 6 of ~,