City limits, hiring limits — City officials warn residency rule could limit Newcastle hiring pool
Editor's note: This story has been updated to include information from the Oct. 20, 2025 Newcastle City Council meeting.
A recent discussion by the Newcastle City Council over a new police hire has ignited discussion about whether city employees should be required to live within or near city limits. Several city officials say such a rule could do more harm than good.
According to Haggerty, during the Oct. 20 Newcastle City Council meeting, Public Works Supervisor Greg Stumpff provided his response to News Letter Journal questions on the pros and cons to an employee living restriction — highlighted in this story.
Haggerty said that the council seemed to agree with his response, and no action was taken on establishing a policy on living requirements, although she noted that Mayor Tyrel Owens did comment on potentially creating a policy regarding city-owned vehicles traveling outside of city limits.
How it started
During an Oct. 6 council meeting, Police Chief Derek Thompson presented a conditional employment offer for Cameron Henson, a candidate who had previously declined a job offer from the department.
Thompson said he believed Henson remained a strong candidate despite initially turning down the job, but the conversation soon shifted after Councilman Tom Voss asked whether Henson lived in Newcastle. Owens followed up by asking whether Henson intended to move to the city if hired, Thompson said the candidate planned to commute until completing police academy training.
That response reignited a long-running question over whether city employees should be required to live within city limits.
“I think we’ve had enough with this living out-of-town stuff,” Voss said during the meeting.
Owens noted that he had believed there was a 5-mile residency rule but admitted he couldn’t recall where that idea came from.
Councilwoman Ann McColley added that response times for police officers were a legitimate concern.
“I think Gillette’s a little far,” she said, referencing where Henson currently lives.
Despite those concerns, Thompson cautioned that strict residency rules could limit the city’s hiring pool and make it difficult to attract qualified candidates.
“Affordable, acceptable housing is not always readily available for somebody in an entry-level position,” he said, adding that another officer with his department lives in Sundance.
Ultimately, the council approved Henson’s conditional offer and directed the personnel committee to review whether a residency policy should be added to the city’s personnel handbook.
City staff urge flexibility
Since that meeting, several city officials have said a residency requirement could create new challenges for staffing, in emails to the News Letter Journal.
Stumpff said the city has no formal policy dictating where employees must live, except when they are on call.
“In rural communities like ours, imposing residency restrictions can significantly limit the pool of qualified applicants. This is especially true for specialized or hard-to-fill positions,” Stumpff said. “By allowing flexibility in where employees reside, we can attract a broader, more diverse, and often more experienced workforce.”
Stumpff also warned that requiring employees to live within a specific distance of town could have legal implications under the Fair Labor Standards Act, depending on whether workers are considered “engaged to wait” — restricted in how they can use their time and thus entitled to compensation — or “waiting to be engaged,” meaning they can use their time freely and are not due additional pay.
He said the public works department already allows employees to live outside Newcastle, provided they stay nearby during on-call weeks.
“During those times, they’ve arranged temporary accommodations nearby and have been happy with the arrangement,” he said.
No record of past policy
City Attorney Dublin Hughes said he has never found any record of a formal residency rule.
“I am unsure where this perception of the requirement to live within the city limits or within 5 miles of the limits came from,” Hughes said. “To date, I have never seen or reviewed a policy requiring that of employees.”
City Clerk-Treasurer Stacy Haggerty agreed, saying that restricting where employees can live would further narrow the city’s employment options.
“If we require employees to live within 5 miles of town, our employment pool is going to be that much smaller,” Haggerty said. “If employees choose to commute longer distances, that’s their choice. As long as they are on time for their shift, it should not be an issue.”