WATERTOWN, N.Y. — July 2025
When the suggestion arises that key city employees—like the City Manager, City Engineer, and Superintendent of Public Works—could live outside Watertown while serving the city, it’s not merely a convenience proposition. It’s a stark insult to this community—even more so when empty homes sit vacant inside our city limits.
Residency Isn’t Optional — It’s a Legal and Civic Imperative
Under New York State law, holders of those offices must reside within the city they serve. Those offices were created with residency in mind: they are meant to lead, represent, and be fully accountable to the community.
Suggesting that leadership quality depends on geography? That no qualified candidate lives in Watertown? That’s the real affront—because there are plenty of talented people here, committed to our city and simply overlooked.
Political Convenience Over Community Interests
Watertown leadership has floated a local law granting exemptions for certain current office-holders to live in Chaumont or elsewhere in Jefferson County.
City Manager Eric Wagenaar was hired with a six-month window to relocate—a timeframe he failed to meet because “he couldn’t find a property that fit his needs”. Yet, is that a valid excuse when vacant homes in Watertown remain idle?
Using Vacant City-Owned Housing as a Civic Solution
Rather than bending the rules, the City Council could acquire or rehab an existing vacant home, offer it rent-free or low-cost to the City Manager or Mayor, and demonstrate leadership by example. This would:
- Fulfill legal residency requirements.
- Show that leaders can live here and want to live here.
- Stimulate neighborhood revitalization by occupying a vacant property.
- Shine a spotlight on available housing and raise expectations for city workers to share in community cost‑sharing.
Voices of Experience Are Clear: “They Must Be Here”
At the June 16 City Council meeting, former Fire Chief Dale Herman—who was required as a condition of employment to move into the City—warned of emergency scenarios wherein critical decisions must be made on-site. He recalled storm events when city streets became impassable, making timely response more difficult when leaders lived outside the city.
Residents like Kerry Johnson questioned aloud: “How were these individuals put in position if they did not meet basic residency law?”.
It’s More Than Law—It’s Respect & Representation
When officials live where they work, they share the same streets, pay municipal taxes, and are visible participants in daily civic life. It’s unfair—almost arrogant—to say no one inside Watertown could meet job qualifications. That message undermines local talent and community pride.
By choosing exemption over enforcement, leaders send a signal: public office is an exception to community involvement—not a standard for service.
Conclusion: Step Up or Step Aside
The debate isn’t about personal comfort. It’s about representation, accountability, and fairness. If we can’t insist our leaders live in the neighborhoods they govern, we undercut the very principle of public service.
Ownership and occupancy of vacant homes by city officials isn’t just symbolic—it’s practical. It demonstrates commitment, revitalizes property, and reflects values this city should embrace.
Watertown deserves leaders who live it, not commute it. And that starts with living here.
About the Author
