Amherst board adopts local residency law after public hearing; town says unions still govern current employees

The Amherst Town Board voted May 26 to adopt a local residency law, Resolution 2026-373, after a continuation of a public hearing in which residents raised concerns about fairness, selective enforcement and access to town job postings.

Supervisor Lavin moved to approve the resolution and the board approved it by voice vote. Before the vote, the supervisor read a section of the proposed law noting that it would not supersede any valid collective bargaining agreement: “This section shall not supersede any valid collective bargaining agreement with the Town of Amherst,” he said while reading the ordinance language aloud.

Why it matters: The law gives Amherst residents preference on civil-service eligibility lists and aims to prioritize local hiring. Residents and former town employees warned the board that the measure, as written, could be applied inconsistently and asked for more transparency about waivers and how the town posts job opportunities.

Residents' objections and questions Nick Pallini, a former town employee, criticized how job openings are posted online and urged clearer navigation and public notice of employment opportunities: “Did you ever try to get there? Www.amorous.net or gotnewyork.us. Then you gotta go and look around the Internet page for government… Give them the website. Show them how to navigate it,” he said, arguing that poor posting limits local applicants.

Jane Cox urged the board to reconsider the law, saying contract (union) workers historically were required to live in town and that the proposed law would be unfair to long-tenured employees: “It's not fair to the other workers who had to move into town and maintain residency here while they were working for at least 20 years,” she said.

Resident Don Smith said the measure felt politically motivated and demanded transparency on who receives waivers and for how long. “We need transparency… I want to know everybody when they get it and when they don't,” he said.

Town response and limits set by CBAs Bob McCarthy, the town's HR director, told the board and public that, in practice, collective bargaining agreements govern residency requirements for covered units and that no contract will be changed unilaterally: “Most of the bargaining agreements actually require residency, depending on the particular CBA,” he said, adding that the town will sit down with union leadership to work out any differences and that the contracts currently in force supersede the local law.

Supervisor Lavin and board members reiterated that the law’s application to unionized employees depends on negotiation: board members said they do not plan to initiate bargaining unilaterally and that the law will not displace the protections or terms of existing CBAs.

Board action and next steps Supervisor Lavin made the motion to adopt Resolution 2026-373; the motion was seconded and approved by voice vote. The board indicated that implementation for unionized positions will follow discussions with each affected bargaining unit. The resolution’s adoption does not, according to town officials, immediately alter existing collective bargaining agreements; any change that affects unionized employees would require negotiation.

The board closed the public hearing before moving on to other agenda items. Residents who raised concerns were told staff would follow up; the supervisor said staff would reach out to at least one resident by the next day to clarify procedural questions.

Quotes that capture the meeting “This section shall not supersede any valid collective bargaining agreement with the Town of Amherst,” Supervisor Lavin read from the law.

“It's not fair to the other workers who had to move into town and maintain residency here while they were working for at least 20 years,” Jane Cox told the board.

“Most of the bargaining agreements actually require residency… we will sit down with [union] leadership,” HR Director Bob McCarthy said.

What to watch for next: Implementation depends on follow-up negotiations with the town’s five bargaining units; residents asked the board for ongoing transparency about waivers and how the town posts and notifies the public of job openings.