Frankly, I've never understood the residency requirements that MPS has for it's teachers.  But this particular editorial makes me question them even more:

Opponents of the residency rule assert that the rule should be abolished because it diminishes the talent pool of applicants for the school district. While the rule may prevent some teachers from applying to MPS, it simply is not a strong enough reason to not require residency.

MPS employs thousands of teachers. Thousands of teachers living in the city of Milwaukee equal thousands of people who are paying desperately needed tax money to keep MPS running. Money is already difficult enough to come by in MPS, and it would be a terrible loss for the city to lose the valuable tax dollars which are provided by middle-class teachers.

More importantly, teachers are a crucial part of the community. Many teachers are involved in community-related activities outside of the classroom. The education and creativity of these valuable citizens is much needed in Milwaukee’s struggling neighborhoods. It is human nature to feel a deeper commitment to the community in which one lives, and should the residency of MPS’ teachers be lost to other communities, Milwaukee would risk the lose of their significant contributions to the community.

If MPS’ teachers aren't committed enough to live within the community which employs then, how much commitment to their students and schools can we expect them to have?

If those are your only reasons, why are we stopping at teachers?  Any person who doesn't live in Milwaukee isn't contributing to it's tax base, and isn't contributing the Milwaukee area community.  So why not pass a city ordinance requiring all companies in the City of Milwaukee to enforce residency requirements?  What makes teachers so special, that they should be forced to live in a city they don't want to just to work there?  Another question which ought to be asked is... are you expecting a mass teacher exodus if the requirement is lifted?  Or perhaps, not that many teachers will decide to move, and instead you'll just be growing your pool of potential hires.  If that's the case, then what are you losing?  Do you honestly expect someone not living in Milwaukee to want to work in MPS and move to Milwaukee?  Really?  Because that's starting to sound more like indentured servitude to me.  Not only will you work where we tell you, but you'll live where we tell you too dammit!

I find the tax argument to be the most... well... liberal.  Not surprisingly, it's the first argument made.  Dear Lord... we can't lose our taxes!  Apparently Jennifer thinks that if a teacher moves out of their middle class home that the house will not be sold to anyone, and therefore nobody will pay property taxes on it.  Even if the buyer's income is less, that doesn't affect the property tax bill... and Milwaukee doesn't have it's own income tax.  So what's the worry there?

As for criticizing the commitment of someone who doesn't live where they work... perhaps it's time that teacher's were judged based on their actual work with students, and the achievements of their students, instead of these strange other factors which may or may not tell you anything about a person.