City of Albuquerque v. Montoya

2012 NMSC 007, 274 P.3d 108, 1 N.M. Ct. App. 446, 2012 WL 1192088
CourtNew Mexico Supreme Court
DecidedMarch 6, 2012
Docket32,570
StatusPublished
Cited by20 cases

This text of 2012 NMSC 007 (City of Albuquerque v. Montoya) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering New Mexico Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
City of Albuquerque v. Montoya, 2012 NMSC 007, 274 P.3d 108, 1 N.M. Ct. App. 446, 2012 WL 1192088 (N.M. 2012).

Opinion

274 P.3d 108 (2012)
2012-NMSC-007

CITY OF ALBUQUERQUE, Petitioner-Petitioner,
v.
Juan B. MONTOYA, Director of the Public Employee Labor Relations Board and the Public Employee Labor Relations Board, Respondents-Respondents, and
AFSCME Council 18, Local 624, Real Party in Interest.

No. 32,570.

Supreme Court of New Mexico.

March 6, 2012.

*109 Robert D. Kidd, Jr., Interim City Attorney, Shelley B. Mund, Assistant City Attorney, Rebecca E. Wardlaw, Assistant City Attorney, Albuquerque, NM, Rodey, Dickason, Sloan, Akin & Robb, P.A., Edward Ricco, Thomas L. Stahl, Jocelyn C. Drennan, Albuquerque, NM, for Petitioner.

Gary K. King, Attorney General, Andrea R. Buzzard, Assistant Attorney General, Santa Fe, NM, for Respondents.

Youtz & Valdez, P.C., Shane C. Youtz, Marianne Lee Bowers, Albuquerque, NM, for Real Party in Interest.

OPINION

MAES, Justice.

{1} The issue presented in this appeal is whether NMSA 1978, Section 10-7E-26(A) (2003), the grandfather clause of the Public Employee Bargaining Act (the Act), applies to the City of Albuquerque Labor-Management Relations Ordinance (the City Ordinance), as it pertains to the process for the appointment of interim members to the Labor-Management Relations Board of the City of Albuquerque (the Local Board). When the Local Board must meet during the absence of a member. Section 3-2-15(D) of the City Ordinance provides that the City Council President is to appoint an interim member "with due regard to the representative character of the [Local] Board." Albuquerque, N.M. Rev. Ordinances ch. 3, art. II, § 3-2-15(D) (1974) (amended 2001). The Court of Appeals characterized the City Council President as "managerial personnel" and held that the President's appointment of a third member defeated the neutral makeup of the Local Board's membership. We disagree and hold that the City Council President does not serve in either a "management" or a "labor" capacity, and therefore the City Ordinance provision that provides a procedure by which the City Council President appoints a member to the Local Board during the absence of a member does not violate the Act's grandfather clause requirement that a local ordinance create a system of collective bargaining.

{2} Accordingly, we reverse the Court of Appeals' holding that, because "the [City Ordinance] establishing [the Local Board] is not eligible to be grandfathered pursuant to Section 10-7E-26(A)," the State Public Employee Labor Relations Board (the PELRB) has jurisdiction over the underlying matter. City of Albuquerque v. Montoya, 2010-NMCA-100, ¶ 1, 148 N.M. 930, 242 P.3d 497. We remand to the Court of Appeals for consideration of the other issues not previously addressed.

FACTS AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY

{3} In June 2007, the American Federation of State, County, and Municipal Employees Council 18, Local 624 (AFSCME), filed a prohibited practices complaint with the Local Board on behalf of Steve Griego, an AFSCME member. The complaint alleged that the City of Albuquerque (the City) discriminated against Griego by failing to hire him for an Electrician 3 position, a position for which he was qualified, because of his union activities. Following the prohibited practices complaint hearing, the "neutral" member of the Local Board recused from the matter. As a result of the deadlock, the two remaining members of the Local Board could not adjudicate AFSCME's complaint.

{4} Following the deadlock, AFSCME filed the same prohibited practices complaint with the PELRB. The City filed with the Local Board a motion for appointment of a neutral third member for the pending action. *110 City Ordinance § 3-2-15(D). The Local Board issued an order directing the City and AFSCME to agree on a neutral third member to present to the City Council President for approval. If the City and AFSCME could not reach an agreement, then the remaining two Local Board members were to select a neutral third member to present to the City Council President. The City Council President subsequently solicited names from both the City and AFSCME. The City proposed either retired Chief Justice of the New Mexico Supreme Court Gene Franchini, or the neutral chair of Albuquerque's Personnel Board, Sean Olivas, to serve as the neutral third member. AFSCME did not respond to the City Council President's request. The City claimed that the "process failed due to [AFSCME's] refusal to participate." AFSCME claimed that according to the plain language of Section 3-2-15(D) of the City Ordinance, the appointment of a neutral third member was not warranted when the neutral member had recused from the proceedings. As a result of the parties' failure to agree on a neutral third member, the Local Board entered an order directing the two remaining members to petition the City Council President for appointment of the neutral third member.

{5} The same day the City filed with the Local Board its motion for appointment of a neutral third member, it filed with the PELRB a motion to dismiss the proceeding for lack of jurisdiction because the dispute remained before the Local Board. Juan B. Montoya, Director of the PELRB (Director Montoya), determined that Section 3-2-15(D) of the City Ordinance was not grandfathered under the Act, and therefore the PELRB had proper jurisdiction over the complaint. Director Montoya's conclusion was based on a reading of Section 3-2-15(D) of the City Ordinance as conflicting with the requirement in Section 10-7E-10(B) of the Act that a local board be balanced in membership.

{6} The City then filed a petition in the Second Judicial District Court seeking the issuance of a writ to prohibit the PELRB from hearing AFSCME's complaint and to stay the PELRB proceedings. The district court granted the writ and ordered the PELRB to cease all proceedings related to the complaint, finding that Section 3-2-15(D) of the City Ordinance was grandfathered under the Act, and therefore, the Local Board, not the PELRB, had proper jurisdiction over the matter.

{7} The PELRB and AFSCME appealed to the Court of Appeals. The Court of Appeals reversed the district court, holding that "the ordinance establishing [the City's] labor board is not eligible to be grandfathered pursuant to Section 10-7E-26(A)." Montoya, 2010-NMCA-100, ¶ 1, 148 N.M. 930, 242 P.3d 497. The court explained that

[t]he [Act] requires that a local board, like the PELRB, be a balanced and, therefore, neutral body. . . . Even though Section 3-2-15(D) requires the president of the city council to appoint an interim member with deference to the representational character of the board, the president's effort to incorporate neutrality in an often highly polarized environment is not sufficient to uphold the integrity of the essential process. . . . Section 3-2-15(D) of the Ordinance effectively removes from an employee the "bargaining" aspect of collective bargaining when it establishes a process whereby two-thirds of a local board could be comprised of appointees pursuant to management recommendations.

Id. ¶ 10.

{8} The City filed a petition for writ of certiorari, which we granted pursuant to NMSA 1978, Section 34-5-14(B) (1972) and Rule 12-502 NMRA. City of Alb v. Montoya, 2010-NMCERT-010, 149 N.M. 65, 243 P.3d 1147. The question presented on appeal is:

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

N.M. Found. for Open Gov't v. Corizon Health
2020 NMCA 014 (New Mexico Court of Appeals, 2019)
AFSCME v. Bd. of Cty. Comm'rs of Bernalillo Cty.
2016 NMSC 17 (New Mexico Supreme Court, 2016)
American Federation of State v. Board of County Commissioners
2015 NMCA 070 (New Mexico Court of Appeals, 2015)
Faber v. King
2015 NMSC 015 (New Mexico Court of Appeals, 2015)
Farber v. King
New Mexico Supreme Court, 2015
City of Albuquerque v. American Federation of State, Employees Local 1888
2015 NMCA 023 (New Mexico Court of Appeals, 2014)
American Federation of State v. City of Albuquerque
2013 NMCA 063 (New Mexico Supreme Court, 2013)
AFSCME Council 18 v. City of Albuquerque
New Mexico Court of Appeals, 2013
American Federation of State v. City of Albuquerque
2013 NMCA 012 (New Mexico Court of Appeals, 2013)
State v. Zamora
New Mexico Court of Appeals, 2012
Estate of Lajeuenesse v. UNM Bd. of Regents
2013 NMCA 4 (New Mexico Court of Appeals, 2012)
In Re the Protective Proceedings for Borland
2012 NMCA 108 (New Mexico Court of Appeals, 2012)
State ex rel. Toomey v. City of Truth or Consequences
2012 NMCA 104 (New Mexico Court of Appeals, 2012)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
2012 NMSC 007, 274 P.3d 108, 1 N.M. Ct. App. 446, 2012 WL 1192088, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/city-of-albuquerque-v-montoya-nm-2012.