Cheyenne Newspapers, Inc. v. City of Cheyenne, S-16-0103

• Citation: 386 P.3d 329,2016 WY 125
• Decision Date: 23 December 2016
• Docket Number: S-16-0103
• Parties: Cheyenne Newspapers, Inc., d/b/a The Wyoming Tribune-Eagle, a Wyoming corporation, Appellant (Plaintiff), v. City of Cheyenne, Wyoming, Appellee (Defendant).
• Court: United States State Supreme Court of Wyoming

386 P.3d 329

2016 WY 125

Cheyenne Newspapers, Inc., d/b/a The Wyoming Tribune-Eagle, a Wyoming corporation, Appellant (Plaintiff),

v.City of Cheyenne, Wyoming, Appellee (Defendant).

S-16-0103

Supreme Court of Wyoming.

December 23, 2016

Representing Appellant: Bruce T. Moats, Law Office of Bruce T. Moats, P.C., Cheyenne, Wyoming.

Representing Appellee: John H. Ridge, Deputy City Attorney, Alessandra K. McCoy, Assistant City Attorney, and Benjamin J. Rowland, Assistant City Attorney, City of Cheyenne, City Attorney's Office, Cheyenne, Wyoming. Argument by Mr. Rowland.

Before BURKE, C.J., and HILL, DAVIS, FOX, and KAUTZ, JJ.

FOX, Justice.

[¶1] The Cheyenne City Council created the Employee Investment Study Implementation Team (EIS Team) to consider alternative means of implementing the recommendations of a staffing and compensation study conducted by the City's contractor. The City refused the newspaper's request that the EIS Team meetings be open to the public, and the newspaper sued the City, requesting an order declaring that the EIS Team must comply with the Wyoming Public Meetings Act. The district court entered summary judgment in favor of the City, holding that the EIS Team was not subject to the Act. We affirm.

ISSUE

[¶2] Cheyenne Newspapers, Inc. (Tribune-Eagle) submits three issues on appeal, which we narrow to the following question: Is the EIS Team an "agency" subject to the Wyoming Public Meetings Act?

FACTS

[¶3] In 2012, the City of Cheyenne (City) hired Mercer Group, Inc. to conduct an employee investment study to determine appropriate staffing levels and pay ranges for various departments and classifications of City employees. In anticipation of receiving the Compensation and Classification Study (Mercer Study), the City Council passed Resolution No. 5508, which created the EIS Team. The full text of Resolution No. 5508 reads:

WHEREAS, the City of Cheyenne engaged the Mercer Group, LLC, to conduct an employee investment study to determine appropriate staffing levels and pay ranges for the various departments and classifications of City employees; and

WHEREAS, it is anticipated that the Mercer Group, LLC, will complete the employee investment study prior to the end of July 2013; and

WHEREAS, various members of the Governing Body of the City of Cheyenne have expressed an interest in serving on a committee to consider alternative means of implementing the recommendations of the Mercer Group following completion of the employee investment study; and

WHEREAS, it would be beneficial if representatives of employee groups covered by the employee investment study, and various members of the City's administrative staff also serve on the committee; and

WHEREAS, a final plan must be submitted to the Governing Body for approval no later than January 1, 2014, and implementation process must begin with the Fiscal Year 2015 Budget.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE GOVERNING BODY OF THE CITY OF CHEYENNE, WYOMING, that the "Employee Investment Study Implementation Team" is hereby created; that said team be composed of the following individuals (in alphabetical order): Sean Allen [City Council member], Jim Brown [City Council member], Bill Gonzales [City Public Works employee], Lois Huff [City Treasurer], Rick Kaysen [City Mayor], Tim Rumpf [City Police Department employee], Jason Sanchez [City Parks & Recreation employee], Theresa Snyder [City Clerk's office employee], Sara Vasquez [City Treasurer's office employee], and Rich Wiederspahn [City Human Resources Director], and that said Team be directed to consider the recommendations of the employee investment study and alternative methods of implementing those recommendations which are approved by the Governing Body of the City of Cheyenne .

(Emphasis added.)

[¶4] Upon completion of the Mercer Study, the City Council passed Resolution No. 5535, which acknowledged receipt of the Mercer Study¹ and referred it to the EIS Team. Resolution No. 5535 reads in part:

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE GOVERNING BODY OF THE CITY OF CHEYENNE, WYOMING, that the Governing Body acknowledges receipt of "The City of Cheyenne, Wyoming, Compensation and Classification Study, Final Report," dated October 1, 2013, attached hereto as Exhibit A.

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that "The City of Cheyenne, Wyoming, Compensation and Classification Study, Final Report," dated October 1, 2013, is hereby referred to the "Employee Investment Study Implementation Team" to consider the recommendations of said Compensation and Classification Study and to prepare a plan containing alternative means of implementing all or some of the recommendations of said study, together with such other recommendations as shall be forthcoming upon final completion of the employee investment study, said implementation plan to be presented to the Governing Body no later than February 1, 2014, or such other date as may be determined by the Governing Body.

(Emphasis added.)

[¶5] The City conceded that, if it proceeded to implement changes to City employee classification and compensation pursuant to the EIS Team's recommendations, it would be required to do so by adopting an ordinance. "An ordinance is a legislative act prescribing general, uniform and permanent rules of conduct or government, to continue in force until the ordinance is repealed." Cheyenne, Wyo., Code § 2.04.150 (2016). The public would then be afforded its right to public meetings through the ordinance process. Wyo. Stat. Ann. § 15–1–115(c) (LexisNexis 2015) ("Every ordinance shall be publicly read on three (3) different days. Public reading may be by title only. At least ten (10) days shall elapse between the introduction and final passage of every ordinance."); see also Cheyenne, Wyo., Code § 2.04.160(B) (2016) ("An ordinance, resolution, approval of a bid for public improvements, contracts or other matters brought before the governing body shall be referred to a city council standing committee prior to final action.").

[¶6] Before the EIS Team met, the Tribune-Eagle petitioned the district court for declaratory judgment that the EIS Team must conduct its meetings in public as required by the Wyoming Public Meetings Act (the Act), Wyo. Stat. Ann. §§ 16–4–401 through 16–4–408 (LexisNexis 2015), and it sought an injunction prohibiting the committee from meeting unless it complied with the Act. The City admitted that "it has taken the position that the [EIS Team] is not subject to the provision of W.S. §§ 16–4–401 through 16–4–408 pertaining to open meetings," it agreed that the EIS Team would not meet until the litigation was resolved, and the district court did not rule on the request for a preliminary injunction.

[¶7] The City filed a motion for summary judgment, arguing that the EIS Team was not an "agency" and not subject to the Act. The district court allowed the parties to conduct additional discovery prior to the hearing on the motion. The Tribune-Eagle deposed Councilman Jim Brown and Mayor Richard Kaysen, posing several questions relating to the future actions of the EIS Team, to which the City objected, largely on the grounds that the testimony was speculative. The Tribune-Eagle attached both deposition transcripts to its response in opposition to the City's motion for summary judgment. The City objected to the Tribune-Eagle's use of the depositions, arguing that it timely objected to portions of the testimony that were speculative and called for legal conclusions.

[¶8] The district court granted the City's motion for summary judgment. Without relying on the deposition transcripts, it held that the EIS Team was not an "agency" as defined by the Act, and therefore the EIS Team was not subject to the open meetings requirements of the Act.

[¶9] The Tribune-Eagle timely filed a notice of appeal.

STANDARD OF REVIEW

[¶10] Summary judgment can be an appropriate resolution of a declaratory judgment action, and we invoke the usual standard for review. Continental Western Ins. Co. v. Black , 2015 WY 145, ¶ 13, 361 P.3d 841, 845 (Wyo. 2015). Summary judgment can be sustained only when no genuine issues of material fact are present and the moving party is entitled to judgment as a matter of law. W.R.C.P. 56(c) ; Felix Felicis, LLC v. Riva Ridge Owners Ass'n , 2016 WY 67, ¶ 29, 375 P.3d 769, 275 P.3d 769, 778 (Wyo. 2016). We review a grant of summary judgment deciding a question of law de novo. Id . We accord no deference to the district court on issues of law and may affirm the summary judgment on any legal grounds appearing in the record. Sky Harbor Air Serv., Inc. v. Cheyenne Reg'l Airport Bd. , 2016 WY 17, ¶ 40, 368 P.3d 264, 272 (Wyo. 2016).

DISCUSSION

Is the EIS Team an "agency" subject to the Wyoming Public Meetings Act?

[¶11] Our task is to determine whether the legislature intended the definition of "agency," as used in the Act, to encompass the EIS Team, a question of statutory interpretation. When interpreting statutes, our goal is to determine the legislature's intent, in compliance with the purpose and policy behind the enactment. Clark v. State ex rel. Dep't of Workforce Servs. , 2016 WY 89, ¶ 13, 378 P.3d 310, 314 (Wyo. 2016). It is well settled that:

We [ ] construe each statutory provision in pari materia , giving effect to every word, clause, and sentence according to their arrangement and connection. To ascertain the meaning of a given law, we also consider all statutes relating to the same subject or having the same general purpose and strive to interpret them harmoniously. We presume that the legislature has acted in a thoughtful and rational manner with full knowledge of existing law, and that it intended new statutory provisions to be read in harmony with existing law and as part of an overall and uniform system of jurisprudence. When the words used convey a specific and obvious meaning, we need not go farther and engage in statutory construction.

Robert L. Kroenlein Trust ex rel. Alden v. Kirchhefer , 2015 WY 127, ¶ 22, 357 P.3d 1118, 1126 (Wyo. 2015) ...