City of Aurora v. Aurora Firefighters' Protective Ass'n
| Decision Date | 02 August 1977 |
| Docket Number | No. 27227,27227 |
| Citation | 193 Colo. 437,566 P.2d 1356 |
| Parties | , 96 L.R.R.M. (BNA) 2252 CITY OF AURORA, Colorado, a Municipal Corporation, Petitioner-Appellee, v. AURORA FIREFIGHTERS' PROTECTIVE ASSOCIATION, a non-profit ColoradoCorporation, Samuel J. Dilley, President, Aurora Firefighters' ProtectiveAssociation, J. Richard McGovern, Vice-President, Aurora Firefighters'Protective Association, andClifford E. Kenney, Treasurer, Aurora Firefighters' Protective Association, Frank T. Bruner, Jr., Acting Fire Chief of the City of Aurora, Colorado, SamuelJ. Dilley, Melvin W. Morley, and J. Richard McGovern, Individually and asrepresentatives ofthe class of all of the Individuals signing petitions requesting an election toadd a new Article XIV to the Charter of the City of Aurora, Colorado, andGeorge B. Ackman, Joseph R. Conacci, Jr., and Eli H. Gehman, Individually andas representativesof a class of members of the Aurora Fire Department who are not members of theAurora Firefighters' Protective Association, and the State of Colorado,Respondents-Appellants. |
| Court | Colorado Supreme Court |
Leland M. Coulter, Richard Kaufman, Louise L. Edmonds, Aurora, for petitioner-appellee.
Douglas R. Phillips, Denver, for respondents-appellants Aurora Firefighters' Protective Association.
J. D. MacFarlane, Atty. Gen., Jean E. Dubofsky, Deputy Atty. Gen., Edward G. Donovan, Sol. Gen., Deborah L. Bianco, Asst. Atty. Gen., Denver, for respondent-appellant The State of Colorado.
Geer & Goodwin, Denver, for amicus curiae Denver Firefighters Local 858.
Walter C. Brauer, III, Mark N. Simons, Thomas B. Buescher, Denver, for amici curiae, Colo. Prof. Fire Fighters, Denver Police Protective Ass'n. and Colo. Labor Council, AFL-CIO.
There is here involved Article XIV of the Charter of the city of Aurora, a Home Rule city. Article XIV was adopted by a majority vote of the qualified electors of the city on November 5, 1974. 1 It grants to the members of the Aurora Fire Department the rights to bargain collectively and to have unresolved issues submitted to arbitration. Most of the arguments presented to the trial court and here have been resolved by Greeley Police Union v. City Council of Greeley, Colo., 553 P.2d 790, which was announced on August 23, 1976, after all but supplemental briefs had been filed here. As in Greeley Police Union, we affirm in part and reverse in part.
After the charter amendment was adopted, the city administration and the appellant Aurora Fire Fighters' Protective Association entered into an agreement concerning wages, hours, working conditions and other incidents of employment of the members of the fire department for the year 1975. Early in 1975 the city and the respondent Association began negotiations as to the 1976 agreement and reached an impasse on the issues of wages and of modification of the educational incentive pay plan. The Association sought to proceed to arbitration. The city was unwilling to join them and brought the declaratory judgment action which became the subject of this appeal.
The district court ruled:
1. As a matter of statewide concern, binding arbitration is beyond the scope of Aurora's legislative power under Colo.Const. Art. XX, Sec. 6.
2. Labor relations are of statewide concern and, therefore, Article XIV is unconstitutional.
3. Submission by the city to arbitration constitutes an unlawful delegation of power.
4. The provisions of Article XIV are inseparable and, arbitration being void, the entire amendment is void.
Greeley Police Union v. City Council of Greeley, supra, is dispositive as to each of these rulings. It was there held:
A. Collective bargaining is a matter of both statewide and local concern. A city may legislate on such matters in the absence of conflicting statutory provisions. There is no state legislation concerning rights of public employees to engage in collective bargaining.
B. The charter amendment is not unconstitutional in providing for collective bargaining.
C. The provisions of the amendment providing for binding arbitration constitute an unconstitutional delegation of authority.
D. The provisions of the amendment are severable and the amendment is valid with the provisions for binding arbitration being excised therefrom.
We follow the ruling in Greeley Police Union and affirm in part and reverse in part here as was done there.
The appellants contend that the city's challenge to the charter provision was not timely commenced, and rely upon section 31-2-118, C.R.S.1973 (The Municipal Home Rule Act of 1971), which provides:
"No proceeding contesting the adoption of a charter, charter amendment, or repeal thereof shall be brought unless commenced within forty-five days after the election adopting the measure."
We agree with the city's argument that this 45-day provision refers to the contest of a charter amendment which allegedly had been adopted with procedural defects; and that the courts are not thereby ousted of jurisdiction to subsequently determine the constitutionality of the substance of an amendment.
Following the decision in Greeley Police Union, the city filed a supplemental brief arguing that ...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
City and County of Denver v. State
... ... Cross-Appellees, ... Denver Police Protective Association, Colorado Professional ... Fire Fighters, ... was a matter of statewide concern); City of Aurora v. Aurora Firefighters' Protective Ass'n, 193 Colo. 437, ... ...
-
Regional Transp. Dist. v. Colorado Dept. of Labor and Employment, Div. of Labor
... ... (1986 & 1991 Supp.); City of Golden v. Ford, 141 Colo. 472, 348 P.2d 951 ... Denver Firefighters Local No. 858, 663 P.2d 1032 (Colo.1983), and y of Aurora v. Aurora Firefighters' Protective Association, ... ...
-
City and County of Denver v. Denver Firefighters Local No. 858, AFL-CIO, AFL-CI
...holding on an issue never considered by this court.12 The holding of Greeley Police Union was reaffirmed in Aurora v. Aurora Firefighters' Ass'n, 193 Colo. 437, 566 P.2d 1356 (1977).13 E.g., West Hartford Education Ass'n v. DeCourcy, 162 Conn. 566, 295 A.2d 526 (1972); Board of Education v.......
-
Gallegos v. Phipps
...12-47-128.5, 5 C.R.S. (1988 Supp.) because the issue was not raised at the trial level. See City of Aurora v. Aurora Firefighters' Protective Ass'n, 193 Colo. 437, 566 P.2d 1356 (1977). Appellants' complaint originally asserted one claim based solely upon the appellees' alleged willful and ......
-
Collective Bargaining for Local Public Employees in Colorado
...as defined in 29 U.S.C.§ 152(11) (1970). For a comparable state provision, see C.R.S. 1973, § 8-3-104 (11)(a). 43.___Colo.___,566 P.2d 1356 (Colo. 1977). 44. See Supplemental Brief for Petitioner-Appellant, Aurora v. Aurora Firefighters Protective Ass'n, S.C. docket no. 27227, at 7-16. 45. ......
-
Chapter 22 - § 22.2 • ADR IN DISPUTES WITH THE STATE OF COLORADO, ITS AGENCIES, AND ITS POLITICAL SUBDIVISIONS
...Greeley Police Union v. City Council of Greeley, 553 P.2d 790 (Colo. 1976).[3] City of Aurora v. Aurora Firefighters' Protective Ass'n, 566 P.2d 1356 (Colo. 1977).[4] City & County of Denver v. Denver Firefighters Local No. 858, 663 P.2d 1032 (Colo. 1983).[5] Id. at 1038 (citation omitted).......
-
Delegation of Authority in Land Use Decisions
...§ 12.127. 3. Id. at §§ 10.39 and 10.40. 4. Id. at 10.39. 5. Ministerial acts are always delegable. 6. 553 P.2d 790 (Colo. 1976). 7. 566 P.2d 1356 (Colo. 8. Greeley Police Union, supra, note 6 at 792. 9. 636 P.2d 703 (Colo. 1981). 10. Denver City Charter, § C4.14. 11. Cottrell, supra, note 9......
-
Chapter 408, SB 25 – Collective Bargaining Firefighters
...public safety and general welfare, as the Colorado supreme court held in City of Aurora v. Aurora Firefighters' Protective Association, 193 Colo. 437, 566 P.2d 1356 (1977). The citizens of Colorado have the right to expect a consistently high level of public safety throughout the state, whi......