City of Lewiston v. Androscoggin County
| Decision Date | 18 March 2016 |
| Docket Number | Civil Action AUBSC-CV-15-118 |
| Parties | CITY OF LEWISTON, et al., Plaintiffs, v. ANDROSCOGGIN COUNTY, et al., Defendants. |
| Court | Maine Superior Court |
ORDER ON DEFENDANTS' MOTION TO DISMISS FOR FAILURE TO STATE A CLAIM & FOR FAILURE TO JOIN A NECESSARY PARTY
Thirteen municipalities in Androscoggin County[1] have brought this action against Androscoggin County[2](the "County") and the seven County Commissioners of Androscoggin County for declaratory judgment, breach of fiduciary duty, and unjust enrichment. Presently before the court is Defendants motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted and failure to join a necessary party.
Based on the following, Defendants' motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim is granted as to Plaintiffs' second claim for breach of fiduciary duty and denied as to Plaintiffs' first and third claims for declaratory judgment and unjust enrichment. Defendants' motion to dismiss for failure to join a necessary party is denied.
In 2012, the voters of Androscoggin County approved the adoption of a County Charter. Plaintiffs assert that, in order to avoid conflicts of interest, the County Charter provided that a Budget Committee, whose members are appointed by municipalities, was responsible for approving the County budget and setting the salaries and benefits of the County's elected officials. Section 5.5.3 of the County Charter at that time provided:
When the Budget Committee has completed its deliberations, it shall hold a public hearing to present its proposed budget.... After the public hearing, the Budget Committee shall adopt a final budget and transmit the same to the Board [of County Commissioners].
Androscoggin Cty., Me., Androscoggin Cty. Charter, Art. V § 5.5.3 (Dec. 26, 2012). Section 5.5.4 of the County Charter at that time provided:
The Board [of County Commissioners] shall act on the proposed budget in a timely fashion.... The budget as adopted shall be the final authorization for assessment of county taxes... A copy of a final approved budget shall be filed with the State Auditor as provided by law.
Androscoggin Cty., Me., Androscoggin Cty. Charter, Art. V § 5.5.4 (Dec. 26, 2012). Additionally, § 3.7 of the County Charter at that time provided:
Salaries and benefits of all County elected officials shall be recommended by the Board [of County Commissioners] and approved by a majority plus one vote of the full Budget Committee.
Androscoggin Cty., Me., Androscoggin Cty. Charter, Art. Ill. § 3.7 (Dec. 26, 2012).
In 2013, the Maine Legislature enacted Resolves 2013, Chapter 62. Resolves 2013, Chapter 62 directed the County Commissioners to make several changes to the Androscoggin County Charter, including amendments to § 5.5.3 and § 5.5.4. Resolves 2013, ch. 62. Resolves 2013, Chapter 62 was approved by the Governor on June 21, 2013. Id. Section 5.5.3 of the County Charter now provides:
When the Budget Committee has completed its deliberations, it shall hold a public hearing to present its proposed budget.... After the public hearing, the Budget Committee shall approve a final proposed budget and transmit the same to the Board [of County Commissioners] for its approval.
Androscoggin Cty., Me., Androscoggin Cty. Charter, Art. V § 5.5.3 (Aug. 14, 2013). Section 5.5.4 of the County Charter now provides:
The Board [of County Commissioners] has the authority to modify the proposed budget and the authority to adopt the final budget for the County. The Board shall act on the proposed budget in a timely fashion and, in any event, shall vote to adopt the final budget.... The budget as adopted shall be the final authorization for assessment of county taxes... A copy of a final approved budget shall be filed with the State Auditor as provided by law.
Androscoggin Cty., Me., Androscoggin Cty. Charter, Art. V § 5.5.4 (Aug. 14, 2013). Resolves 2013, Chapter 62 did not require the County Commissioners to amend § 3.7 of the County Charter governing the setting of salaries and benefits of elected officials. (2d Amend. Compl. U 36); Resolves 2013 ch. 62.
Plaintiffs allege that, in 2014, the Budget Committee voted to reduced the salaries of the County Commissioners and eliminate their benefits. Plaintiffs allege that the County Commissioner amended the budget approved by the Budget Committee and voted to adopt a final budget that set their own salaries higher than had been approved by the Budget Committee and reinstated their benefits. (Id. ¶¶ 41, 44-45.) Plaintiffs further allege that the County Commissioners did not seek or obtain additional approval of the amendments to the budget setting their own salaries and benefits from the Budget Committee or a Finance Committee. (Id. ¶ 46.) Plaintiffs allege that the County operated under the amended budget approved by the County Commissioners and paid salaries and benefits that were not approved by the Budget Committee or a Finance Committee to the County Commissioners during the 2014-2015 fiscal year. (Id. 49.)
Plaintiffs filed their initial complaint on July 21, 2015. The Plaintiffs filed an amended complaint on August 6, 2015. On August 18, 2015, Plaintiffs filed a motion for leave to file a second amended complaint in order to join an additional Plaintiff. The following day, August 19, 2015, Defendants filed their motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim and for failure to join a necessary party. Defendants' motion addresses the first amended complaint. (Defs. Mot. Dismiss. 1.) The Court approved Plaintiffs' motion to file a second amended complaint on September 8, 2015.
Plaintiff second amended complaint asserts that the County Commissioners' approval of the amended budget, which set their own salaries and benefits without additional approval from the Budget Committee or a Finance Committee was improper under both the County Charter and 30-A M.R.S. § 1353. Section § 1353 of Title 30-A, regarding county finance committees, provides:
A county adopting a charter under this chapter may provide for a method of appropriating money for county expenditures other than the method in sections 2, 701 and 702. Any alternative method provided must give the county legislative body authority to appropriate money, according to the budget, which must first be approved by majority vote of the finance committee.
30-A M.R.S. § 1353. Plaintiffs' second amended complaint also asserts that the County Commissioners breached their fiduciary duty to the public and were unjustly enriched by their actions.
After an enlargement of time, Plaintiffs filed their opposition to Defendants motion to dismiss on September 18, 2015. That same day, Defendants filed a motion to dismiss the second amended complaint, which incorporated by reference the arguments contained in their earlier motion to dismiss. Defendants also filed a reply to Plaintiffs' opposition on September 25, 2015.
On December 15, 2015, Defendants filed a motion to supplement their motion to dismiss, which the court granted on January 20, 2016. According to Defendants' supplement, on November 3, 2015, the voters of Androscoggin County approved an amendment to § 3.7 of the County Charter. On November 23, 2015, the Governor issued a proclamation announcing the approval of the amendment to the Androscoggin County Charter. As amended, § 3.7 of the County Charter now provides:
The court shall dismiss a civil action when the complaint fails "to state a claim upon which relief can be granted." M.R. Civ. P. 12(b)(6). A motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim tests the legal sufficiency of a complaint. State v. Weinschenk, 2005 ME 28, ¶10, 868 A.2d 200. The sufficiency of a complaint is a question of law. Bean v. Cummings, 2008 ME 18, ¶ 7, 939 A.2d 676. On a motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim, the facts are not adjudicated. Marshall v. Town of Dexter, 2015 ME 135, ¶ 2, 125 A.3d 1141. The court reviews the material allegations in the complaint in the light most favorable to the plaintiff to determine whether the plaintiff would be entitled to relief pursuant to some legal theory. Bean, 2008 ME 18, ¶ 7, 939 A.2d 676. Dismissal is warranted when it appears beyond a doubt that the plaintiff is not entitled to relief under any set of facts that the plaintiff might prove in support of his or her claim. Id.
Normally on a motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim, only the facts alleged in the complaint are considered by the court. Moody v. State Liquor & Lottery Comm'n, 2004 ME 20, ¶ 8, 843 A.2d 43. If the court considers material outside of the pleading, the court must convert the motion to dismiss into a motion for summary judgment under Rule 56 M.R. Civ. P. 12(b). However, in limited circumstances, the court may consider certain extraneous documents without converting a motion to dismiss to one for a summary judgment. Moody, 2004 ME 20, ¶ 9, 843 A.2d 43. The court may consider "official public documents, documents that are central to the plaintiffs claims, and documents referred to in the complaint, without converting a motion to dismiss into a motion for a summary...
To continue reading
Request your trial