City of Trussville v. Pers. Bd. of Jefferson Cnty.
| Decision Date | 18 March 2022 |
| Docket Number | 1200629 |
| Court | Alabama Supreme Court |
| Parties | City of Trussville v. Personnel Board of Jefferson County |
Appeal from Jefferson Circuit Court (CV-19-904034)
The City of Trussville ("the City") appeals from the Jefferson Circuit Court's summary judgment in favor of the Personnel Board of Jefferson County ("the Board") in the City's action seeking a judgment declaring that it has the authority to create and operate its own civil-service system.
The Board was created pursuant to a local act of the Alabama Legislature in 1935. See Act No. 284, Ala. Acts 1935. That legislation was subsequently reenacted in 1945. See Act No 248, Ala. Acts 1945. The 1935 and 1945 acts together are referred to in the record as the "enabling act." The enabling act was last amended in 1977 by Act No. 782 Ala. Acts 1977. The Board was created to administer the civil-service system in Jefferson County, and to ensure that hiring and advancement in public-sector jobs in Jefferson County is conducted in an impartial, professional manner without political or personal bias and favoritism.
Regarding the authority of the Board, § 2 of the enabling act, as amended, provides in pertinent part:
Act No. 782, § 1. Section 2 of the enabling act, as amended, further provides:
Id. Thus, § 2 of the enabling act, as amended grants the Board (1) authority to the Board over "all employees and appointees holding positions in the classified service of ... the municipalities therein [i.e., within Jefferson County] having a population of five thousand or more inhabitants, according to the last federal census, whose corporate limits lie wholly within the county" and (2) authority over "police officers who are employed by any municipality therein [i.e., within Jefferson County] having a population of 2500 or more inhabitants, according to the last federal census, whose corporate limits lie wholly within the county." Id. In 1977, the City's police department came under the authority of the Board because the City had reached a population of 2, 500 inhabitants and its corporate limits at the time were wholly within Jefferson County.
In May 1986, the City began to consider the annexation of property located in St. Clair County, which adjoined the City and Jefferson County, and the effect that such an annexation would have on the authority of the Board over the City's police department. Charles Grover, the City's mayor at the time, wrote to the Board's director of personnel, raising the question regarding whether the proposed annexation would affect the Board's authority over the City's police department and the director informed Mayor Grover that it was his "opinion that [the proposed annexation] would have no bearing on the matter and the police department would continue to come under the rules and regulations of the [Board]." In June 1986, the City annexed the property located in St. Clair County, thereby extending the City's boundaries beyond Jefferson County.
According to the 1990 federal census, the population of the City exceeded 5, 000 inhabitants, thus making the City's nonpolice civil servants eligible for inclusion in the Board's civil-service system. In July 1991, the City passed an ordinance purporting to establish its own personnel board. The City determined that, while its police department had been under the jurisdiction of the Board, the City's police department had experienced "substantial delay in attempting to employ and assign qualified law enforcement personnel, which delays ha[d] impaired employee morale and implementation of legitimate municipal goals and objectives," and that the "City's best interests would be served by the creation of a personnel board for the City." In September 1991, the Board passed its own ordinance, purporting to extend its jurisdiction to include all classified and regular employees of the City, pursuant to § 2 of the enabling act, as amended.
On October 9, 1991, the City sued the Board in the Jefferson Circuit Court, seeking a judgment declaring that, despite the fact that the 1990 federal census reflected that the population of the City exceeded 5, 000 inhabitants, the Board lacked the authority to assert its jurisdiction over its employees based solely on the 1990 federal census ("the 1991 action"). The City also sought a judgment declaring that it had the statutory authority to adopt a resolution establishing its own personal board and civil-service system. It appears from the record that, before initiating the 1991 action, the City's leaders had contemplated the effect the City's annexation of property in St. Clair County would have on the Board's jurisdiction over its employees and that the issue had been discussed at several city-council meetings. However, the issue of what effect the City's annexation of property in St. Clair County would have on the Board's jurisdiction over the City's employees was not specifically raised in the 1991 action. In June 1992, while the 1991 action was still pending, the City annexed additional property located in St. Clair County.
In October 1992, the City and the Board negotiated a settlement agreement regarding the 1991 action. The settlement agreement provided that the "parties hereby agree that, as of the Effective Date specified in paragraph 8 [October 3, 1992], all classified and regular employees of Trussville shall be deemed to be under the jurisdiction and control of the Board ...." The settlement agreement also provided that "[t]he City shall comply with all of the rules and regulations of the Board, as the same exists as of the Effective Date and as hereafter amended from time to time." The settlement agreement further provided that "[t]he City shall take such acts as are necessary or desirable to adopt this Settlement Agreement and its Exhibits."
Mayor Grover announced at a city-council meeting on October 2, 1992, that a settlement agreement had been negotiated with the Board regarding the 1991 action. Also at that city-council meeting, council members unanimously passed an ordinance that rescinded the prior ordinance purporting to establish the City's personnel board. During a city-council meeting on October 13, 1992, the council members considered approving the settlement agreement. The City's attorney stated that, in his opinion, the settlement agreement was in the best interest of the City. The council members voted to authorize Mayor Grover to sign the settlement agreement. On October 16, 1992, Mayor Grover and the City's attorney signed the settlement agreement on behalf of the City. On October 29, 1992, the circuit court entered a final consent judgment in the 1991 action, approving and ratifying the settlement agreement and directing that the parties comply with the terms and conditions of the settlement agreement. Thereafter, the City operated under the jurisdiction of the Board. After the entry of the consent judgment, the City has on several occasions annexed additional property in St. Clair County.
Buddy Choat was elected mayor of the City in 2016. Mayor Choat testified that, after he ran into difficulty trying to fill several vacant employment positions with the City, he determined it would be in the City's best interest to separate from the Board. In particular, Choat testified that the City's police chief had decided to retire and had recommended an individual that had been serving as a captain on the police force as the new chief of police. Mayor Choat was unable to hire the individual recommended by the outgoing chief because that individual did not qualify for inclusion on the list of eligible candidates provided to Mayor Choat by the Board. Mayor Choat testified that he had not been familiar with the Board and how it operated because he came from the private sector. ...
To continue reading
Request your trial