Decker v. United States Dept. of Labor
| Citation | 485 F. Supp. 837 |
| Decision Date | 12 March 1980 |
| Docket Number | Civ.A.No. 78-C-634. |
| Parties | Alice DECKER, Patricia Hayes, and Marilyn Z. Hempstead, Plaintiffs, v. UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF LABOR et al., Defendants. |
| Court | U.S. District Court — Eastern District of Wisconsin |
COPYRIGHT MATERIAL OMITTED
Mary Jo Schiavoni and Michael A. Campbell and Raymond Dall'Osto, Milwaukee, Wis., for plaintiffs.
William E. Callahan, Jr., Asst. U. S. Atty., Milwaukee, Wis., Keith M. Werhan and Paul Blankenstein, Attys., Dept. of Justice, Washington, D. C., for Federal defendants; Harry L. Sheinfeld, Atty., Dept. of Labor, Washington, D. C., of counsel.
Bronson C. LaFollette, Atty. Gen., David C. Rice, Asst. Atty. Gen., Madison, Wis., for defendant, Governor Lee S. Dreyfus.
David P. Lowe, Milwaukee, Wis., for defendant, William F. O'Donnell, Milwaukee Co. Executive.
Toby E. Marcovich, Superior, Wis., for defendant, James Bonney, Executive Director, Northwest CEP Prime Sponsor.
Gerald L. Engeldinger, Corp. Counsel, Oshkosh, Wis., for defendant, Alan Wentz, Executive Secretary, WINNE-FOND Consortium.
Henry A. Gempeler, City Atty., and Eunice Gibson, Asst. City Atty., Madison, Wis., for defendant, Pam Anderson, Director, Madison-Dane Consortium.
Victor Moyer, Corp. Counsel, Janesville, Wis., for Kenyon Kies, Director, Rock County Prime Sponsor.
George A. Moore, Director, Racine, Wis., TRICO-CETAC Consortium.
Willis J. Zick, Corp. Counsel, Waukesha County, Waukesha, Wis., for defendant, Leonard Cors, Director, W-O-W Consortium.
James T. Runyon, Wausau, Wis., for defendant, John Cook, Director, Marathon County Prime Sponsor.
Richard L. Hamilton, Corp. Counsel, Outagamie County, Appleton, Wis., for defendant, Jim Lauer, Director, Outagamie County Prime Sponsor.
T. Michael Bolger, Patrick W. Schmidt and Patricia A. Graczyk, Milwaukee, Wis., for intervening defendants; Quarles & Brady, Milwaukee, Wis., of counsel.
This is an action for injunctive relief brought pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 and 28 U.S.C. §§ 1331(a), 1337, 1343(3), and 1361.
Plaintiffs are federal taxpayers, residing in Wisconsin, who seek to enjoin the payment of funds under the Comprehensive Employment Training Act of 1973, 29 U.S.C. § 841 et seq. ("CETA"), to elementary or secondary schools operated by sectarian or religious organizations. Defendants are the United States Department of Labor, Secretary of Labor Ray Marshall, and Milwaukee County Executive William O'Donnell. Defendant-intervenors are the Catholic Archdiocese of Milwaukee, CETA employees Candace Warlin and John Broczek, and the Catholic Dioceses of Madison, Green Bay, LaCrosse, and Superior, Wisconsin.
On July 31, 1979, this Court, D.C., 473 F.Supp. 770, issued a decision and order which inter alia enjoined the defendants from "granting, awarding, or contracting for payment of any CETA funds for full-time or part-time employees of any elementary or secondary school operated by or for any religious or sectarian organization." On August 17, 1979, the preliminary injunction was stayed pending further order of the Court. In the meantime, the defendants and the defendant-intervenor Archdiocese of Milwaukee moved for reconsideration and amendment of the injunction. The Court granted the Archdiocese's request to present further evidence, and an evidentiary hearing was held on September 19 and 20, 1979. The Court has considered the written submissions of the parties as well as the testimony elicited at the hearing and now makes the following findings of fact and conclusions of law.
1. The CETA program was enacted by Congress in 1973 for the purpose of providing
unemployed and underemployed persons with transitional employment in areas of public service so that such persons can develop job skills and techniques that will enable them to become gainfully employed in the private sector.
2. In order to carry out this purpose, CETA authorizes the Department of Labor to allocate funds to various "prime sponsors" who then distribute funds to "sub-grantees" who provide employment to CETA recipients.
3. Milwaukee County is a prime sponsor receiving funds from the CETA program.
4. In fiscal year 1979 (October 1, 1978, through September 30, 1979), approximately ten million dollars in CETA funds were allocated by the Department of Labor to Milwaukee County.
5. The CETA division of the Milwaukee County Executive's office administers the CETA grants from the Department of Labor for use in Milwaukee County.
6. In Milwaukee County, CETA funds are distributed to subgrantees in the following manner: Milwaukee County sends to any organization that so requests a package explaining the CETA program and the applicable regulations, and a request that an interested organization return a proposal that describes its program, the job positions for which it requests funding, and a budget. The CETA division staff rates each proposal and submits its ratings to the CETA Advisory Council which is composed of twenty-one volunteer representatives of specific segments of the public. The CETA Advisory Council, following public hearings, ranks each job proposal requested and submits its nonbinding rankings to the Milwaukee County Executive, defendant William O'Donnell, an elected public official, who then makes the final funding decisions.
7. The Archdiocese of Milwaukee first applied for and received CETA funding for its sectarian schools in 1977.
8. In fiscal year 1979, the Archdiocese of Milwaukee received approximately $143,000 in CETA funds from the County of Milwaukee.
9. The Archdiocese of Milwaukee makes the hiring and firing decisions concerning its CETA employees, determines their salaries, and supervises their work.
10. CETA workers employed by the Archdiocese of Milwaukee are paid by checks issued by the Archdiocese. The Archdiocese is later reimbursed by the Department of Labor.
11. In most respects, Archdiocesean CETA employees are treated indistinguishably from other workers employed by the Archdiocese.
12. In the past, the Archdiocese of Milwaukee has used CETA workers as reading, math, music, and art teachers, teacher's aides, librarians, tutors, learning disability specialists, speech therapists, guidance counselors, maintenance workers, housekeepers, kitchen aides and meal planners, nutrition and health coordinators, day care assistants, typists, clerical aides, and testing specialists.
13. Under new rules promulgated by the Department of Labor, effective September 17, 1979, 20 C.F.R. § 676.71, CETA placements in sectarian schools are limited to the following positions:
14. Milwaukee County, as a prime sponsor, is required to audit and monitor all subgrantees receiving CETA funds distributed by Milwaukee County.
15. Milwaukee County conducts a financial audit of the Archdiocese of Milwaukee's CETA program on an annual basis.
16. Milwaukee County monitors the Archdiocese of Milwaukee's participation in the CETA program by making annual visits to schools employing CETA workers and reviewing school records regarding the schools' participation in the program.
17. Due to new Department of Labor directives, Milwaukee County plans in the future to conduct more extensive monitoring procedures, including interviewing individual workers and their supervisors.
18. Milwaukee County conducts no ongoing surveillance of the sectarian schools which employ CETA workers.
19. Unless alerted by a CETA worker or his supervisor, Milwaukee County has no way of determining whether CETA employees are or have engaged in religious oriented activities.
20. In the past, CETA workers employed in schools operated by the Archdiocese of Milwaukee have engaged in religious oriented activities such as mailing religious messages to parents and alumni.
In its July 31, 1979, decision and order, this Court enjoined the defendants from funding the employment of CETA workers in religious and sectarian schools. That decision was based on a number of factors. First, the Court determined that many of the positions filled by CETA workers in the Archdiocese of Milwaukee's parochial schools by their nature created a potential for excessive entanglement between church and State. Second, the Court determined that the auditing and review procedures mandated by the CETA program led to excessive government interference in church affairs. Finally, the Court determined that the allocation of CETA funds to sectarian schools and the concomitant political pressure that religious groups can bring to bear on elective officials could lead to an excessive political entanglement between church and State in that political decisions concerning the allocation of tax funds were likely to involve predominately religious considerations.
On these motions for reconsideration and amendment, defendants and defendant-intervenors have sought to challenge the factual bases for the Court's decision. First, defendants...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Rite-Hite Corp. v. Kelley Co., Inc.
...and (4) that a stay is in the public interest. Adams v. Walker, 488 F.2d 1064, 1065 (7th Cir.1973); Decker v. U.S. Department of Labor, 485 F.Supp. 837, 844 (E.D.Wis.1980). A showing of absolute probability of success on the merits on appeal need not be made if the injunction would destroy ......
-
Johnson v. Heckler
...other parties would not be substantially harmed by the stay, and (4) that a stay would be in the public interest. Decker v. U.S. Dept. of Labor, 485 F.Supp. 837, 844 (D.C.Wis.), aff'd and remanded, 661 F.2d 598 (7th Cir.1980); see also Adams v. Walker, 488 F.2d 1064, 1066 (7th Cir.1973); Co......
-
Decker v. United States Dept. of Labor
...the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment to the United States Constitution. That decision was reaffirmed in February 1980. 485 F.Supp. 837. The defendants appealed to the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals. On September 9, 1980, the Seventh Circuit affirmed this Court, ordered that the......