Local 21 v. City and County

• Decision Date: 15 November 1999
• Docket Number: AFL-CIO
• Citation: 90 Cal.Rptr.2d 186,76 Cal.App.4th 213
• Court: California Court of Appeals Court of Appeals
• Parties: (Cal.App. 1 Dist. 1999) LOCAL 21, INTERNATIONAL FEDERATION OF PROFESSIONAL AND TECHNICAL ENGINEERS,et al., Plaintiffs and Appellants, v. CITY AND COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO et al. Defendants and Respondents. A084918 Filed

Page 186

90 Cal.Rptr.2d 186 (Cal.App. 1 Dist. 1999)

LOCAL 21, INTERNATIONAL FEDERATION OF PROFESSIONAL AND TECHNICAL ENGINEERS, AFL-CIO et al., Plaintiffs and Appellants, v. CITY AND COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO et al. Defendants and Respondents.

A084918

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA, FIRST APPELLATE DISTRICT, DIVISION FIVE

Filed 11/15/99

(San Francisco County Super. Ct. No. 952491)

Trial Judge Raymond D. Williamson, Jr.

Counsel for Plaintiffs and Appellants: Duane W. Reno, Esq., Charles E. Tillage, Esq., Davis & Reno

Counsel for Defendants and Respondents: Louise H. Renne, City Attorney, Jonathan Holtzman, Chief Deputy City Attorney, Linda M. Ross, Chief Labor Attorney, Ellen Forman, Deputy City Attorney

CERTIFIED FOR PARTIAL PUBLICATION¹

HANING, J.

Plaintiffs/appellants, Local 21 of the International Federation of Professional and Technical Engineers, AFL-CIO (Local 21), The Retired Employees of the City and County of San Francisco (TRE), and class representatives Loris Roulette, Nancy Gin, Anthony G. Sacco, and the class of all retirees similarly situated, appeal a judgment in favor of defendants/respondents City and County of San Francisco (City) and its Health Service System Board in appellants' class action for declaratory relief and writ of mandate compelling the City to provide its retirees the same City-funded dental benefits obtained by active employees through collective bargaining. Appellants also appeal the denial of their motion to tax costs. They contend the court erred in concluding they had not shown that the charter² provisions at issue entitle retirees to the same dental benefits obtained by active employees through collective bargaining, and in awarding the City costs of notifying class members of the action. We affirm.

BACKGROUND

Local 21 is a union representing certain active City employees. TRE is an organization comprised of approximately 3,500 retired City employees which exists in part for the purpose of protecting their rights to retirement allowances and benefits. The plaintiff class is comprised of "All retired employees of [the City] and surviving spouses of active and retired employees³ of [the City] who received retirement benefits, retirement allowances and/or death benefits during the period from July 1, 1992 until the date of certification of the class."

Appellants originally filed this action in June 1993. Their first amended complaint seeks a declaration that they are entitled to receive "the same dental health insurance coverage to be provided in the same manner and under the same conditions as active employees," and a peremptory writ of mandate compelling the City "to include as health care coverage provided to retired employees the same dental insurance benefits as provided to active employees." Appellants also seek compensation for monetary losses resulting from the City's denial of such benefits since July 1992. Pursuant to stipulation the action was certified as a class action.

The dispute in this case turns on the interpretation and application of charter provisions enacted 30 years apart. Section A8.428(c) (originally enacted in 1961 as former charter 172.1.11, subd. (c)) provides: "Monthly contributions required from retired persons and the surviving spouses of active employees and retired persons participating in the system shall be equal to the monthly contributions required from members in the system, except that the total contributions required from retired persons who are also covered under Medicare shall be reduced by an amount equal to the amount contributed monthly by such persons to Medicare; provided, however, that for the fiscal year commencing July 1, 1973, and for each fiscal year thereafter, [the City] shall contribute funds sufficient to defray the difference in costs to the system in providing the same health coverage to retired persons and the surviving spouses of active employees and retired persons as is provided for active employee members." (Italics added.) Sections A8.409 through A8.409-6, enacted in 1991, extended dental benefits to active employees through collective bargaining.

Appellants contend that section A8.428(c) entitles them to the same dental benefits obtained by active employees. The City's position is that section A8.428(c) is included in a part of the charter that is completely separate from the sections enacted in 1991; therefore, section A8.428(c) does not apply to the sections enacted in 1991, which were intended to apply only to active employees.

The facts are essentially undisputed.

Charter Formula Method Health Benefits

Sections A8.420 through A8.432 concern the establishment and administration of a "health service system" (the system) for City employees. In 1957 the charter established the system as a separate City department. (Former charter 172.1, now A8.420) Members of the system include all officers and permanent employees of the City and "such other employees as may be determined by ordinance, subject to such conditions and qualifications as the [City's] board of supervisors may impose, and such employees as may be determined by collective bargaining agreement." ( A8.420, italics added.) The voters adopted the italicized language of section A8.420 in November 1993. (See S.F. Voter Information Pamphlet and Sample Ballot, Nov. 2, 1993, Consolidated Gen. Election, p. 123.)

The system board is empowered to adopt a plan for rendering medical care to system members. ( A8.420, A8.422.) "Medical Care" is defined by the system board. ( A8.430.) Medical care plans must be approved by two-thirds of the system board and three-fourths of the City's board of supervisors ( A8.422), and each plan may provide for members' dependents, retired City employees and their dependents, and temporary employees to participate in the benefits of the system as the City's board of supervisors may authorize by ordinance ( A8.425).

The costs of the system are borne, in relevant part, by members of the system, retired persons and the City, who shall contribute to the system fund all funds necessary to administer it. ( A8.428.) "Retired person" as used in this section means "a former member of [the system] retired under the [City] Employees' Retirement System," and certain surviving spouses of deceased active and retired employees. ( A8.428.)

The City's contribution to the costs of these medical care plans is based on a formula derived from an annual survey of the 10 most populated California counties. Based on the survey the system board determines the average contribution for each employee. ( A8.423.) The City is required to contribute to the system fund for each member an amount equal to the average contribution. ( A8.428(b).) As noted, ante, section A8.428(c) provides: "Monthly contributions required from retired persons and the surviving spouses of active employees and retired persons participating in the system shall be equal to the monthly contributions required from members in the system, except that the total contributions required from retired persons who are also covered under Medicare shall be reduced by an amount equal to the amount contributed monthly by such persons to Medicare; provided, however, that for the fiscal year commencing July 1, 1973, and for each fiscal year thereafter, [the City] shall contribute funds sufficient to defray the difference in costs to the system in providing the same health coverage to retired persons and the surviving spouses of active employees and retired persons as is provided for active employee members." (Italics added.)

Prior to 1991 actively employed nurses and transit workers were the only City employees covered by City-funded dental plans, and their dental plans were not administered through the system. All other active employees and retirees could enroll, at their own cost, in voluntary dental plans administered through the system.

The 1957 charter amendment establishing the system stated that retired persons participating in the system and system members would make equal monthly contributions to the system fund. (Former charter section 172.1.11).

In 1961 voters adopted Proposition F, amending former charter section 172.1.1l(c), which again provided for equal monthly contributions by retired members participating in the system and by system members, and additionally provided that "for the fiscal year commencing July 1, 1962, and for each fiscal year thereafter, [the City] shall contribute funds sufficient to defray the difference in costs to the system in providing the same health coverage to retired members as is provided for active employee members thereof." (Italics added.) The ballot pamphlet argument in support of Proposition F stated that it was intended to: (1) increase the City's contribution to the cost of health benefits in keeping with the practice in private industry; and (2) require the City, rather than active employees, to pay the extra cost of health coverage for retirees. The ballot argument states: "Under the City Charter, the premium paid by a retired employee is fixed at the same amount as the premium for an active young working employee. This means that the additional [health] expenses incurred by retired persons are being paid for by the active employees. It means that the premiums charged to employees are unfairly loaded. The amendment calls for [the City] to pay the difference between what a retired person actually pays and what it costs the [system] to provide the required protection."

In 1972 voters adopted Proposition O, amending sections A8.423 and A8.428 regarding the manner in which the City's contribution to the system fund is calculated. Section A8.423 established the 10 county survey to determine the average contribution made by each county toward providing health care plans, exclusive of dental or optical care for each county employee, after which the system board would certify to the City's board of supervisors the...