119 So. 3d 603
La. Ct. App.2013Background
- In 1966, Jefferson Parish amended its Pay Plan to create the Dominick A. Albano Tenure Award, paying $25 per full calendar year of service to classified employees with two+ years, in a lump sum on December 1.
- Ordinance 23916 (Nov 2010) ratified the 2011 budget and expressly denied funding for Tenure Awards due to budgetary restrictions.
- On December 1, 2011, eligible employees did not receive the Tenure Award because of the budget denial contained in Ordinance 23916.
- Eight Jefferson Parish employees filed petitions with the Personnel Board on December 28, 2011 seeking payment of the Tenure Awards and naming the Parish President and Parish Council Chairman as defendants.
- The Board granted the appeals on June 20, 2012, holding the Tenure Award constitutional and ordering payment of the 2011 awards.
- The Parish appealed, arguing lack of Board subject matter jurisdiction to rule on constitutionality and error in ordering funding/budget amendment.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the Board had jurisdiction to rule on constitutionality. | Employees contended the Board may rule on constitutionality of the ordinance. | Parish argued the Board lacks authority to determine constitutionality and the ordinance is unconstitutional. | Board lacked authority to rule on constitutionality; constitutionality review reserved to courts. |
| Whether the Tenure Award is constitutional under the Pay Plan and related law. | Employees contend the Tenure Award is valid under the Pay Plan and not contingent on budget. | Parish contends the award is unconstitutional and unsupported by funding. | Ordinance establishing the Tenure Award is presumed constitutional; Board properly found entitlement on the facts. |
| Whether the Board erred in the remedy directing budget/funding for the Tenure Award. | Employees seek payment of the 2011 Tenure Awards; no budget conditionality precludes payment. | Parish asserts improper pressure to amend the budget. | Remand not required; remedy of entitlement stands; no merit to budget amendment contention. |
Key Cases Cited
- Piper v. Olinde Hardware & Supply Co., Inc., 288 So.2d 626 (La. 1974) (declinatory jurisdiction and lack of standing; fundamental to waivers)
- Dore v. Tugwell, 84 So.2d 199 (La. 1955) (standing to challenge constitutionality; mandamus context)
- Greater New Orleans Expressway Com’n v. Olivier, 892 So.2d 570 (La. 2005) (standing in constitutional challenges; mandamus context)
- City of Kenner v. Kyle, 846 So.2d 34 (La. App. 5th Cir. 2003) (ordinance presumptively constitutional; standards of review)