Milwaukee Deputy Sheriffs' Ass'n v. Milwaukee County
883 N.W.2d 154
Wis. Ct. App.2016Background
- In his 2015 budget request Sheriff David A. Clarke, Jr. sought funding for 119 additional deputy sheriffs and 58 correction officers; Milwaukee County's adopted 2015 budget authorized only 17 additional deputy positions.
- Clarke and the Milwaukee Deputy Sheriffs Association sued the County seeking declaratory and injunctive relief and a writ of mandamus to force creation of additional deputy and correctional positions (specific relief requested: 75 deputy sheriffs, 43 correctional officers, plus supervisory posts).
- The County moved to dismiss, arguing Clarke failed to plead facts showing entitlement to relief and that the requested relief implicated separation of powers; the circuit court granted the motion and dismissed Clarke's claims with prejudice for failure to state a claim.
- Clarke appealed, arguing (1) the budget was arbitrary and unreasonable because it prevented fulfillment of his constitutional/statutory duties, (2) the hiring/appointment of deputies is a constitutionally protected power of the sheriff, and (3) Wis. Stat. § 59.26(2) gives him authority to appoint as many deputies as he considers necessary.
- The court analyzed the scope of a sheriff’s constitutional and statutory powers, concluded Clarke lacks constitutional or unfettered statutory authority to set total deputy staffing, and held the County budget was not arbitrary or unreasonable because Clarke could meet constitutional duties using overtime.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether hiring/appointing deputies is a constitutionally protected power of the sheriff | Clarke: appointment of deputies is part of sheriff’s constitutional functions and thus immune from legislative control | County: appointment is an administrative/management task that may be regulated | Held: Appointment of deputies is not a constitutionally protected power; it is a non‑distinctive administrative duty and may be regulated. |
| Whether Wis. Stat. § 59.26(2) gives Clarke unilateral statutory authority to appoint as many deputies as he deems proper | Clarke: § 59.26(2) (“sheriff may appoint as many other deputies as the sheriff considers proper”) grants unfettered appointment authority | County: County Board authority in § 59.22 to establish number of employees (including deputies) controls and prevails when in conflict | Held: § 59.22(2)(c)1.b gives the county board authority to set number of employees (including deputies); Clarke has no unfettered statutory appointment power. |
| Whether the County’s 2015 budget was arbitrary and unreasonable such that courts should order additional positions | Clarke: Budget is arbitrary/unreasonable because it prevents him from fulfilling constitutional and statutory duties | County: Budget does not prevent fulfillment of constitutional duties; overtime allows performance; board has authority to set staffing | Held: Budget is not arbitrary or unreasonable; because Clarke can fulfill constitutional duties (via overtime), no relief warranted. |
| Entitlement to injunctive relief or mandamus directing creation of positions | Clarke: Needs injunction/mandamus to prevent County from blocking hires and to compel creation of positions | County: Clarke lacks clear legal right to relief; political/administrative decisions are for county board | Held: Denial of injunction and mandamus affirmed — Clarke cannot show clear legal right or likelihood of success; no adequate basis for extraordinary relief. |
Key Cases Cited
- Kocken v. Wisconsin Council 40, AFSCME, AFL-CIO, 301 Wis. 2d 266 (recognizes constitutional powers of sheriff are limited to immemorial, principal duties and distinguishes administrative tasks)
- Heitkemper v. Wirsing, 194 Wis. 2d 182 (rejects broad common-law construction of sheriff's constitutional powers; administrative duties may be regulated)
- State ex rel. Kennedy v. Brunst, 26 Wis. (historical discussion of common-law origins of sheriff powers)
- State ex rel. Milwaukee Cnty. v. Buech, 171 Wis. 474 (appointing deputies was not a power that gave character and distinction to the office)
- Manitowoc Cnty. v. Local 986B, AFSCME, AFL-CIO, 168 Wis. 2d 819 (appointment of deputies is mundane/administrative and subject to regulation)
- Wisconsin Prof'l Police Ass'n/Law Enforcement Employee Relations Div. v. Dane Cty., 149 Wis. 2d 699 (sheriff has right to sufficient financial resources to fulfill constitutional duties)
- State ex rel. Robins v. Madden, 317 Wis. 2d 364 (mandamus standards: clear right, plain duty, substantial damage, no adequate remedy)