Agenda - Planning Commission - 04/07/1998

Home

Page 2 w March 25, 1998 Z.B. Supreme Co,rt Decision -- Local government officials claim immunity for legislative activity U.S. Supreme Court, No. 96-1569 (1998) In a recent decision, the U.S. Supreme Court gave absolute immunity to city officials who passed an ordinance eliminating the position of a city admin- istrator. The decision, written by Justice Clarence Thomas, extended to local legislators the same immunity held by federal, state,..and regional legislators. It also represented the Supreme Court's stamp of approval for a view held by practically all courts in the country. Although the case didn't involve zoning issues, zoning officials certainly should be aware Of the decision. The Facts ' The case, Bogan v. Scott-Harris, originated in Fall River, Mass. Scott-Harris was administrator for the city's Department of Health and Human Services. She received a complaint that an employee temporarily working under her had made racial and ethnic slurs about coworkers. She prepared to fire the employee, but the employee used her political connections to get a hearing before the city council. Among those the employee contacted was Roderick, the city council vice president. After the hearing, the city council reached a settlement with the employee and suspended her for 60 days without pay. Bogan, the mayor, later reduced the suspension significantly. -. · B(ffore the charges against the employee had been r6solved, Bogan prepared his budget for the upcoming year. The .proposed budget eliminated 135 posi- tions and froze salaries. Bogan also proposed eliminating the Department of Health and Human Services. Scott-Harris was the department's only employee. A city council committee Roderick chaired approved an ordinance elimi- nating the department. The city council later passed the ordinance, and Bogan signed it. Scott-Harris sued the city, Bogan, Roderick, and other city officials. She claimed they eliminated her position because of racial discrimination and in retaliation for her exercising her free speech rights -- starting termination proceedings against the employee. Bogan and Roderick both asked the court for legislative immunity, but the court denied their requests. After a trial, a jfiry found there was no racial discrimination against Scott-Harris. However, the jury found against the city, Bogan, and Roderick on Scott-Harris' free speech claim. Bogan and Roderick asked the court to overturn the verdict~ but the court refused. It said the ordinance was not a neutral, legislative act, but was an administrative act targeted at Scott-Harris. Bogan and Roderick appealed. The appeals court reversed the verdict against the city, but affirmed the verdicts against Bogan and Roderick for the same reason the trial court gave. Bogan and Roderick appealed to the Supreme Court. The Decision The Supreme Court reversed in favor of Bogan and Roderick, granting them legislative immunity. Citing legal precedents and treatises dating back to