Laserfiche WebLink
Page Two <br />August 10,r 1.978 <br />position was consistent with adopted League policies on ircipass <br />resolution with public employee un ions O The League has joined <br />the proceedings as amici curiae at the Supreme Court l eve l and <br />will assist in coordinating efforts. of individual local governments <br />who wish to support the lawsuit.. <br />The City of Richf ield and the League of Minne-rota C ities have both <br />f fled their Supreme Court brief s. On the other . side, the Attorney <br />General, and AFCME have filed their briefs. The IAFF has not - yet <br />n <br />f sled its brief but is expected to do so shortly, In add itior the <br />Minnesota Education Association has intervened at the Supre-me Court <br />level and will file a brief on behalf of it's membership in support <br />of the arbitration provisions . <br />This lawsuit is the f irst attempt to determine the constitutional it <br />of the compulsory binding arbitration provisions of PELRA since <br />first enacted in 1971. However, similar efforts have occurred in <br />other states with varying degrees of success,, The most recent <br />litigation occurred in Texas where a lower court decision found the <br />Texas arbitration law unconstitutional. Early in July- the Hartford, <br />Connecticut Superior Court found that state's compulsory arbitration <br />law unconstitutional, A copy of an NLC news article on this Connecticut <br />decision is attached. <br />You will note in the article on the Connecticut decision that 75 <br />Connecticut municipalities helped to support the action initiated in <br />that state. We believe that in addition to LMC support it would be <br />very helpful for the 'court and our state legislatures to know that <br />a large' number of cities in the state are concerned with the binding <br />arbitration provisions in the state statutes. Therefore, I am asking <br />that you bring this ma-LL- <br />I. F4 <br />-ter to the attention of your c it council and <br />recommend that your city support our action through adoption of the <br />attached resolution - <br />We are requesting that interested cities help defray the cost of the <br />Supreme Court appeal with a $100 contribution (should contributions <br />exceed costs, we will return the balance on a pro rata basis) , How- <br />ever, please note that the contribution is'not a prerequisite for <br />the resolution of support. -It is most important that cities indicate <br />their positions With respect to this litigation by adopting a resolution <br />similar to the sample which is attached,.. <br />Please send a copy of your city's resolution to <br />Mr. Stan Peskar, General Counsel <br />League of Minnesota Cities <br />300 Hanover Building <br />480 Cedar Street <br />St. Paul, Minnesota 55101 <br />Checks should be made out to the League of Minnesota Cities - and <br />designated Tor this bind irig arbitration lawsuit. <br />