Opinion ID: 483585
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: The Responsibilities of the Regional Director

Text: 16 Our second inquiry is into the particular responsibilities of the Regional Director to determine whether they entail policymaking, access to confidential information, communications, or similar functions for which party loyalty is an appropriate requirement. Our focus in this analysis is on the Regional Director's inherent powers, not the duties actually performed. The purpose of this approach seems to be two-fold: first, to resolve the issue entirely in one proceeding, thereby relieving the courts of the burden of having to reexamine a certain position every time a new administration changes the mix of responsibilities bestowed upon the officeholder; and, second, to provide certainty to litigants. De Abadia v. Izquierdo Mora, 792 F.2d 1187, 1192 (1st Cir.1986) (quoting Tomczak v. City of Chicago, 765 F.2d 633, 641 (7th Cir.1985)). 17 The job classification provided to the court lists the following duties of the RHA Regional Director: 18
19
20
21
22 5. Filling out, investigating, and referring applications for parcels not awarded, left vacant, or obtained because of certain changes in ownership and configuration; 23 6. Organizing personnel training; 24 7. Coordinating RHA activities with municipal administrations; 25 8. Directing the investigation and verification of candidate lists for parcel distribution; 26 9. Handling complaints and making referrals to mayors, legislators, and community commissions; 27 10. Coordinating deed signing for the property granted in the district; 28 11. Coordinating and supervising surveying activity; 29 12. Evaluating work performance and submitting recommendations on personnel matters to the central office; 30 13. Serving as liaison between the RHA central office and other district-level agencies; 31 14. Drafting reports; 32 15. Offering recommendations for the improvement of RHA services to the executive director; 33 16. Representing the RHA in disputes concerning pertinent statutes, regulations, and rules; 17. Carrying out other assigned duties; and 34 18. Participating in a direct or delegated manner in the enactment of program rules and regulations, including the enactment, modification and interpretation of [program] functions or in the direct counseling of the [RHA] head influencing the public policy. 3 35 These duties include implementing RHA programs, coordinating RHA activities with senior officials and other agencies and officials, and evaluating RHA policy and making recommendations for changes to it. They are very similar to the Regional Director's duties for which we found party loyalty to be an appropriate requirement in Jimenez Fuentes. See Jimenez Fuentes, 807 F.2d 244-245. Plaintiff argues, however, that the RHA Regional Director in fact has no discretion in performing the assigned functions. He directs our attention to the Norms and Procedures Handbook for the RHA, which contains detailed guidelines for the implementation of the parcel distribution program. The use of a detailed guidebook does not necessarily mean, however, that the position does not involve duties for which political affiliation is an appropriate requirement. Even if the procedures for carrying out the program are strictly circumscribed, there is still opportunity for affecting rural social and economic policies. As we said in Jimenez Fuentes, unless a regional director supports the agency's policies, the agency head  'might face a situation where the hostile efforts or foot-dragging actions of any one of the [regional directors] could singlehandedly thwart the Administration's goals in that particular [region].'  803 F.2d at 10 (quoting Brunton v. United States, 518 F.Supp. 223, 239 (S.D.Ohio 1981). [P]olicy implementation is just as important as policymaking. Branti v. Finkel, 445 U.S. at 530, 100 S.Ct. at 1301 (Powell, J., dissenting), quoted in Jimenez Fuentes, 807 F.2d at 246. The Regional Director's duties offer considerable opportunity either to effectuate or to hinder the implementation of RHA programs and policies. 36 In Jimenez Fuentes, we found support for our conclusion that the Urban Development and Housing Corporation Regional Director was a position for which party loyalty was an appropriate requirement in the legislative classification of the position as one of trust and confidence. 807 F.2d at 246-247. The RHA Regional Director is similarly classified. See L.P.R.A. tit. 3, Sec. 1350 (1978). According to the statute, [c]onfidential employees are those who intervene or collaborate substantially in the formulation of the public policy, who advise directly or render direct services to the head of the agency, such as ... [r]egional directors of agencies. Id. The district court did not find this classification significant in the context of its determination that there was no other evidence that the Regional Director had responsibilities of a policymaking nature. Although this legislative classification is not determinative in our examination of the Regional Director's responsibilities, the decision to include the individual in this position as one of the few confidential employees indicates that the position was viewed as entailing sensitive responsibilities. As we said in Jimenez Fuentes, [w]ithin the agency at least, [plaintiff was] considered to be at the policymaking end of the spectrum. 807 F.2d at 247. We hold, therefore, that party affiliation is an appropriate requirement for the effective performance of the Regional Director position. See Branti v. Finkel, 445 U.S. at 518, 100 S.Ct. at 1294. 37 In light of the similarity between the RHA Regional Director's duties and those of the Urban Development and Housing Corporation Regional Director, the same conclusion is warranted in this case as in Jimenez Fuentes. 38 The grant of the preliminary injunction is reversed. Remanded. 39 Costs awarded to appellants. 40