Court Opinion

ID: 9847205
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-09-24 03:55:47.515076+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T09:17:03.195404
License: Public Domain

MR. CHIEF JUSTICE PRINGLE
concurring in part and dissenting in part:
I concur in that portion of the majority opinion which upholds the charter amendment with respect to compulsory collective bargaining.
I respectfully dissent from that portion of the majority opinion which strikes down the provisions in the charter amendment providing for compulsory arbitration. In my view, it is a matter of local concern as to how a home rule city will determine its wages for its policemen. It is true that compulsory arbitration may place in the hands of someone not a city official the determination of what compensation should be made to police officers; but the city of Greeley is a home rule city and when its citizens, in their organic document, declared by their vote that it is their intention that such is the manner by which they wish compensation to be determined, then they have the right to do so.
The power, in the last analysis, in any government entity rests with the people. I would uphold the compulsory arbitration clause as a valid exercise of the peoples’ right in a home rule city.