This summary was computer-generated without any editorial revision. It is not official, has not been checked for accuracy, and is NOT citable.
Facts
The appellant, a technical program manager in the Public Works Department of the City of Albuquerque, was terminated from his employment in November 2002. His termination was based on allegations of masturbating in his office, possessing and dubbing pornography at work, and compulsively using the Internet for personal purposes. Witnesses observed behavior consistent with masturbation, and the appellant admitted to possessing and dubbing pornography at work (paras 2-3, 16-18).
Procedural History
- Personnel Hearing Officer, May 2003: Recommended upholding the appellant's termination, finding sufficient evidence of misconduct (para 2).
- City of Albuquerque Personnel Board, August 20, 2003: Voted 2-1 to uphold the termination based on the Personnel Hearing Officer's recommendation (para 3).
- City of Albuquerque Personnel Board, September 17, 2003: Clarified that the conclusions of law from the Personnel Hearing Officer were adopted at the August 20 meeting (para 3).
- District Court of Bernalillo County: Upheld the Personnel Board's decision, rejecting the appellant's arguments regarding procedural and evidentiary issues (para 4).
Parties' Submissions
- Appellant: Argued that the Personnel Board acted without authority due to procedural irregularities, including the lack of a full five-member board, expired terms of some board members, and insufficient evidence to support the termination (paras 4, 6-7, 15).
- Respondents: Contended that the Personnel Board acted within its authority, complied with the applicable ordinances, and that the termination was supported by substantial evidence (paras 7-12, 18).
Legal Issues
- Did the Personnel Board act without authority due to procedural irregularities, including the composition and quorum of the board?
- Was the Personnel Board's decision to uphold the appellant's termination supported by substantial evidence?
Disposition
- The Court of Appeals affirmed the decision of the Personnel Board to uphold the appellant's termination (para 19).
Reasons
Per Castillo J. (Sutin and Kennedy JJ. concurring):
Procedural Validity of the Board's Actions:
The court found that the Personnel Board acted within its authority. The City's ordinances allowed the board to act with a quorum of three members, even if the full five-member board was not present or if some members' terms had expired. The ordinances also provided that board members could hold over in their positions until successors were duly qualified. The board's actions at both the August 20 and September 17 meetings complied with these requirements (paras 6-14).
Substantial Evidence Supporting Termination:
The court held that the Personnel Board's decision was supported by substantial evidence. Witness testimony and circumstantial evidence reasonably supported the finding that the appellant engaged in inappropriate conduct, including masturbating in his office. Additionally, the appellant admitted to possessing and dubbing pornography at work. The court deferred to the fact-finder's credibility assessments and inferences drawn from the evidence (paras 15-18).
Standard of Review:
The court applied a whole-record standard of review, independently examining the administrative record to determine whether the board's decision was arbitrary, capricious, unsupported by substantial evidence, or contrary to law. The appellant failed to meet his burden of demonstrating grounds for reversal (paras 5, 15-18).