AG Opinion re Membership 1950 58g-19500928

Home Browse Search

MUNICIPALITIES 147 submitted to the chief executive of the municipality signed by the members of the board of freeholders or a majority of its members. "Majority of its members" means a majority of its full complement of fifteen members. The constitutional provision here involved, as well as the statute enacted in pursuance thereof, provides a simple and expeditious method for filling any vacancies which may, from time to time, exist in the full complement of the boa'rd's membership.' The mandate of the Constitution that the "board shall always contain its full complement of members" is clear and unequivocal. It is not lightly to be brushed aside. Equally clear and almost as emphatic is the constitu- tional direction that amendments to the charter may be initiated by proposal "made by a board of fifteen commissioners." Substantial considerations underlie these constitutional requirements. One of these reasons is, unques- tionably, to provide assurance that any charter or amendment thereto pro- posed would evolve, before submission to the chief executive officer of the municipality, out of the studied consideration, discussion, debate and delib- erate judgment of fifteen resident freeholders of the municipality. While both the constitution and the statute authorize a majority of the members of a board of fifteen to propose, it does not follow that eight or more mem- bers of a board having less than the full complement of fifteen members are possessed of that power or authority simply because the number eight or more is a mathematical "majority" of the number fifteen. To so hold would, in my opinion, be tantamount to saying that the mandatory provi- sions of the Constitution here considered are wholly meaningless. Nor have I overlooked the circumstance that even if the Charter Commission of the city of Owatonna did have presently its full complement of fifteen members, eight of its present membership of nine "have voted to present the amend- ment to the voters," But that factor is not a controlling one on the legal question involved. The question is one of legal authority. To be sure, if six additional resident freeholders should now be appointed so that the Com- mission did have "its full complement of members" those six 'night, con- ceivably, in their considerations and discussions of the proposed amendment involved, agree with the ninth present member who has not voted to present the amendment; and, also conceivably, they might, in that process, convince one of the eight remaining members that the amendment should not be proposed. If your inquiry presented a situation where an amendment to the charter had been proposed by eight or more members of the Charter Commission not having at the time thereof "its full complement of members" and the proposal so submitted had been duly adopted and ratified by the electors, a different question would be presented. But that is not the situation here considered. The proceedings involved in your question are still in their preliminary stages. In these circumstances we are of the view that full effect should be given to the constitutional requirements that the "board 'Vacancies therein shall be filled by appointment for the unexpired term or terms by the dis. trict judges of the judicial district in which the municipality is situated. Const. Art. 4, § 36 ; M. S. 1949, § 410.06.