Opinion No. 71-250 (1971) Ag

CourtOklahoma Attorney General Reports
DecidedJune 28, 1971
StatusPublished

This text of Opinion No. 71-250 (1971) Ag (Opinion No. 71-250 (1971) Ag) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Oklahoma Attorney General Reports primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Opinion No. 71-250 (1971) Ag, (Okla. Super. Ct. 1971).

Opinion

EMPLOYEES OF STATE SENATE — DESIGNATION OF STATUS The Legislature may abolish the distinction between permanent and temporary employees of the Oklahoma Senate as now found in 74 O.S. 292 [74-292] (1970), and authorize the President Pro Tempore to designate which employees are permanent and which ones are temporary. The pay period for employees is discretionary with the particular Legislative body. The Attorney General has considered your letter of April 28, 1971, wherein you ask the following questions: "1. May the Legislature abolish the distinction between permanent and temporary employees of the Oklahoma Senate as now found in 74 O.S. 292 [74-292] (1970), and authorize the President Pro Tempore to designate which employees are permanent and which ones are temporary? "2. Are there any constitutional requirements that the Legislature pay their employees for any specified period or is this discretionary with the particular legislative body?" Title 74 O.S. 292 [74-292] (1970), provides as follows: "The State Senate shall, during each regular or special session, provide by simple resolution for the employment of its temporary employees in such number and at such emolument not exceeding that below designated: "(Herein is listed the employees and their rate of pay.) "Beginning sixty (60) days prior to the commencement of any session and for sixty (60) days after the adjournment of any session, a President Pro Tempore of the State Senate is authorized to employ such temporary personnel, not exceeding in number or emolument than above designated, as may be necessary to insure the orderly commencement and closing of the session. "Positions created for service only during regular or special sessions and for a period beginning sixty (60) days prior to the commencement of a session and for a period of sixty (60) days after the adjournment of any session of the Legislature shall be considered temporary employment positions and those positions created and authorized for service during both regular or special session in the interim periods of time when the Legislature is not in such session shall be considered permanent employment positions and persons occupying such permanent employment positions shall serve until their successors are appointed and qualified. The positions of permanent employment within the Senate and the salaries attached thereto shall be prescribed by the President Pro Tempore of the State Senate in such manner and at such emolument not exceeding that below designated: "(Herein is listed the employees and their rate of pay.) "All employees of the State Senate shall be paid out of the State Treasury from funds appropriated by the Legislature for said purposes on warrants of the auditor issued on vouchers certified by the President Pro Tempore of the Senate or his designee. The Secretary of the State Election Board shall be secretary of the Senate and draw the salary and be allowed assistance as provided by law." The Constitution of the State of Oklahoma, Article V, Section 49, states: "The Legislature shall not increase the number or emolument of its employees, or the employees of either house, except by general law, which shall not take effect during the term at which such increase was made." The Constitution of the State of Oklahoma, ArticleV, Section 36, states: "The authority of the Legislature shall extend to all rightful subjects of legislation, and any specific grant of authority in this Constitution, upon any subject whatsoever, shall not work a restriction, limitation, or exclusion of such authority upon the same or any other subject or subjects whatsoever." It appears clear that the Constitution grants the authority for the Legislature to enact by general law those provisions necessary to provide for employees and their rate of pay. It is also clear that the legislative department of the State has the authority to appoint or elect its own officers and employees. In the case of Wentz v. Thomas,159 Okl. 124, 15 P.2d 65, the court stated: "In the absence of constitutional provision the method of filling offices is to be determined by the Legislature. 46 C.J. 950; 22 R.C.L. 426; Article V, Section 36 Const. "So that the power to appoint to office is not per se an executive function. 12 C.J. 836. And the Legislature, where not inhibited by the Constitution, may vest the power of appointment at its discretion. Riley v. State,43 Okl. 65, 141 P. 264. "In the cited Oklahoma case it was held: `Generally the power to select officers of the State is not an exclusive function of either the executive, legislative, or judicial branches. Primarily, the power resides in the people, and they alone are authorized to say by what instrumentality the power may be exercised." Dunbar v. Cronnin, 18 Ariz. 583, 164 P. 450; State, ex rel Standish v. Boucher, supra; State, ex rel v. Prather (N.B.), 189 N.W. 334; People v. Shawver, (Wyo.) 22 P. 29; Peo. v. McCullough, 254 Ill. 9, 98 N.E. 156; Richardson v. Young, 122 Tenn. 471, 125 S.W. 664. "But the power of election or appointment to office is a political power, not inherently legislative, executive, or judicial, but which may be vested with equal propriety in either of them, for `all political powers inherent in the people.' " Section 1, Article II, Section 1 Bill of Rights, Constitution of Oklahoma. "The Legislature represents the whole power and authority of the people, except when they have withheld or limited such power, or have conferred it upon some other department. People v. Freeman, 80 Cal. 233,13 Am. St. Rep. 122; Trav. Ins. Co. v. Oswego, 59 Fed. 58; Copps v. State, 72 Ark. 94, 105 Am. St. Rep. 17; Elliot v. McCray, 23 Id., 524, 130 P. 785." Therefore, it appears clear that the Legislature has the power of appointment to fill employment vacancies. The Oklahoma Supreme Court was concerned with the legislature's power to appoint and delegate in the case of Shaw v. Grumbine,137 Okl. 95, 278 P. 311. In that case the Court held that there was no constitutional inhibition to the Legislature hiring extra employees when the Legislature was sitting in an inquisitorial and investigating capacity. However, the Court did hold that the Legislature could not delegate to a committee the power to fix the number or emoluments of the additional employees. While discussing the applicability and effect Article V, Section 49 of the Oklahoma Constitution has on the hiring and payment of employees the Court stated: "While we have set out in this opinion numerous expressions by learned jurists relative to statutory and constitutional construction, we are of the opinion that the clearest rule announced by the authorities is found in the case of Lake County Commissioners v. Rollins, 130 U.S. 662, 32 L.Ed. 1060

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Lake County v. Rollins
130 U.S. 662 (Supreme Court, 1889)
State Board of Dental Examiners v. Pollock
1927 OK 44 (Supreme Court of Oklahoma, 1927)
Wentz v. Thomas
1932 OK 636 (Supreme Court of Oklahoma, 1932)
Riley v. State Ex Rel. McDaniel
1914 OK 251 (Supreme Court of Oklahoma, 1914)
Shaw v. Grumbine
1929 OK 116 (Supreme Court of Oklahoma, 1929)
Elliott v. McCrea
130 P. 785 (Idaho Supreme Court, 1913)
People ex rel. Waterman v. Freeman
22 P. 173 (California Supreme Court, 1889)
Dunbar v. Cronin
164 P. 447 (Arizona Supreme Court, 1917)
Cox v. State
78 S.W. 756 (Supreme Court of Arkansas, 1904)
State v. Prater
189 N.W. 334 (North Dakota Supreme Court, 1922)
People ex rel. Gullett v. McCullough
98 N.E. 156 (Illinois Supreme Court, 1912)
Richardson v. Young
122 Tenn. 471 (Tennessee Supreme Court, 1909)
Travelers' Ins. v. Township of Oswego
59 F. 58 (Eighth Circuit, 1893)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
Opinion No. 71-250 (1971) Ag, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/opinion-no-71-250-1971-ag-oklaag-1971.