The following opinion is presented on-line for informational use only and does not replace the official version. (Mich Dept of Attorney General Web Site - www.ag.state.mi.us) STATE OF MICHIGAN FRANK J. KELLEY, ATTORNEY GENERAL Opinion No. 5195 May 16, 1977 CONSTITUTIONAL LAW: Salary of Lieutenant Governor when acting as Governor. STATE OFFICERS COMPENSATION COMMISSION: Authority over salary of a state officer when acting as Governor. The State Officers Compensation Commission, which was created by Const 1963, art 4, Sec. 1 and empowered by it to fix salary and expenses of certain state officers, is precluded by Const 1963, art 5, Sec. 27 from fixing the salary of the Lieutenant Governor or other state officer while acting as Governor. Honorable James J. Damman Lieutenant Governor Capitol Building Lansing, Michigan You have requested my opinion on the following question: Where the requirement of Const 1963, art 5, Sec. 27 was modified by the constitutional amendment (Const 1963, art 4, Sec. 12), creating the current mechanism for establishing salary and expense rates for state officers. Const 1963, art 5, Sec. 27 provides: 'The legislature shall provide that the salary of any state officer while acting as governor shall be equal to that of the governor.' The State Officers Compensation Commission, the public body charged with the duty of determining the compensation of certain state officials, was created by the people in 1968 by amendment of Const 1963, art 4, Sec. 12, which reads: 'The state officers compensation commission is created which shall determine the salaries and expense allowances of the members of the legislature, the governor, the lieutenant governor and the justices of the supreme court. The commission shall consist of 7 members appointed by the governor. The commission shall determine the salaries and expense allowances of the members of the legislature, the governor, the lieutenant governor and the justices of the supreme court which determinations shall be the salaries and expense allowances unless the legislature by concurrent resolution adopted by 2/3 of the members elected to and serving in each house of the legislature reject them. The commission shall meet each 2 years for no more than 15 session days. The legislature shall implement this section by law.' The Michigan Court of Appeals in Holmes v State Officers Compensation Commission, 57 Mich App 255; 226 NW2d 90 (1974) considered both Const 1963, art 4, Sec. 12, supra, and Const 1963, art 5, Sec. 27 when it was asked to mandamus the State Officers Compensation Commission to redetermine its salary and expense determinations submitted on August 23, 1974. Part III, Sec. B of the subject salary and expense determination related to the office of Lieutenant Governor. Pertinent to the question here, the State Officers Compensation Commission made the following determination concerning the office of Lieutenant Governor: '1. Salary--$27,000 per annum. The salary of the Lt. Governor, when officially acting as Governor, shall be the same as for Governor, computed per diem.' The Court upheld the determination of the salary of the Lieutenant Governor, as set forth is the first line of Part III, Sec. B(1). However, the Court ruled that the sentence following the determination of salary stating that the salary of the Lieutenant Governor, when officially acting as Governor, shall be the same as for Governor, computed per diem, was beyond the authority of the State Officers Compensation Commission. The Court relied precisely upon Const 1963, art 5, Sec. 27, which requires the legislature to provide that the salary of any state officer, while acting as Governor, shall be equal to that of the Governor. In doing so, the Michigan Court of Appeals gave meaning to both Const 1963, art 4, Sec. 12, supra, and Const 1963, art 5, Sec. 27, supra. The decision in Holmes v State Officers Compensation Commission, supra, is in accord with the basic rules of constitutional construction laid down by the Michigan Supreme Court in People v Blachure, 390 Mich 326, 333; 212 NW2d 182 (1973): '1. Every statement in a state constitution must be interpreted in the light of the whole document. '2. Because fundamental constitutional principles are of equal dignity, none must be so construed as to nullify or substantially impair another.' It is therefore my opinion that Const 1963, art 5, Sec. 27 has full force and effect. It is not modified by Const 1963, art 4, Sec. 12, as amended. Frank J. Kelley Attorney General