[ Previous Page] [ Home Page ]
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. 6446 June 12, 1987 COUNTIES: Social Services board--authority to spend public funds to influence outcome of election A county social services board may not spend public funds to encourage a favorable vote at an election on a question of a tax limitation increase to build a new county medical care facility. A county social services board may not contribute public funds to a ballot question committee to influence the outcome of an election on the passage of a tax limitation question to build a new county medical care facility. Mr. John L. Livesay Prosecuting Attorney Branch County 31 Division Street Coldwater, MI 49036 You have requested my opinion regarding whether funds contributed to the county for the use of the Maple Lawn Medical Care Facility, a county-owned and operated institution, may be utilized to seek and encourage passage of a millage to build a new medical care facility. You attached with your opinion request your own opinion that was delivered to the Branch County Board of Commissioners concluding in part that there was no authority to utilize public funds for this purpose. I agree with your opinion on this question. The initial question that must be addressed is whether funds contributed to the Branch County Social Services Board become public funds and are thus subject to the normal restrictions on the use and expenditure of public moneys. The Legislature has defined public moneys as follows: "All moneys which shall come into the hands of any officer of any county, or of any township, school district, city or village, or any other municipal or public corporation within this state, pursuant to any provision of law authorizing such officer to collect or receive the same, shall be denominated public moneys within the meaning of this Act." MCL 129.11; MSA 3.751. See also, MCL 750.490; MSA 28.758. Additionally, you have indicated that the funds contributed have been placed into an account with other public moneys from the State of Michigan. Therefore, the money in question constitutes public funds and is subject to all restrictions on the use and expenditure thereof. The next question is whether public funds may be contributed to a ballot proposal committee to "seek and encourage passage of a millage to build a new Maple Lawn Medical Care Facility." This question has been addressed in a number of contexts and in a number of opinions. OAG, 1965-1966, No 4291, p 1 (January 4, 1965), concluded that a school district is not authorized to spend public funds to advocate a favorable vote at an election on the question of increasing the tax limitation and the issuance of bonds. Most recently, the issue was discussed in OAG, 1987-1988, No. 6423, p ___ (February 24, 1987), with regard to the authority of a community college district to expend public funds to support independent political ballot or candidate committees. This opinion stated: "(I)t has been the consistent position of this office that school districts and other public boards and commissions lack authority to expend public funds to influence the electorate in support of or in opposition to a particular ballot proposal or candidate. OAG, 1965-1966, No 4291, p 1 (January 4, 1965); Phillips v Maurer, 67 NY2d 672; 490 NE2d 542 (1986). A public body, however, may expend public funds to objectively inform the people on issues related to the function of the public body. OAG, 1965-1966, No 4421, p 36 (March 15, 1965); OAG, 1979-1980, No 5597, p 482 (November 28, 1979)." It is my opinion, therefore, that the Branch County Social Services Board may not spend public funds to encourage a favorable vote at an election on a tax limitation increase question on a new county medical care facility. It is my further opinion that the Branch County Social Services Board may not contribute public funds to a ballot question committee to influence the outcome of an election on the passage of a tax limitation question to build a new county medical care facility. Frank J. Kelley Attorney General
[ Previous Page] [ Home Page ]