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. 6652

July 25, 1990

HUNTING:

Hunting area control committees are subject to the Open Meetings Act

OPEN MEETINGS ACT:

Open Meetings Act applies to hunting area control committees

A hunting area control committee is a "public body" within the meaning of section 2(a) of the Open Meetings Act and is therefore subject to the requirements of that Act.

Honorable Willis Bullard, Jr.

State Representative

The Capitol

Lansing, Michigan 48913

You have requested my opinion on whether the Open Meetings Act, MCL 15.261 et seq; MSA 4.1800(11) et seq, applies to a hunting area control committee.

The creation of hunting area control committees is provided for in 1967 PA 159, MCL 317.331 et seq; MSA 13.1397(101) et seq. A committee is composed of a representative from both the Department of Natural Resources and the Department of State Police, as well as a representative from both the township and the sheriff's department of the county that are represented by the committee.

Section 2(1) of the Act sets forth the powers of a committee "to regulate and prohibit hunting, and the discharge of firearms and bow and arrow, ..." in areas where persons or property could be affected by such activity, and "to determine and define the boundaries of such areas...." MCL 317.332(1); MSA 13.1397(102)(1). The Act further provides for a specific process by which this regulation is to be accomplished. Where a local governing body has determined that hunting, firearm, or bow and arrow activity endangers the safety or well-being of persons or property in an area, it may request that the committee recommend regulations to relieve problems caused by such activity. After the committee receives such a request, it must establish a date for a hearing on the problem, receive testimony, cause necessary investigations and studies to be made, issue a statement of facts and, finally, prescribe regulations to alleviate or correct the problems found. MCL 317.332; MSA 13.1397(102). The committee's findings and recommendations are then submitted to the local governing body and, if approved, section 3(1) of the Act provides that a local ordinance "shall be enacted ... which shall be identical in all respects to the regulations prescribed by the committee...." MCL 317.333(1); MSA 13.1397(103)(1). (Emphasis added.)

Where an ordinance is passed closing an area to hunting, firearm, or bow and arrow activity, section 4 of the Act gives a hunting area control committee an additional responsibility. The committee must check and approve the posting of closure notices to ensure that the local governing body has properly posted the area to give adequate notice of closure. Section 4 also states:

"If, in the judgment of the committee, closure signs are not so maintained as to adequately give notice of the closure to a careful and prudent person, the closure may be rescinded by service of notice of recission on the clerk or recording officer of the political subdivision, and in such case the closure shall terminate 30 days after service of notice of recission." MCL 317.334; MSA 13.1397(104). (Emphasis added.)

The Open Meetings Act, MCL 15.261 et seq; MSA 4.1800(11) et seq, requires, subject to limited exceptions, that meetings of a public body must be open to the public. Section 2(a) of the Act defines a "public body," in pertinent part, as:

"any state or local legislative or governing body, including a ... committee, ... which is empowered by state constitution, statute, charter, ordinance, resolution, or rule to exercise governmental or proprietary authority or perform a governmental or proprietary function,...." MCL 15.262(a); MSA 4.1800(12)(a).

This provision was discussed in OAG, 1987-1988, No 6487, p 242 (January 14, 1988):

"Whether a body falls within the above definition of 'public body' depends upon the nature of that body. A number of previous Attorney General opinions have distinguished between bodies that are advisory in nature, capable only of making recommendations concerning the exercise of governmental authority, and bodies which exercise decision-making and policy-making authority. For example, OAG, 1977-1978, No 5183, pp 21,40 (March 8, 1977), concluded that:

'[T]he act does not apply to committees and subcommittees of public bodies which are merely advisory or only capable of making "recommendations concerning the exercise of governmental authority." These bodies are not legally capable of rendering a "final decision." ' "

See, also, OAG, 1981-1982, No 6053, p 616 (April 13, 1982).

However, a number of opinions have concluded that certain advisory bodies were subject to the Open Meetings Act where, in addition to their purely advisory duties, they were vested with authority to make a final decision on a particular matter. For example, OAG, 1977-1978, No 5256, p 329 (January 23, 1978), concluded that watershed councils are "public bodies" for purposes of the Open Meetings Act because, in addition to their advisory duties, they are legally capable of rendering a final decision as to the expenditure of public money in carrying out their other functions. OAG, 1987-1988, No 6487, supra, concluded that the governing board of the Senate Fiscal Agency is a "public body" for purposes of the Open Meetings Act because it is vested with final decision-making authority with regard to personnel matters within the Senate Fiscal Agency and because it determines the policies and procedures for the operation of the Agency.

A review of the powers of a hunting area control committee indicates that such a committee is not merely advisory in nature. A hunting area control committee is vested with final decision-making authority, under section 4 of the Act, to rescind the closure of an area to hunting if the local governing body fails to maintain signs which give adequate notice of the closure.

It is my opinion, therefore, that a hunting area control committee is a "public body" within the meaning of section 2(a) of the Open Meetings Act and is therefore subject to the requirements of that Act.

Frank J. Kelley

Attorney General