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. 6714 March 9, 1992 COUNTIES: Discretionary appointment of county controller COUNTIES: Employment of county coordinators or county administrators The county board of commissioners is not required to take any action to eliminate the vacant office of county controller if the board determines that it does not desire to appoint a person to fill a vacancy in that office, because such appointment may, pursuant to MCL 46.13b; MSA 5.336, be made at the discretion of the board. A county board of commissioners may employ a county coordinator or county administrator to manage the county's day-to-day activities which are not assigned by statute to other county officials. Honorable William Van Regenmorter State Senator The Capitol Lansing, MI 48913 At the request of the Ottawa County prosecutor, you have asked two questions concerning the organization of county government in Ottawa County. Your first question may be restated as follows: If a county has appointed a controller, as authorized by MCL 46.13b; MSA 5.336, and that office thereafter becomes vacant, is any action required of the county board of commissioners to eliminate the office if the board does not desire to appoint a person to serve in the office of county controller? Under the express terms of MCL 46.13b; MSA 5.336, the county board of commissioners may, but is not required to, appoint a controller. That statutory provision provides, in pertinent part: The [county] board of ... [commissioners] ... by a majority vote of its members-elect, may appoint a county controller ... and fix the salary, to be paid in like manner as the salaries of other county officers are paid. The controller ... after appointment shall hold the office at the pleasure of the [county] board of ... [commissioners] and may be removed in the manner provided by law for the removal of county officers, or by a 2/3 vote of all the ... [commissioners] elected to office. [Emphasis added.] The above-quoted statute authorizes, rather than requires, a county controller. Your letter suggests that there is some disagreement within the county, with one side claiming that the vacant office of controller may be eliminated by a simple majority of the board of commissioners and the other side claiming that a two-thirds majority is required to eliminate the office. However, the controversy appears to be based on an erroneous premise that a controller is required by statute. It is my opinion, therefore, in answer to your first question, that the county board of commissioners is not required to take any action to eliminate the vacant office of county controller if the board determines that it does not desire to appoint a person to fill a vacancy in that office, because such appointment may, pursuant to MCL 46.13b; MSA 5.336, be made at the discretion of the board. Your second question may be restated as follows: May a county board of commissioners employ a coordinator or administrator to manage the county's day-to-day activities which are not assigned by statute to other county officials? The use of county employees designated as county coordinators or county administrators is a common practice in Michigan. See VerBurg, Guide to Michigan County Government (MSU, 2d ed, 1987), pp 73-74. Authority for the practice is found in MCL 46.13a; MSA 5.335, which provides, in pertinent part: The board of ... [county commissioners] ... may appoint a county purchasing agent and such other representatives, agents and employees for its county as may be deemed necessary by it, to carry out any of the powers granted by this act, or by any other law of the state.... OAG, 1979-1980, No 5816, p 1079 (November 17, 1980), concluded that a county board of commissioners may create the position of administrative assistant to the board and combine with it the position of county purchasing agent, and that such person may be designated as the chief administrative officer of the county. The conclusion that county boards may designate county coordinators and county administrators is consistent with the requirement that the powers of counties be liberally construed pursuant to Const 1963, art 7, Sec. 34, which provides, in part: The provisions of this constitution and law concerning counties ... shall be liberally construed in their favor. Powers granted to counties ... by this constitution and by law shall include those fairly implied and not prohibited by this constitution. It is my opinion, therefore, in answer to your second question, that a county board of commissioners may employ a county coordinator or county administrator to manage the county's day-to-day activities which are not assigned by statute to other county officials. Frank J. Kelley Attorney General