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. 6878

November 1, 1995

COUNTIES:

Adoption of the Michigan Vehicle Code as an ordinance by a board of commissioners in a charter county

The Michigan Legislature has not authorized a board of commissioners in a charter county to adopt the Michigan Vehicle Code as an ordinance.

Honorable Eileen DeHart

State Representative

The Capitol

Lansing, Michigan

You have asked if a board of commissioners in a charter county has been authorized by the Legislature to adopt the Michigan Vehicle Code as an ordinance.

OAG, 1979-1980, No 5617, p 526 (December 28, 1979), concluded that counties have not been authorized by the Legislature to adopt the Michigan Vehicle Code, 1949 PA 300, MCL 257.1 et seq; MSA 9.1801 et seq. That conclusion was based, in part, on the powers conferred on boards of county road commissioners by the Michigan Vehicle Code. The opinion stated, at p 527, the following:

The express enumeration of certain powers of county road commissioners in the vehicle code indicates the legislative intention that other or greater powers, such as the authority to adopt the entire code as an ordinance, should not be conferred upon counties.

As your request letter notes, a charter county with a population of 1,500,000 or more has amended its charter to provide that many of the powers formerly exercised by the board of county road commissioners under the Michigan Vehicle Code are now exercised by the county board of commissioners. This charter amendment is authorized by MCL 45.514(2); MSA 5.302(14), and MCL 224.6(2); MSA 9.106(2). However, that change does not detract from the opinion's conclusion that the exercise of certain powers in the Michigan Vehicle Code by a county body suggests the legislative intention that the county is not authorized to adopt the entire Code.

In addition, OAG, 1979-1980, No 5617, at p 527, observed that the Legislature has authorized cities, townships and villages, but not counties, to adopt by reference a uniform traffic code promulgated by the Director of the Department of State Police. The Legislature has subsequently amended the statutory section authorizing cities, townships and villages to adopt a uniform traffic code but the authorization still does not include counties. See, MCL 257.951(1); MSA 9.2651(1), as last amended by 1993 PA 225.

Finally, in 1994 PA 12 through 1994 PA 26, the Legislature passed a comprehensive series of acts authorizing local units of government to adopt ordinances that designate violations of the ordinances as municipal civil infractions punishable by civil fines. In those acts, the Legislature authorized cities, townships and villages to adopt ordinances that are consistent with the Michigan Vehicle Code but it did not grant that authority to counties. Compare section 21 of 1994 PA 13 (charter townships), section 3 of 1994 PA 14 (townships), section 25a of 1994 PA 15 (home rule villages), section 2 of 1994 PA 16 (general law villages), section 41 of 1994 PA 17 (home rule cities), section 2 of 1994 PA 19 (fourth class cities), with 1994 PA 18 (counties), 1994 PA 20 (charter counties) and 1994 PA 21 (optional forms of county government).

The relevant legislative history, Senate Legislative Analysis, SB 731 through SB 745, March 23, 1994, at pp 2-3, provides:

The bill also would revise the definition of "civil infraction", which currently refers to an act or omission prohibited by law that is not a crime as defined in Section 5 of the Michigan Penal Code, and for which civil sanctions may be ordered. The bill would refer to an "act or omission that is prohibited by a law and is not a crime under that law or that is prohibited by an ordinance and is not a crime under that ordinance and for which civil sanctions may be ordered". "Civil infraction" would include but not be limited to a municipal civil infraction or a violation of the following:

-- The Michigan Vehicle Code.

-- A city, township, or village ordinance substantially corresponding to the Michigan Vehicle Code, if the ordinance designated the violation as a civil infraction.

-- An parking area ordinance adopted by a city, village, or township.

-- A city, township, or village ordinance adopting the Uniform Traffic Code, if the Code designated the violation as a civil infraction.

-- A parking, traffic, or pedestrian ordinance adopted by the governing board of a State university or college, if the ordinance designated the violation as a civil infraction.

-- A parking lot regulation adopted by a county board of commissioners.

-- The Marine Safety Act, or an ordinance enacted in conformity with that Act, if the violation were designated by the Act as a marine law civil infraction. [Emphasis added.]

It is my opinion, therefore, that the Michigan Legislature has not authorized a board of commissioners in a charter county to adopt the Michigan Vehicle Code as an ordinance.

Frank J. Kelley

Attorney General