xt75hq3rxp4x https://exploreuk.uky.edu/dips/xt75hq3rxp4x/data/mets.xml Michigan United States Works Progress Administration 1937 Other contributors include: Robert C. Lowe (Robert Chapin) and Helen R. Sherfey under the supervision of A. Ross Eckler; 16 pages, 27 cm; This bulletin is one of a series presenting state constitutional provisions affecting public welfare; Includes bibliographical references; UK holds archival copy for ASERL Collaborative Federal Depository Program libraries; Call number Y 3. W 89/2:36/M 58 books English Washington D.C.: Works Progress Administration Contact the Special Collections Research Center for information regarding rights and use of this collection. Analysis of Constitutional Provisions Affecting Public Welfare in the State of Michigan text Analysis of Constitutional Provisions Affecting Public Welfare in the State of Michigan 1937 2015 true xt75hq3rxp4x section xt75hq3rxp4x •
• · WORKS PROGRESS ADMINISTRATION
HARRY L. HOPKINS, ADMINISTRATOR
CORRINGTON GILL, ASSISTANT ADMINISTRATOR
HOWARD B. MYERS, DIRECTOR
’ DIVISION OF SOCIAL RESEARCH
•
` •
ANALYSIS OF CONSTITUTIONAL PROVISIONS
. AFFECTING PUBLIC WELFARE IN THE STATE OF
MICHIGAN
•
•
•
° I
•
MARCH 15, 1957
•
ix

   Y
O
O
O
•.
I
I
O
PREPARED BY
ROBERT C. LOwE AND HELEN R. SHERFEY
LEGAL RESEARCH SECTION
C
UNDER THE SUPERVISION OF
A. Ross ECKLER, COORDINATOR OF SPEC\AL INQUIRIES
DTVTBTON OF SOCIAL RESEARCH
O
O

 ••
•
U PREFACE
• This bulletin is one of a series presenting
State constitutional provisions affecting public wel-
fare, prepared to supplement the State by State digests
• of public welfare laws so as to provide in abstract
form the basis for the public welfare services of the
several States.
` The provisions quoted are those concerned
directly with public welfare administration and such
• others as may substantially affect a public welfare
program, even though only indirectly related. It would
be impossible to consider within the limits of this
` study every remotely connected constitutional provi-
sion. The indirectly related provisions included,
• therefore, have been restricted to those concerning
finance, legislation, and the methods of constitutional
· amendment .
An attempt has been made, by a careful selec-
tion of the most recent cases decided by the highest
• courts of the States, to indicate wherever possible how
these provisions have been construed. These cases are
included in footnotes appended to the constitutional
provisions shown.
It is hoped that these abstracts will be
• useful to those interested inpublic welfare questions
in indicating how State and local public welfare admin-
istration may be affected by constitutional powers and
limitations.
•
•
•

 
 Q
O
  -
CONTENTS
` O
Page
Incidence of Responsibility for Welfare Program .................. 1
Financial Powers and Limitations ................................. 2
O
Taxation and Assessments .... . ............................... 2
EX€mptiOl'lS..................•............................... 6
Borrowing and Use of Credit ................................. 6
Other Income ................................................ 8
• Appropriations and Expenditures ............................. 8
Provisions Affecting legislation ............. . ................... 9
I Constitutional Amendment or Revision ............................. 14
O
O
I
O
O

  

 •
Michigan
•
ANALYSIS OF CONSTITUTIONAL PROVISIONS AFFECTING
PUBLIC WELFARE IN MICHIGAN1
• I. Incidence of Responsibility for Welfare Program
A. Institutions for the benefit of those inhabitants who are
• deaf, dumb, blind, feeble-minded or insane shall always be fostered and
supported.2
B. Any county in this state, either separately or in conjunction
with other counties, may appropriate money for the construction and main-
tenance or assistance of public and charitable hospitals, sanatoria or
• other institutions for the treatment of persons suffering from contagious
or infectious diseases.5 Each county may also maintain an infirmary for
the care and support of its indigent poor and unfortunate, and all county
· poor houses shall hereafter be designated and maintained as county infir-
maries.4
• C. In each county organized forjudicial purposes, there shall
be a probate court. The jurisdiction, powers and duties of such courts
· * * *. shall be prescribed by law, and they shall also have original
jurisdiction in all cases of juvenile delinquents and dependents.5
1Const1tut10n (1908), as published by the State of M1ch1gan In the Michigan Official
• Dlrectory and Legislative Manual (1935-1956); wlth all amendments to March 15, 1957.
2Const1tut1on, Art. XI, Sec. 15.
The Legislature may devise other types of care ln add1t1on to1nst1tut1onal care
for mental defectlves when public economy, safety, and welfare so demand. Thus a
statute authorizing the sterllizatlon of the feeble-mlnded not ln 1nst1tut1ons was
held constitutional under this section. Smith vs. Command, 251 Mich. 409, 204 N. w.
140 (1925).
0 5Th1s provision giving a spec1f1c grant of authority must be strictly construed since
it 1s an exception to the general l1m1tat1on upon the right of the State and Its con-
stituent mun1c1pal1t1es to grant cred1t or levy taxes or assessments In a1d of any
person, assoclatlon, or corporation. (See page 5, par. (c) and page 6, par. (b)).
Sault Ste. Marie Hospital vs. Sharpe, 209 M1ch. 684, 177 N. W. 297 (1920).
The power to make appropriations under this section 1s llmlted to those Institu-
tlons only where persons suffering from contaglous or Infectious diseases are treated,
and cannot be extended to Include hospitals generally where persons suffering from
• other diseases are also treated. The court stated In a dlctum that this provision
could not be lnterpreted to Include nosplcals where contagious or infectious dlseases
were not treated. Sault Ste. Marle Hospital vs. Sharpe, 209 Mlch. 684, 177 N. w. 297
(1920).
4Const1tut1on, Art. VIII, Sec. 11.
This provision 1sself—execut1ng. Sault Ste. Marie Hospltal vs. Sharpe, 209 Mich.
684, 177 N. w. 297 (1920).
• 5Const1tut1on, Art. VII, Sec. 15.
No appeal may lle from the decislon of the probate court 1n cases of Juvenile
dellnquents and dependents. Van Leuven vs. Ingham C1rcu1t Judge, 166 Mich. 115, 151
N. w. 551 (1911); ln re Broughton. 192 Mich. 418. 158 N. w. 884 (1916).
· 1
•

 •
2 Michigan
I. Incidence of Responsibility for Welfare Program-—Continued
•
D. Any cityor village may acquire,own, establisheuulmaintain,
either within or without its corporate limits, parks, boulevards, ceme-
teries,hospitals, almshouses andall works which involve Uuepublic health
or safety.6
II. Financial Powers and Limitations •
A. Taxation and Assessments
(1) state °
(a) The legislature shall provide by law for an annual
tax sufficient with other resources to pay the estimated expenses of the
state government, the interest on any state debt and such deficiency as
may occur in the resources.7
•
(b) The legislature shall provide by law a uniform
rule oftaxation,except onpropertypaying specifictaxes,and taxes shall
be levied on such property as shallbe prescribed by law: Provided, That
the legislature shall provide by law a uniform rule of taxation for such
property as shall be assessed by a state board of assessors,andthe rate
of taxation on such property shall be the rate which the state board of ·
assessors shall ascertain and determine is the average rate levied upon
other property upon which ad valorem taxes are assessed for state, county, ·
township, school and municipal purposes.B
(c) The total amount of taxes assessed against prop-
erty for all purposes in any one year shall not exceed one and one-half •
6Const1tut1oh, Art. VIII. Sec. 22.
This section 1s not self-executing. City of Detroit vs. oakland Circuit Judge,
237 M1ch. 448, 212 N. w. 207 (1927).
The words ¤all works which involve the public health or safety' have reference
to physical properties which may be convenient or necessary ln caring for the public
hea1th;however,th1s section shouldnotbe interpreted to mean that the State surren- *
ders to any mun1c1pal1ty control over matters relatlngto public health. Civil Service
Commission vs. Engel, 184 Mich. 269, 150 N. W. 1081 (1915).
In matters relating to public health, the clty acts as an arm of the State, and
city property devoted to purposes of public health being used in discharge of a gov-
ernmental function may not be sold. Curry vs. City of Highland Park, 242 Mich. 614,
219 N. w. 745 (1928).
¤A sewage disposal plant is a work which involves the public health and safety.
and a city has express constitutional authority under this section to establish and •
maintain such plant. * Young vs. City of Ann Arbor, 267 Mich. 241, 255 N. W. 579 (1934).
See page 7, par. (d), and footnote 22. ,
7Const1tut1on, Art. X, Sec. 2.
The power to tax 1s vested exclusively in the Legislature and is limited in ex-
tent. in purpose, and in methods, only by the will of the State as expressed ln its
laws. narsna vs. City of Detroit, 261 Mich. 586, 246 N. W. 849 (1935).
A license fee as a prerequisite to doing bus1ness.1mposed for the regulation of ,
such business, and not for revenue, 1s not a tax although incidental revenue may
accrue therefrom. Fletcher 011 Company vs. Bay City, 247 Mich. 572, 226 N. W. 248
(1929).
BConst1tut1on. Art. X, Sec. 5.
The term {specific taxes•' as used in this section lncludes license, privilege, ·
and occupation taxes. They are not ad valorem taxes upon property, and thus are not
•

 •
Michigan 3
II. Financial Powers and Limitations-—Continued
•
A. Taxation and Assessments——Continued
(1) State-—Continued
' per cent of the assessed valuation of said property, except taxes levied
for the payment of interest and principal on obligations heretofore in-
. curred,whichsums shall be separately assessed in all cases:9 Provided,
That this limitation may be increased for a period of not to exceed five
years at any one time, to not more than a total of five per cent of the
assessed valuation, by a two—thirds vote ofthe electors of any assessing
district, orwhen provided.forby‘thecharter of a municipal corporationzlo
# =: ==_
V •
(d) The power of taxation shall never be surrendered
or suspended by any grant or contract towhich the state or any municipal
corporation shall be a party.11
» • subject to the rule of uniformity of this section. C. F. Smith Company vs. Fitzgerald,
270 Mlch. 659, 259 N. W. 552 (1955).
Slnce assessments for local improvements are a peculiar species of taxatlon based
on the assumption thata part of the property of the community 1s lncreased in value
by the improvement, such assessments are not subject _to the unlformlty requirement
of this section. City of Detroit vs. Well, 180 Mich. 595, 147 N. W. 550 (1914).
The unlformlty requirement means only that the Legislature may not arbitrarily
tax property according to locality, klnd, or quality wlthout regard to value. The
° constitutional mandate ls met so long as those objects which are taxed are brought
wlthln a uniform rule. Union Trust Company vs. Common Council, etc., 17OM1ch. 892,
157 N. W. 122 (1912).
Slnce an Inheritance or succession tax 1s a tax on the privilege of recelvlng
property by inheritance. and ls not a tax upon property, it does not come within the
uniformity rule of this section. In re Fox's Estate, 154M1ch. 5~, 117 N. W. 558 (1908).
glncluded within this exception are direct refunding bonds exchanged for prior bonds
, • exlstlng at the time this sectlon became effective, new bonds sold to pay bonds ex-
isting at the time of the adoption of this section, and renewal of notes or evidences
of indebtedness lssued upon the falth of delinquent taxes and existing as general
obligations of the public body prlor tothe adoptlon of this section. Wilcox vs. Board
— of Commlssloners of Sinking Fund, etc., 262 Mich. 699, 247 N. W. 925 (1955).
1OConst1tut10n, Art. X, Sec. 21.
The one and one-half percent tax llmltatlon of this section is not self-executing
and requires legislation for a dlvlslon of the taxes between the State, counties.
° cltles, vlllages, townships, or school districts. School Dlstrlct of City of Pontiac
vs. Clty of Pontlac, 262 Mlch. 558, 247 N. W. 474 (1955).
The phrase •'two—th1rds vote of the electors" does not mean two—th1rds of all the
electors of the assessing dlstrlct, but only two—th1rds of those electors voting on
the question of an increase ln the tax limit. Wilcox vs. Board of Commissioners of
Sinking Fund, etc., 262 Mich. 699, 247 N. W. 925 (1955).
I Thls provlslon does not alter the rlght of home—rule cltles or villages or fourth
, • class cltles to exerclse thelr powers of local self·government and f1x their own tax
l1m1ts for local needs and purposes. In these excepted cltles and villages, however,
this amendment ls effectlve as to State and county taxes. School District of Clty
of Pontiac vs. Clty of Pontlac, 262 Mich. 558, 247 N. W. 474 (1955). See page 4,
par. (a), and footnote 15; page 5, par. (b), and footnote 16.
· 11Const1tut1on, Art. X, Sec. 9.
•

 •
4 Michigan
II. Financial Powers and Limitations-Continued
•
A. Taxation and Assessments——Continued
(1) State-Continued
(e) The legislature may bylaw impose specific taxes,
which shall be uniform upon the classes upon which they operate.12
•
(f) All assessments hereafter authorized shall be on
property at its cash value.13 ‘
(2) Counties14 °
See page 2,pars. (b) and (c), and footnote 8; page 3,
par. (d), and footnotes 9, 10, and 11; par. (f), above, and footnote 13,
below.
(3) Other Local Units •
(a) The legislature shall provide by a general law
for the incorporation of cities, and by a general law for the incorpora-
tion of villages; such general laws shall limit their rate of taxation
for municipal purposes, and restrict their powers of borrowing money and
contracting debts.15 ·
12C
· onst1tut10n, Art. X. Sec. 4.
These taxes Include l1cense, pr1v1lege, and occupation taxes; they are not ad
valorem taxes on property. A l1cense tax for the prlvllege to do bus1ness In more .
than one store, and graduated according to the number of stores operated was held to
be a reasonable tax under this section. C. F. Smlth Company vs. Fltzgerald, 270
M1ch. 659. 259 N. N. 552 (1955). •
A graduated Inherltancetax not allowingfor deductions of the amount pald under
a Federal estate tax was held not to v1olate the un1form1ty requlrementof this sec—
tlon. In re F1sh•s Estate, 219 Mich. 569, 169 N. N. 177 (1922).
15Const1tutIon, Art. X, Sec. 7. ·
Held that In revlewlng the assessments made by the c1ty assessor, the board of
review of the City of Jackson mlght horizontally reduce the values of realty due to
excessive assessments or depreclatlon In value. It mlght not, however, arbltrarlly •
reduce horlzontally the valuation on personalty,s1nce by1ts nature personalty takes
so many forms thatrm general rule maybe applled eltherto depreclatlon or reductlons
In value. Hayes vs. C1ty of Jackson, 267 M1ch. 525, 255 N. W. 561 (1954).
14Each organlzed county shall be a body corporate wlth such powers of a local, legis-
lat1ve,and admlnlstratlve character conferred on the county boards of supervlsors as
the Leglslature may provide by law. Constltutlon, Art. VIII, Secs. 1, 8.
The boards of supervisors are authorized without a vote of the electors (Art.
VIII, Secs. 1,6) to levy a tax In any one year of One-tenth of one mill on the as- •
sessed valuation of the county,or to borrow an equal sum, to ma1nta1n public bulld-
ings or bridges (such taxlngor borrowing power l1m1ted to $1,000 where the assessed
valuatlon Is less than $10,000,000). Art. VIII, Sec. 10.
County taxes for road purposes are l1m1ted to f1ve mllls In any one year. Art.
VIII, Sec. 26.
15Const1tut1on, Art. VIII, Sec. 20.
This power of the Legislature Is complete and unrestrlcted. Harsha vs. City of •
Detrolt. 281 Mich. 566, 246 N. w. 649 (1955).
Munlclpal corporations are State agencles. and subject to constitutional re-
strlctlons; the Legislature may modify the charters of munlclpal corporations at
w1ll. Harsha vs. City of Detrolt, 261 Mich. 586, 246 N. W. 649 (1955).
This section and the one following (par. (b), page 5) have been the basls of home- ·
rule leglslatlon. glvlng the electors of the cities chartered thereunder Increased
•

 -•
Michigan 5
II. Financial Powers and Limitations-—Cont1nued
•
A. Taxation and Assessments——Cont1nued
(3) Other Local Units-Continued
(b) Under suchgenerallaws,the electors of each city
and village shall have power and authority to frame, adopt and amend its
• charter, * * * and, through its regularly constituted authority, to
. pass all laws and ordinances relating to lts municipal concerns, subject
' to the constitution and general laws of this state.18
•
_ (c) No city or village shall have power to * * *
loan its credit,nor to assess, levy or collect any tax or assessment for
other than a public purpose.17 * * *
(d) See page 2, pars. (b) and (c), and footnote 8;
• page 3, par.(d), and footnotes 9, 10, and 11; page 4, par.(f), and foot-
note 13.
control of local government. Thus,const1tut1onal provision, Art. X, Sec. 21 (page
· 2, par. (c)), l1m1t1ng the total amount of taxes to one and one—half percent of the
assessed valuation has no referenceto home-rule c1t1es,or c1t1es with special char-
ters (w1th llke provisions as to the taxing power),fourthclass c1t1es,or vlllages.
• School Dlstrlct of Clty of Pontiac vs. Clty of Pontiac, 262 Mich. 558, 247 N. H.
474 (1955).
A statute authorizing cltles to make public improvements and pay for them by
self-llquldating bonds was held not to create a debt on the·part of the city since
the bonds were payable solely from the lncome to be derived from the operation of
such Improvements, and not from the general revenues of the clty. As the clty ln-
curred no debt by the bond Issue It was deemed unimportant to determine whether the
cltyls statutory debt l1m1t had already been reached. Young vs. City of Ann Arbor,
• 267 hlch. 241, 255 N. W. 579 (1954).
Organized townships shall be bodies corporate wlth such powers of a local leg-
islatlve and administrative character as the Legislature may provide by law. Art.
VIII, Sec. 16. 17.
- 18Const1tut1on, Art. VIII, Sec. 21.
This section forbids the State to meddle wlth purely local munlclpal affairs,
and similarly forbids municipalities to usurp the police power of the State In 1ts
sovereign capacity. Attorney General ex rel.Lennane vs. City of Detroit. 225 Hlch.
• 651, 196 N. W. 591 (1925).
A workmenls Compensat1onAct,requlrlng each county,c1ty,townsh1p,incorporated
village, school district, Incorporated public board,or publ1c commission within the
Stateto Insure 1ts employees against 1nJury and death was held constltutional under
this and other sections relating to municipalities, since the Act Involved no rlght
of local self-government or local control of corporate property. The Act was held
tobe declaratory of a new State—w1de public purpose for which taxes couldbe levied.
Wood vs. City of Detroit, 188 Hlch. 547, 155 N. W. 592 (1915).
• The Board of Health of the City of Detroit ls a State and not a municipal gov-
ernmental agency. Civil Servlce Commission of Clty of Detroit vs. Engel, 184 Hlch.
269, 150 N. W. 1081 (1915).
The fire department, however, and the departments managing municipal streets
and municipal waterworks are purely municipal agencies. The distinction between the
two classes of agencies restsln the fact that negllgence on the part of a municipal
board of health might cause a State—w1de epldemlc, whereas the possibility that a
conflagratlon would spread beyondthe llmlts of the municipality 1s remote. Davidson
• vs. Hlne, 151 Mich. 294, 115 N. W. 246 (1908).
17Const1tut1on, Art. v111, Sec. 25.
Under the Home Rule Act, providing for a clvlu service system In clty charters,
an ordinance of the City of Detroit creating a pension fund for clvll employees wa:
held to be for a ”publ1c purpose' under this section. Bowler vs. Nagel, 228 Hlch.
45m %ON.W.2% (wsu.
•

 •
6 Michigan
II. Financial Powers and Limitations-Continued
B. Exemptions °
No prov1s1on.1B
C. Borrowing and Use of Credit
(1) State
(a) The state may contract debts to meet deficits in °
revenue,but such debts shall not in the aggregate at any t1me,exceed two A
hundredflfty thousand dollars. The state may also contractdebts to repel •
1nvas1on,suppress 1nsurrectl0n,defend the state or aid the United States
in time of war. The money so raised shall be applied to the purposes for
whlchlt was raised or to the payment of the debts contracted.19 * * *
(b) The credit of the state shall not be granted to,
nor ln aid of anyperson, association or corporat1on,pub11c or pr1vate.2° • l
18There be1ng no constltutlonal restrlctlon on the power of the Leglslature to exempt
from taxat1on,1t follows that It can exerclse the power of exemptlon as It chooses.
C. F. Smlth Company vs. Fitzgerald, 270 M1ch. 859, 259 N. W. 352 (1935).
Thepower to exemptfrom taxatlonthe property of churches,schools,and llbraries,
has no reference to the rule of unlformlty provided for ln Art. X, Sec. 3 (page 2, .
par. (b))ln relatlon to ad valorem taxation or to the same rule as set out in Art. •
X, Sec. 4 (page 4, par. (e)) ln relatlon to other forms of taxatlon. Union Trust
Company vs. Common Council, 170 Mlch. 892, 137 N. W. 122 (1912).
Under astatute exemptlng from taxation the real property of all houses of public .
worship and parsonages occupied as such,1t was held that for the tlme covering con-
structlon of a parsonage andbefore the rector actually took up h1s residence there,
the real property was not exempt from taxation. The court stated that exemption
statutes should receive astrlct construction. In all cases of doubt as to the leg-
lslatlve lntentlon. the presumption ls 1n favor of the taxing power, and the burden •
ls on the claimant to establish clearly lts right to exemptlon. St. Joseph's Church
vs. City of Detrolt, 189 Mich. 408, 155 N. W. 588 (1915).
19Const1tut1on, Art. X, Sec. 10.
2OConst1tut10n, Art. X, Sec. 12.
A deposlt of State funds in a bank ln the ordlnary course of buslness cannot
be consldered a loan of State credlt. Fry vs. Equitable Trust Company, 264 Mich.
165, 249 N. w. 819 (1933). •
A statute authorized the State to contract wlth a rallroadfor certain lmprove-
ments. Under the contract the State agreed to secure a new r1ght—of—way for the
railroad and construct a track thereon. In return the rallroad was to deed certain
land to the State. The contract further provided that the rallroad was to repay the
State w1th1n 15 years the amount spent. The statute was held valld as not providing
for a grant of the State•s credlt. Fltzslmmons k Galvin, Incorporated vs. Rogers,
243 Mlch. 849. 220 N. H. 881 (1928).
Thls section, belng a general limitation upon the power of the State to grant •
credit, does not operate to curtall specific grants of authorlty to countles under
Art. VIII, Sec. 11 (page 1, par. B), to furnlsh support to 'publlc and charitable
hospltals, sanator1a,or other lnstltutlons for the treatment of persons suffering
from contagious or lnfectlous d1seases.• Sault Ste. Marie Hospltal vs. Sharpe,
209 Mlch. 884. 177 N. W. 297 (1920).
Under thls sectlon the Clty of Detroit was held unauthorlzed to approprlate
funds to the Detrolt Museum of Art even though the museum conveyedlts real property
to the clty, and the clty had representation on the board of directors, and the mu- ’
seum was open to the publlc. The court, after determining that It was a private
corporat1on,stated: ¤It ls of no lmportance how publlc the aims and purposes of the
corporatlon may be, unless 1t takes on the form of a munlclpal agency, It ls stlll
under the ban of the constltutlonal 1nh1b1t1on.· Detroit Museum of Art vs. Engel,
187 Mich. 432, 153 N. W. 700 (1915). See page 12, footnote 45. ·
•

 • .
Michigan 7
II. Financial Powers and Limitations-Continued
’ C. Borrowing and Use of Credit-Continued
(1) State-—Continued
(c) The state shall not subscribe to, nor be interested
in the stock of any company, association or corporation.21
• (d) The state shall not be a party to, nor be inter-
ested in any work of internal improvement, nor engage in carrying on any
such work, except in the improvement of or aiding in the improvement of
* the public wagon roads,in the reforestation and protection of lands owned
by the state and in the expenditure of grants to the state of land or
other property.22
(e) .Thestateshall borrownotto exceedthirtymillion
dollars, pledge its faith and credit and issue its notes or bonds there-
• for, for the purpose of paying to each person who entered into the mili-
tary, naval or marine forces of the United States between April sixth,
nineteen hundred seventeen, and November eleventh, nineteen hundred eight-
een,andserved honestly and faithfully therein during the late world war
° and who was a resident hithis state atthe time of entering such service,
, the sum of fifteen dollars for each month or major fraction thereof, of
such service, up to and including August first, nineteen hundred nine-
· ¤ee¤.25
(2) Counties24
No county shall incur any indebtedness which shall in-
• crease its total debt beyond three per cent of its assessed valuation,
except counties having an assessed valuation of five million dollars or
less, which counties may increase their total debt to five per cent of
1 their assessed valuation.25
21 ` '
Constitution. Art. X, Sec. 13.
•
22Const1tut1on, Art. X, Sec. 14.
Since the State cannot engage in the construction and operation of internal
‘ improvements, municipal and quasi-municipal corporations may not do so, because the
X latter are but lnstruméntalltlés of the State 1n carrying on local government, and
the State may not delegate power to a municipal or quas1—mun1c1pal corporationto do
what it has no power to do itself. If, however, a work of public improvement can be
classified under an express constitutional grant of power, such as the power of mu-
• n1c1pal1t1es to acquire hospitals, almshouses, and all works involving the public
h€3lCh or safety, (see page 2, par. D), an act authorizing such a project will be
held constitutional. Thus,an act authorizing the construction of a munlclpal sewage
plant, being a work involving public health and safety, was upheld with reference
to this section. Young vs. City of Ann Arbor, 267 Mich. 241, 255 N. w. 579 (1934).
Similarly an act authorlzlngthe development of municipal harbors and parks was held
constitutional. Gllbert vs. Traverse City, 267 Mich. 257, 255 N. W. 585 (1954).
See, further, a d1scuss1on of this section 1n Bird vs. Common Council of City
• of Detroit, 148 Mich. 71, 111 N. w. 860 (1907).
23Const1tut1on, Art. X, Sec. 20-b.
24See par. (d), above, and footnote 22; page 12. f00D¤0¤€ 45-
25Const1tut1on, Art.VIII, Sec. 12.
. See page 5, footnote 16.
•

 •
8 Michigan
II. Financial Powers and Limitations——Continued ·
•
C. Borrowing and Use of Credit—Continued
(3) Other Local Units
(a) See page 4, par. (a), and footnote 15.
(b) See page 5, par. (c), and footnote 17; page 7,
par. (d), and footnote 22; page 12, footnote 45. ‘
D. Other Income
•
(a) The proceeds from the sales of all lands that have
been or hereafter may be granted by the United States to the state for
educational purposes and the proceeds of all lands or other property given
by individuals or appropriated by the state for like purposes shall be
and remain a perpetual fund, the interest and income of which, together
with the rents of all such lands as may remain unsold, shall be inviolably °
appropriated and annually applied to the specific objects of the original
gift, grant or appropriation.26
(b) All lands, the title to which shall fall from a
defect of heirs, shall escheat to the ‘state, and the interest on the clear
proceeds from the sales thereof shall be appropriated exclusively to the °
support of the primary schools.27 ·
(c) The legislature shall appropriate all salt spring
lands now unappropriated, or the money arising from the sale of the same,
where such lands have already been sold, and any funds or lands which may
hereafter be granted or appropriated for such purpose, for the support •
and maintenance of the agricultural college.2B (
E. Appropriations and Expenditures
(1) State
(a) No money shall be paid out of the state treasury °
except in pursuance of appropriations made by law.z9 p
(b) * *· * No money shall be appropriated or drawn y 
from the treasury for the benefit of any religious sect or society, the- 1
ological or religious seminary; nor shall property belonging to the state
be appropriated for any such purpose.5O * * * •
z6Constltut1on, Art. Xl, Sec. 11.
All fines assessed and collected ln the several countles, cltles, and townships
for any breach of the penal laws shall be exclusively applied to the support of ll-
brarles ln the cltles and townships. Art. XI, Sec. 14.
27C0nstltut1on, Art. Xl, Sec. 12. ·
2BConst1tutlon, Art. XI, Sec. 13.
29Constltutlon. Art. X, Sec. 16.
3OConst1tutlon, Art. ll, Sec. 3. ·
•

 •
Michigan 9
j II. Financial Powers and Limitations——Continued
•
E. Appropriations and Expenditures-—Continued
(2) Counties
See page 1, par. B.
• (3) Other Local Units
No provision.
° III. Provisions Affecting legislation
A. Regular Sessions of legislature
The legislature shall meet atthe seat of government on the
first Wednesday in January, 1909, and on the first Wednesday in January
° in every second year thereafter,31 * * *.
B. Special Sessions of legislature
He (the governor) may convene the legislature on extraor-
dinary occasi0ns.3z
c •
C. Powers of Initiative and Referendum
· (1) Initiative
* * * the people reserve to themselves the power
to propose legislative measures, resolutions and laws; to enact or re-
, ject the same at the polls independently of the legislature; and to ap-
rove or re ect at the olls any act assed b the legislature, exce t
P P P Y 35 P
acts makin a ro riations for state institutions and tomeetdeficien—
S PP P
cies in state funds. * * * At least 8 per cent of the legal voters
of the state shall be re uired to ro ose any measure by petition: Pro-
Q P P
. vided, That no law shall be enacted by the initiative that could not
• e . l
under this constitution be enacted by the le islature. r * r If any
S
law proposed by such petition shall be enacted by the legislature it
shall be subject to referendum, as hereinafter provided. If any law so
• 31Const1tut1on, Art. V, Sec. 13.
32Const1tut1on, Art. VI. Sec. 7.
35The term 'state 1nst1tut1ons” should be interpreted in a broad sense, tolnclude all
organized departments ofthe State towhich the Legislature may delegate the exercise
of State functions. Thus,a law imposing a gasoline tax and approprlatlng the proceeds
for the use of the State hlghway department ls not subject to referendum. Detroit
Automobile Club vs. DeLand, 230 Mich. 623, 203 N. w. 529 (1925). Slmllarly, the
counties, when building roads for State purposes with funds approprlated from the
° State highway fund, are exerclsing State functions, and such an approprlatlon act ls
not subject to referendum. Moreton vs. Haggerty, 240M1ch. 584, 216 N. w. 450 (1927).
A resolution passed by the Legislature ratlfylng an amendment to the Federal
Constitution is not an 'act” within the meaning of this section, and thus 1s not
subject to the power of referendum. Decher vs. Vaughan, 209 Mich. 565, 177 N. w.
· 388 (1920).
•

   `
10 Michigan
III. Provisions Affecting Legislation-Continued 1
•
C. Powers of Initiative and Referendum-Continued
(1) Initiative-Continued
étitioned for be re ected or if no action is taken u on it b the le -
P s P Y S
islature within * * * forty days, the secretary of state shall submit
such proposed law to the people for approval or rejection at the next en- °
suing general election. The legislature may reject any measure so pro-
posedby initiative petition andpropose a different measure upon the same .
subject * *· *, and in such event both measures shall be submitted by
the secretary of state to the electors for approval or rejection at the
next ensuing general e-lection.34 *· * *
(2) Referendum
(a) * * * Upon presentation to the secretary of •
state within ninety days after the final adjournment of the legislature,
of a petition certified to as herein provided, "·‘ * * asking that any
act, section or part of any act of the legislature, be submitted to the
electors for approval or rejection, the secretary of state, after can-
vassing such petition as above required,35 * * *, shall submit to the ,
electors for approval or rejection such act or section or part of any act
at the next succeeding general election; and no such act shall go into ·
effect until and unless approved by a majority of the qualified electors
voting thereon.56 * *