xt7j6q1sj677 https://exploreuk.uky.edu/dips/xt7j6q1sj677/data/mets.xml Michigan United States. Work Projects Administration. Lowe, Robert C. (Robert Chapin), 1907- Sherfey, Helen R. 1937 16 p.; 27 cm UK holds archival copy for ASERL Collaborative Federal Depository Library Program libraries and the Federal Information Preservation Network. Call number Y 3. W 89/2:36/M 58 books English Washington DC: Works Progress Administration This digital resource may be freely searched and displayed in accordance with U. S. copyright laws. Michigan Works Progress Administration Publications Public welfare -- Law and legislation -- Michigan Social workers -- Legal status, laws, etc. -- Michigan Constitutional law -- Michigan 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 1937 2019 true xt7j6q1sj677 section xt7j6q1sj677 O
. - W O R K S P R O G R E S S A D M I N I S T R A T l O N




. MARCH 15, 1957

‘ I
I i

o I 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,
O therefore, have been restricted to those concerning
A 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
1 O 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
0 useful to those interested inpublic welfare questions
in indicating how State and local public welfare admin—
istration may be affected by constitutional powers and

. .
Incidence of Responsibility for Welfare Program.................. 1
Financial Powers and Limitations................................. 2
Taxation and Assessments.................................... 2
Exemptions.................................................. 6
Borrowing and Use of Credit................................. 6
Other Income................................................ 8
. Appropriations and Expenditures............................. 8
Provisions Affecting legislation................................. 9
Constitutional Amendment or Revision............................. 14


. 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

' 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.3 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—

. 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

1Constitution (1908), as published by the State of Michigan in the Michigan Official

0 Directory and Legislative Manual (1935-1956); with all amendments to March 15, 1937.
2Constitution, Art. XI, Sec. 15.

, The Legislature may devise other types of care in addition to institutional care
for mental defectives when public economy, safety, and welfare so demand. Thus a
statute authorizing the sterilization of the feeble—minded not in institutions was
held constitutional under this section. Smith vs. Command, 251 Mich. 409, 204 N. W.
140 (1925).

a 3This provision giving a specific grant of authority must be strictly construed since
it is an exception to the general limitation upon the right of the State and its con-
stituent municipalities to grant credit or levy taxes or assessments in aid of any
person, association, or corporation. (See page 5, par. (c) and page 6, par. (13)).
Sault Ste. Marie Hospital vs. Sharpe, 209 Mich. 684, 177 N. W. 297 (1920).

The power to make appropriations under this section is limited to those institu-
tions only where persons suffering from contagious or infectious diseases are treated,

‘ and cannot be extended to include hospitals generally where persons suffering from

9 other diseases are also treated. The court stated in a dictum that this provision

; could not be interpreted to include hospitals where contagious or infectious diseases

‘. were not treated. Sault Ste. Marie Hospital vs. Sharpe, 209 Mich. 684, 177 N. w. 297

i (1920).

' 4Constitution, Art. VIII, Sec. 11.

This provision is self-executing. Sault Ste. Marie Hospital vs. Sharpe, 209 Mich.
684, 177 N. w. 297 (1920).
‘ 0 5Constitution, Art. VII, Sec. 15.
No appeal may lie from the decision of the probate court in cases of Juvenile
delinquents and dependents. Van Leuven vs. Ingham Circuit Judge, 166 Mich. 115, 151
N. w. 551 (1911); in re Broughton, 192 Mich. 418. 158 N. w. 884 (1916).
O 1

2 Michigan
I. Incidence of Responsibility for Welfare Program—Continued


D. Any city or village may acquire, own, establish and maintain,
either within or without its corporate limits, parks, boulevards, ceme—
teries, hospitals, almshouses and all works which involve the public 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 on property paying specific taxes, and taxes shall
be levied on such property as shall be 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, and the rate
. c
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.3
(c) The total amount of taxes assessed against prop—

erty for all purposes in any one year shall not exceed one and one—half
6Constitution, Art. VIII, Sec. 22.

This section is not self-executing. City of Detroit vs. Oakland Circuit Judge,

237 MICh. 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 in caring for the public
health; however, this section should not be interpreted to mean that the State surren— 0
ders to any municipality control over matters relating to public health. Civil Service
Commissmn vs. Engel, 184 Mich. 269, 150 N. w. 1081 (1915).

In matters relating to public health, the city 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 9 ;
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. ;

vconstitution, Art. X, Sec. 2.

The power to tax is 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 in its
laws. Harsha vs. City of Detroit, 261 Mich. 586, 246 N. w. 849 (1935).

A license fee as a prerequisite to doing business. imposed for the regulation of , i
such business, and not for revenue, is not a tax although incidental revenue may
accrue therefrom. Fletcher 011 Company vs. Bay City, 247 Mich. 572, 228 N. w. 248
8Constitution, Art. X, Sec. 3.

The term {specific taxes'I as used in this section includes 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, which sums 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 of the electors of any assessing
district, or when provided forby the charter of a municipal corporation:10
* =t =1:
(d) The power of taxation shall never be surrendered
or suspended by any grant or contract to which 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 Mich. 659, 259 N. W. 552 (1955).

Since assessments for local improvements are a peculiar species of taxation based
on the assumption thata part of the property of the community is increased in value
by the improvement, such assessments are not subJect to the uniformity requirement
of this section. City of Detroit vs. Weil, 180 Mich. 595, 147 N. W. 550 (1914).

The uniformity requirement means only that the Legislature may not arbitrarily
tax property according to locality, kind, or quality without regard to value. The

0 constitutional mandate is met so long as those objects which are taxed are brought
within a uniform rule. Union Trust Company vs. Common Council, etc ., 170 Mich. 692,
157 N. W. 122 (1912).

Since an inheritance or succession tax is a tax on the privilege of receiving
property by inheritance, and is not a tax upon property, it does not come within the
uniformity rule of this section. In re Fox's Estate, 154Mich. 5, 117 N. W. 558 (1908).
9Included within this exception are direct refunding bonds exchanged for prior bonds

0 existing at the time this section 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 issued upon the faith of delinquent taxes and existing as general
obligations Of the public body prior to the adoption of this section. Wilcox vs. Board
of Commissioners of Sinking Fund, etc., 262 Mich. 699, 247 N. W. 925 (1955).

10Constitution, Art. X, Sec. 21.

The one and one—half percent tax limitation of this section is not self—executing

. and requires legislation for a division of the taxes between the State, counties.
cities, villages, townships, or school districts. School District of City of Pontiac
vs. City of Pontiac, 262 Mich. 558, 247 N. W. 474 (1955).

The phrase lltwo-thirds vote of the electors' does not mean two-thirds of all the
electors of the assessing district, but only two-thirds of those electors voting on

, the question of an increase in the tax limit. Wilcox vs. Board of Commissioners of
I Sinking Fund, etc., 262 Mich. 699, 247 N. W. 925 (1955).

This provision does not alter the right of home—rule cities or villages or fourth

. class cities to exercise their powers Of local self-government and fix their own tax

‘ limits for local needs and purposes. In these excepted cities and villages, however, '
, this amendment is effective as to State and county taxes. School District of City
of Pontiac vs. City of Pontiac, 262 Mich. 558, 247 N. W. 474 (1955). See page 4,
par. (a), and footnote 15; page 5, par. (b), and footnote 16.
. 11Constitution, Art. X, Sec. 9.
, o

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,
(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 o
-Constitution, Art. X, Sec. 4.
These taxes include license, privilege, and occupation taxes; they are not ad
valorem taxes on property. A license tax for the privilege to do business in more 1
than one store, and graduated according to the number of stores operated was held to
be a reasonable tax under this section. C. F. Smith Company vs. Fitzgerald, 270
Mich. 659. 259 N. w. 552 (1935). 0
A graduated inheritancetax not allowingfor deductions of the amount paid under
a Federal estate tax was held not to violate the uniformity requirementof this sec-
tion. In re Fish's Estate, 219 Mich. 369, 189 N. w. 177 (1922).
15Constitution, Art. x, Sec. 7. '
Held that in reviewing the assessments made by the city assessor, the board of
review of the City of Jackson might horizontally reduce the values of realty due to
excessive assessments or depreciation in value. It might not, however. arbitrarily .
reduce horizontally the valuation on personalty,since byits nature personalty takes
so many forms thatrm general rule maybe applied either a)depreciation or reductions
in value. Hayes vs. City of Jackson, 267 Mich. 523, 255 N. W. 361 (1954).
14Each organized county shall be a body corporate with such powers of a local, legis—
lative,and administrative character conferred on the county boards of supervisors as
the Legislature may provide by law. Constitution, Art. VIII, Secs. 1, 8. ,
The boards of supervisors are authorized without a vote of the electors (Art.
VIII, Secs. 1,8) to levy a tax in any one year of one—tenth of one mill on the as- 0
sessed valuation of the county,or to borrow an equal sum, to maintain public build-
ings or bridges (such taxingor borrowing power limited to $1,000 where the assessed
valuation is less than $10,000,000). Art. VIII, Sec. 10.
County taxes for road purposes are limited to five mills in any one year. Art.
VIII. Sec. 26. 1
15Constitution, Art. VIII, Sec. 20. :
This power of the Legislature is complete and unrestricted. Harsha vs. City of .
Detroit, 261 Mich. 586, 246 N. w. 849 (1933).
Municipal corporations are State agencies, and subject to constitutional re- ‘
strictions; the Legislature may modify the charters of municipal corporations at
will. Harsha vs. City of Detroit, 261 Mich. 586, 246 N. H. 849 (1933). ‘
This section and the one following (par. (b), page 5) have been the basis of home- . ‘
rule legislation, giving the electors of the cities chartered thereunder increased
. 2

Michigan 5
II. Financial Powers and Limitations—Continued
p A. Taxation and Assessments——Continued
(3) Other Local Units——Continued
(b) Under such general laws, 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 its municipal concerns, subject
‘ to the constitution and general laws of this state.16
‘ (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;
i . page 3, par. ((1), and footnotes 9, 10, and 11; page 4, par. (f') , and foot—
note 13.
control of local government. Thus,constitutiona1 provision, Art. X, Sec. 21 (page
; 2, par. (c)). limiting the total amount of taxes to one and one-half percent of the
assessed valuation has no referenceto home-rule cities, or cities with special char-
ters (with like provisions as to the taxing power),fourthclass cities,or villages.
, . School District of City of Pontiac vs. City of Pontiac, 262 Mich. 338. 247 N. H.
474 (1933).

A statute authorizing cities to make public improvements and pay for them by
self-liquidating bonds was held not to create a debt on the~part of the city since
the bonds were payable solely from the income to be derived from the operation of
such improvements, and not from the general revenues of the city. As the city in-
curred no debt by the bond issue it was deemed unimportant to determine whether the
city's statutory debt limit had already been reached. Young vs. City of Ann Arbor,

. 267 Mich. 241. 255 N. w. 579 (1934).

Organized townships shall be bodies corporate with such powers of a local leg-
islative and administrative character as the Legislature may provide by law. Art.
VIII, Sec. 16, 17.

16Constitution, Art. VIII, Sec. 21.

This section forbids the State to meddle with purely local municipal affairs,
and similarly forbids municipalities to usurp the police power of the State in its
sovereign capacity. Attorney General ex rel.Lennane vs. City of Detroit, 225 Mich.

o 631. 196 N. w. 391 (1923).

A Workmen's Compensation Act, requiring each county,city,township, incorporated
village. school district, incorporated public board,or public commission within the
Stateto insure its employees against injury and death was held constitutional under
this and other sections relating to municipalities, since the Act involved no right
of local self—government or local control of corporate property. The Act was held
tobe declaratory of a new State—wide public purpose for which taxes couldbe levied.
Wood vs. City of Detroit, 188 Mich. 547, 155 N. w. 592 (1915).

0 The Board of Health of the City of Detroit is a State and not a municipal gov—
ernmental agency. Civil Service Commission of City of Detroit vs. Engel, 184 Mich.
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 restsin the fact that negligence on the part of a municipal
board of health might cause a State—wide epidemic, whereas the possibility that a
conflagration would spread beyondthe limits of the municipality is remote. Davidson

' vs. Hine, 151 Mich. 294, 115 N. w. 246 (1908).
”Constitution, Art. VIII, Sec. 25.

Under the Home Rule Act, providing for a civih service system in city charters,
an ordinance of the City of Detroit creating a pension fund for civil employees was
held to be for a "public purpose" under this section. Bowler vs. Nagel, 228 Mich.
437, 200 N. W. 258 (1924).


6 Michigan
II. Financial Powers and Limitations—Continued
B. Exemptions . ‘
No provision. 18
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 time, exceed two ‘
hundredfif‘ty thousand dollars. The state may also contract debts to repel .
invasion, suppress insurrection, defend the state or aid the United States
in time of war. The money so raised shall be applied to the purposes for i
which it was raised or to the payment of the debts contracted.19 * * *
(b) The credit of the state shall not be granted to, ‘
nor in aid of any person, association or corporation, public or private.20 . I
18There being no constitutional restriction on the power of the Legislature to exempt 3
from taxation, it follows that it can exercise the power of exemption as it chooses. ..
C. F. Smith Company vs. Fitzgerald, 270 Mich. 659, 259 N. N. 352 (1955). I
The power to exempt from taxation the property of churches, schools,and libraries,
has no reference to the rule of uniformity provided for in Art. X, Sec. 3 (page 2. I
per. (b))in relation to ad valorem taxation or to the same rule as set out in Art. 0
X, Sec. 4 (page 4. par. (e)) in relation to other forms of taxation. Union Trust
Company vs. Common Council. 170 Mich. 692. 157 N. N. 122 (1912).
Under astatute exempting from taxation the real property of all houses of public .
worship and parsonages occupied as such, it was held that for the time covering con-
struction of a parsonage and before the rector actually took up his residence there,
the real property was not exempt from taxation. The court stated that exemption
statutes should receive astrict construction. In all cases of doubt as to the leg-
islative intention, the presumption is in favor of the taxing power. and the burden 0
is on the claimant to establish clearly its right to exemption. St. Joseph's Church
vs. City of Detroit. 189 Mich. 408, 155 N. H. 588 (1915).
19Constitution, Art. X. Sec. 10.
20Constitution, Art. X, Sec. 12.
A deposit of State funds in a bank in the ordinary course of business cannot
be considered a loan of State credit. Fry vs. Equitable Trust Company, 264 Mich.
165, 249 N. w. 619 (1933). O
A statute authorized the State to contract with a railroad for certain improve-
ments. Under the contract the State agreed to secure a new right-of—way for the
railroad and construct a track thereon. In return the railroad was to deed certain
land to the State. The contract further provided that the railroad was to repay the
State within 15 years the amount spent. The statute was held valid as not providing
for a grant of the State's credit. Fitzsimmons E Galvin, Incorporated vs. Rogers,
248 Mich. 649. 220 N. W. 881 (1928).
This section, being a general limitation upon the power of the State to grant '
credit, does not operate to curtail specific grants of authority to counties under
Art. VIII, Sec. 11 (page 1, par. B), to furnish support to 'public and charitable
hospitals, sanetoria, or other institutions for the treatment of persons suffering
from contagious or infectious diseases.| Sault Ste. Marie Hospital vs. Sharpe,
209 Mich. 684. 177 N. W. 297 (1920).
Under this section the City of Detroit was held unauthorized to appropriate
funds to the Detroit Museum of Art even though the museum conveyed its real property
to the city, and the city had representation on the board of directors, and the mu— '
seum was open to the public. The court, after determining that it was a private
corporation,stated: IIt is of no importance how public the aims and purposes of the
corporation may be, unless it takes on the form of a municipal agency. it is still
under the ban of the constitutional inhibition.' Detroit Museum of Art vs. Engel,
187 Mich. 432, 155 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) , The state shall borrow not to exceed thirty million
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, and served honestly and faithfully therein during the late world war
and who was a resident in this state at the 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—
. ' teen.“
(2) Countiesz“
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
" their assessed valuation.25
21 ' '
Constitution, Art. X, Sec. 13.
ZZConstitution, 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
| latter are but instrumentalities of the State in carrying on local government, and
= the State may not delegate power to a municipal or quasi—municipal corporation to do
a 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-
‘ . nicipalities to acquire hospitals, almshouses, and all works involving the public
health 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 municipal 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 (1954).
Similarly an act authorizing the development of municipal harbors and parks was held
constitutional. Gilbert vs. Traverse City, 267 Mich. 257, 255 N. w. 585 (1954).
See, further, a discussion of this section in Bird vs. Common Council of City
0 of Detroit, 148 MiCh. 71, 111 N. W. 860 (1907).
23Constitution. Art. X, Sec. 20—h.
24See par. (d), above, and footnote 22; page 12, footnote 45.
ZSConstitution, 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. (0), 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.‘?‘6
(b) All lands, the title to which shall fall from a
defect ofheirs, shallescheat 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.2a '
E. Appropriations and Expenditures ‘ I
(1) State
(a) No money shall be paid out of the state treasury .
except in pursuance of appropriations made by law.29
(b) *- * * No money shall be appropriated or drawn
from the treasury for the benefit of any religious sect or society, the— I
ological or religious seminary; nor shall property belonging to the state
be appropriated for any such purpose.50 * * * .
2600nstitution, Art. XI, Sec. 11.
A11 fines assessed and collected in the several counties, cities, and townships
for any breach or the penal laws shall be exclusively applied to the support of 11—
} braries 1n the cities and townships. Art. XI, Sec. 14.
”Constitution, Art. XI, Sec. 12. .
ZBConstitution, Art. XI, Sec. 13.
29Constitution, Art. X, Sec. 16.
mConstitutlon, Art. 11. Sec. 3. .

. Michigan 9
1 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 at the seat of government on the
first Wednesday in January, 1909, and on the first Wednesday in January
' in every second year thereafter,31 4’ * *.
B. Special Sessions of Legislature
He (the governor) may convene the legislature on extraor—
dinary occasions.32
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—
prove or reject at the polls any act passed by the legislature, except
acts making appropriations for state institutions:53 and to meet deficien—
cies in state funds. * ‘3‘ * At least 8 per cent of the legal voters
of the state shall be required to propose any measure by petition: Pro—
. vided, That no law shall be enacted by the initiative that could not
under this constitution be enacted by the legislature. * * * If any
law proposed by such petition shall be enacted by the legislature it
shall be subject to referendum, as hereinafter provided. If any law so
. Constitution, Art. V, Sec. 13.
SZConstitution, Art. VI, Sec. 7.
35The term 'state institutions'I should be interpreted in a broad sense. to include all
organized departments of the State to which the Legislature may delegate the exercise
of State functions. Thus,a law imposing a gasoline tax and appropriating the proceeds
for the use of the State highway department is not subject to referendum. Detroit
Automobile Club vs. DeLand, 230 Mich. 623, 203 N. w. 529 (1925). Similarly, the
counties, when building roads for State purposes with funds appropriated from the
- . State highway fund, are exercising State functions, and such an appropriation act is
not subject to referendum. Moreton vs. Haggerty, 240Mich. 584, 218 N. w. 450 (1927).
A resolution passed by the Legislature ratifying an amendment to the Federal
Constitution is not an "act" within the meaning of this section, and thus is not
subJect to the power of referendum. Decher vs. Vaughan, 209 Mich. 565, 177 N. w.
. 388 (1920).

10 Michigan .
O .
III. Provisions Affecting Legislation—Continued
C. Powers of Initiative and Referendum—Continued
(1) Initiative—Continued
petitioned for be rejected, or if no action is taken upon it by the leg—
islature within ’5 * * 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 * ’3 ’3, 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 election.“ ’5 * *
(2) Referendum
(a) * 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, "F * * 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 * "F *, shall submit to the