Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutResolutions - 1962.09.10 - 19885RESOLUTION 24000 September 10, 1962 BY: Mr. Semann IN RE: 1962 COUNTY LEGISLATIVE PROGRAM To the Oakland County Board of Supervisors Mr. Chairman, Ladies and Gentlemen: Pursuant to Miscellaneous Resolutions 3885, 3896, 3897 and 3898, your Legislative Committee prepared for presentation to the 1962 Session of the State Legislature several amendments to existing laws and, with the cooperation and assistance of the six State Representatives of Oakland County and our State Senator, proceeded to have bills introduced to accomplish the purposes set forth in the program approved by the Board. \s/ Following is a detailed report of the various items approved by the Board and action taken by the Legislature: 1. Amendments to the D.P.W. Act. These amendments were intended to strengthen and improve the D. P.W, Act including the special assessment procedure as well as authority to permit the Board of Public Works to establish, finance and operate a public airport. The latter amendment was recommended by the Aviation Committee of the Board. In order to accomplish the purposes of this portion of the Board's program, Senate Bill 1086 was introduced by Senator Roberts with the sponsorship of Senators Fitzgerald and Schweigert. This legislation came before the Senate for consideration at about the same time that the airport matter was being considered by the Board. Since this matter was quite contro- versial locally, Senator Roberts, after consulting with the Committee, agreed to have this legislation withheld from consideration this year. While the purpose and intent of the amendment had no direct bearing on the financing of a county airport, some confusion arose over the fact that the proposal did include amendments to the special assessment procedures of the D. P.W. which had been requested by Wayne and other counties. We were primarily interested in making it possible for the D.P.W. to take over any county airport that might be acquired. This portion of the legislation will be studied further for possible consideration in the 1963 Legislative Program. 2, Amendments to the Drain Code :, A year ago several amendments proposed by the County to the Drain Code were shelved by the Legislature. This year as a part of the County's Legislative Program two new laws were enacted: Act 103 permits the Drain Commissioner to contract with local units of government for the cost of maintenance and repair of drains in lieu of assessing the cost to the land within the drainage district. Act 191 provides for the making of a new apportionment on a county drain whenever a city or village is incorporated out of the territory of a township or whenever annexations are made to a city or village from a township. This Act also includes several other desirable additions to the Drain Code. 3. Tax Exemption for Civil Defense Facilities. In support of this proposal of the Board, there were 3 bills introduced: House Bill 3, House Bill 66 and Senate Bill 1022, However, after considerable study in both the Senate and the House Committees on Taxation, the proposals were not favorably reported. 4. Amendment to the Divorce Law to Substitute the Friend of the Court in Place at.tePlasect..!Lir-IgAttoau_In Filing Apsearances in Cases Involving Interests of Minor Children. Representative Baker of the 4th District, Oakland County, introduced House Bill 239 which would have permitted the Friend of the Court to file appearances in divorce cases involving children under the age of 17 years, At the present time the law requires this to be done by the Prosecuting Attorney and further provides a $5.00 fee which the Prosecuting Attorney night be entitled to collect from the county. Our Prosecutor has never collected this fee since his salary is set by the Board and is paid in lieu of any fees to which he might otherwise be entitled. This bill passed the House and was sent to the Senate where it died in committee. Your Legislative Committee proposes to resubmit this proposal next year. 5. Amendment to City Home Rule Act to Require Separate Vote in Village and Township When New City is Incorporated from an Existing Village and Part of an Adjacent Township. In order to carry out the intent of this proposal, Representative Hayward of the 5th District, Oakland County, introduced House Bill 83 which was defeated by one vote. Later this proposal for separate votes was included as a part of an amendment to House Bill 22, which bill was vetoed by the Governor. 6. At the request of the Miscellaneous Committee, a proposal was submitted to the Legislature for establishment of an Interim Study Committee to Review the Dog Laws of the State. This idea did not meet with favor in the Legislature and no action was taken. 7. As authorized by the Board in Miscellaneous Resolution 3897, your Committee advocated restoration of the matching formula between the State and the County to a 50/50 basis rather than the present 70/30 matching and opposed the 1 mill amendment suggested by Wayne and other counties as not being in the best interests of this County. The Legislature was not receptive to restoring the matching for welfare to the 50/50 basis because of the State's financial difficulties and so it was necessary for the County to oppose House Bills 278 and 298 and Senate Bill 1090, all of which would have placed a 1 mill ceiling on the County's share of welfare expenditures prior to the time that the State would take over the balance of welfare expenditures in a particular county for the balance of the fiscal year. At present there is a 1-1/2 mill limitation which, along with other features of the welfare law, is quite favorable to this County. 8. As authorized by the Board on February 16, 1962, your Committee prepared, with the cooperation of the Corporation Counsel, County Clerk and Prosecuting Attorney, House Bill 736 which authorizes the Board of Supervisors in counties between 500,000 and 1,000,000 population to appoint .a Jury Commission of 3 electors. If approved by a majority of the members of the Board of Supervisors, the Jury Commission would be appointed by the Board and serve for a term of 6 years and receive such compensation as established by the Board for each day's service but not to exceed more than 100 days in one calendar year. Under this act the Jury Commission would make a random selection of jurors from a list of names taken from the poll lists furnished by the township and city clerks to the County Clerk. The Jury Commission would meet on the 4th Monday of May in each year either by sworn statement or oral examination review the qualifications of the prospective jurors. Eventually 700 names would be put in the jury box unless the Court ordered a different number and that would be the list for the year. From time to time the panels would be drawn with the Presiding Judge and the Sheriff present in the Clerk's office as the names are taken from the box. Jurors would be summoned by the Sheriff and subject to a $10.00 fine for any day that they failed to show up unless they were excused. This new act, known as Act 104 of the Public Acts of 1962, was approved by the Governor on April 30, 1962 and was given immediate effect. This new Act is now available to Oakland County if a majority of the members of the Board decide to authorize a Board of Jury Commissioners. In order that your Committee might be prepared to present more information as to steps which might be taken when and if the Board authorizes the creation of a Jury Commission, a special study has been undertaken. Your Committee plans to present a report on this to the Board at the next meeting. In addition to the foregoing, your Committee, with the fine cooperation of our State Legislators and Legislators from other districts of the State, assisted in the enactment of several other amendments and new legislation which we feel will be of benefit to the County as follows: Public Act 122 which requires all tax assessing officials to use manuals prepared or approved by the State Tax Commission. Public Act 25 which permits the C onservation Department or the Board of Super- visors to initiate lake level procedures either upon its own motion or by petition to the Board of 2/3 of the freeholders owning lands abutting the lake for the protection of the public health, welfare and safety and the conservation of the natural resources of the State or to preserve property values around a lake. Public Act 117 which makes annual inspections of drains by the County Drain Commissioner optional and mandatory only upon request of a municipality. Public Act 77 which provides for compensation for Chairman of the Board of Supervisors. Public Act 181 which authorizes the Board of Supervisors to create a county institution board where there is a tuberculosis hospital. Public Act 147, sponsored by Representative Hayward, which permits alteration of city boundaries by mutual consent when a street, river or drain which forms the boundary of a city is to be relocated. Public Act 21, sponsored by Representatives Law, Hogan and Anderson, which requires the consent of a city or village for use of its sewage disposal plant before any other city or village may use such facility. Public Act 162 which prescribes the manner of giving notice in special assessment procedures. This was perhaps one of the most important pieces of legislation enacted in the 1962 Session of the State Legislature. As the result of a Supreme Court decision, all special assessment procedures were clouded with uncertainty as to the manner of giving notice to various property owners in the district. This legislation provided for the manner of giving notices. It was approved by both the House and Senate as well as the Governor and was given immediate effect. Public Act 43, sponsored by Senator Roberts, which provides for the continuation of two Circuit Court Commissioners in Oakland County. Public Act 108 which is an amendment to the Drain Code to permit making of contracts or agreements for flood control in conservation utilization of soil. Public Act 179 which authorizes local units of government such as townships to erect municipally needed buildings which may contain facilities for rental to other governmental entities. Public Act 78, sponsored by Senator Roberts, which permits the electors of a township to vote after the creation of a township planning commission. Public Act 136 which provides for compensation for members of the Board of Supervisors serving on county library, zoning commission, planning commission and fair boards and sets the mileage reimbursement at 11:1 per mile„ This act was not given immediate effect and will therefore become effective 90 days after the Legislature finally adjourns. On many of the foregoing items your Committee worked very closely with the State Association of Supervisors, the Township Association and the Macomb County Board of Supervisors. Another piece of legislation which was backed by the Board was co-sponsored by several Representatives and known generally as the Bowman Bill. This would have restricted income taxes imposed by cities to residents of that particular city. Representatives Hayward, Anderson, Law, Hitchcock and Baker of Oakland County co-sponsored the bill and gave active support. It passed both houses but was vetoed by the Governor. MR. CHAIRMAN, on behalf of the Legislative Committee, I move that the foregoing report be received and placed on file.