MARTIN v MURRAY
Docket No. 319509
Court of Appeals of Michigan
January 20, 2015
309 Mich. App. 37
Submitted January 14, 2015, at Detroit.
Docket No. 319509. Submitted January 14, 2015, at Detroit. Decided January 20, 2015, at 9:00 a.m.
Roy Roberts, as the emergency manager for the Detroit Public Schools (DPS), brought an action in the Wayne Circuit Court against the 11 members of the DPS Board of Education on August 8, 2012, alleging that defendants were acting or threatening to act outside their authority and seeking declaratory, injunctive, and other relief. The first DPS emergency manager had been appointed under a 1990 emergency-manager law. The Governor‘s appointment of Roberts on May 4, 2011, as successor emergency manager and subsequent reappointment on March 30, 2012, were done under a new emergency-manager law, the Local Government and School District Fiscal Accountability Act,
The Court of Appeals held:
1. The circuit court did not err.
2. The provisions of
Affirmed.
SCHOOLS — EMERGENCY MANAGERS — APPOINTMENT POWERS — SCHOOL BOARD VACANCIES.
When a vacancy occurs on a board of education, the remaining board members generally may fill the vacancy by appointment; if an emergency manager has been appointed for a local unit of government (such as a school district) under the Local Financial Stability and Choice Act,
Constitutional Litigation Associates, PC (by Hugh M. Davis and Cynthia Heenan), for defendants.
Before: BECKERING, P.J., and JANSEN and BOONSTRA, JJ.
JANSEN, J. Defendants, present and former members of the Detroit Public Schools Board of Education (“board of education” or “board“),1 appeal by right the circuit court‘s opinion and order of November 22, 2013, confirming the authority of the Detroit Public Schools Emergency Manager (“emergency manager“) to fill vacancies on the board of education and denying defendants’ motion to set aside the emergency manager‘s appointment of Jonathan Kinloch to the board. We affirm.
I
In late 2008, the Superintendent of Public Instruction declared the existence of a financial emergency within the Detroit Public Schools (“DPS“). In accordance with Michigan‘s then-existing emergency financial manager law,
Meanwhile, on February 29, 2012, petitions seeking a referendum on
Soon thereafter, the Legislature enacted the Local Financial Stability and Choice Act,
II
The board of education presently consists of 11 members.7 Board member Carol Banks submitted her
III
The present action was commenced on August 8, 2012, when Roberts sued defendants for declaratory, injunctive, and other relief. Roberts alleged that defendants, the 11 members of the board of education, were acting or threatening to act outside their authority. Roberts requested that the circuit court enjoin them from abrogating plans, changing programs, canceling
are elected at large,
The circuit court acknowledged that under the Revised School Code,
IV
Whether the authority to fill the vacancy on the board of education rested with the emergency manager or the remaining board members is a question of law. “Questions of law, including questions of statutory interpretation, are reviewed de novo on appeal.” Risk v Lincoln Charter Twp Bd of Trustees, 279 Mich App 389, 396; 760 NW2d 510 (2008). Similarly, “[w]hether a violation of the separation of powers doctrine has occurred is a question of law that this Court reviews de novo.” Harbor Tel 2103, LLC v Oakland Co Bd of Comm‘rs, 253 Mich App 40, 50; 654 NW2d 633 (2002). Inasmuch as defendants sought declaratory and injunctive relief, we generally review such matters for an abuse of discretion. Mich Coalition of State Employee Unions v Civil Serv Comm, 465 Mich 212, 217; 634 NW2d 692 (2001); Allstate Ins Co v Hayes, 442 Mich 56, 74; 499 NW2d 743 (1993); Barrow v Detroit Election Comm, 305 Mich App 649, 662; 854 NW2d 489 (2014).
V
As a preliminary matter, we note that defendants actually sought two different forms of relief from the circuit court. First, they sought a declaration that the emergency manager lacked the authority to fill vacancies on the board of education in general. Second, they sought a judgment invalidating the emergency manager‘s appointment of Kinloch to the board of education.
VI
In general, when a vacancy occurs on a board of education,8 the remaining board members possess the authority to fill the vacancy by appointment. This is true for both first-class school districts and general-powers school districts. With respect to first-class school districts, § 411a(6) of the Revised School Code,
If a vacancy occurs on the first class school district board from among the at large members, the vacancy shall be filled by majority vote of the remaining first class school district board members at a meeting called by the president of the board for that purpose. If a person is appointed to fill a vacancy for which the unexpired term is more than 1 year and 8 months, that person shall serve until January 1 following the next general election. At that first general election the vacancy shall be filled for the unexpired term. A vacancy shall not be filled later than 60 days before a primary election at which at large board members are to be nominated.9
With regard to general-powers school districts, § 311(1) of the Michigan Election Law,
If less than a majority of the offices of school board member of a school district become vacant, the remaining school board members shall fill each vacant office by appointment. If a vacancy in the office of school board member is not filled within 30 days after the vacancy occurs or if a majority of the offices of school board member of a school district become vacant, the intermediate school board for that school district shall fill each vacancy by appointment. An individual appointed under this subsection serves until a successor is elected and qualified.
However, these general statutes give way to more specific enactments when a financial emergency exists within the school district. When an emergency manager is appointed for a local government under
during the pendency of the receivership, the authority of the chief administrative officer and governing body to exercise power for and on behalf of the local government10 under law, charter, and ordinance shall be suspended and vested in the emergency manager. [
MCL 141.1552(2) .]
The Legislature has conferred upon emergency managers broad authority to act for and in place of the governing body of the local government:
Upon appointment, an emergency manager shall act for and in the place and stead of the governing body and the office of chief administrative officer of the local government. The emergency manager shall have broad powers in receivership to rectify the financial emergency and to assure the fiscal accountability of the local government and the local government‘s capacity to provide or cause to be provided necessary governmental services essential to the public health, safety, and welfare. Following appointment of an emergency manager and during the pendency of receivership, the governing body and the chief administrative officer of the local government shall not exercise any of the powers of those offices except as may be specifically authorized in writing by the emergency manager or as otherwise provided by this act and are subject to any conditions required by the emergency manager. [
MCL 141.1549(2) .]
Among other things, emergency managers are specifically empowered to “[r]emove, replace, appoint, or confirm the appointments to any office, board, commission, authority, or other entity which is within or is a component unit of the local government,”
As a remedial statute,
“The legislature may provide by law . . . the manner of filling vacancies where no provision is made in this constitution.”
It is true that “[t]he powers of government are divided into three branches: legislative, executive and judicial. No person exercising powers of one branch shall exercise powers properly belonging to another branch except as expressly provided in this constitution.”
“[T]he separation of powers doctrine stated in
Nor can we agree with defendants’ novel contention that the emergency manager‘s appointment of Kinloch to fill the vacancy on the board of education was infected by an impermissible conflict of interest because the board must remain free of the emergency manager‘s control. Defendants argue that in order for
True enough,
VII
During the pendency of the receivership, the emergency manager has the exclusive authority to fill any vacancies on the board of education by appointment. The power of the remaining board members to fill such vacancies is suspended during the financial emergency unless the emergency manager delegates that power to the board in writing. We affirm the circuit court‘s ruling to this effect. We also affirm the circuit court‘s order validating the emergency manager‘s appointment of Kinloch and invalidating the board of education‘s purported appointment of Gay-Dagnogo.
Affirmed. No taxable costs pursuant to MCR 7.219, a public question having been involved.
BECKERING, P.J., and BOONSTRA, J., concurred with JANSEN, J.
