No. 13771
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA
1977
THEODORE A. SCHUMAN et al.,
Petitioners and Appellants,
THE STUDY COMMISSION OF YELLOWSTONE
COUNTY et al.,
Respondents and Respondents.
Appeal from: District Court of the Thirteenth Judicial
District,
Honorable Bernard W. Thomas, Judge presiding.
Counsel of Record:
For Appellants:
Jones, Olsen and Christensen, Billings, Montana
Paul G. Olsen argued, Billings, Montana
For Respondents:
Honorable Mike Greely, Attorney General, Helena
Helena, Montana
Moulton, Bellingham, Longo and Mather, Billings,
Montana
William H. Bellingham argued, Eillings, Montana
Submitted: September 30, 1977
CPY .- ?97Q
. "-
Filed:
Honorable R o b e r t M. H o l t e r , D i s t r i c t J u d g e , s i t t i n g i n p l a c e
of M r . Chief J u s t i c e Haswell, d e l i v e r e d t h e Opinion of t h e
Court.
T h i s i s a n a p p e a l from a n o r d e r o f t h e D i s t r i c t C o u r t ,
Yellowstone County, a f f i r m i n g and d e c l a r i n g v a l i d t h e
September 1 4 , 1976, C i t y of B i l l i n g s and Yellowstone County
a l t e r n a t i v e form o f government e l e c t i o n s .
P u r s u a n t t o s e c t i o n s 16-5101 t o 16-5115, R.C.P1. 1947,
t h e Yellowstone County Board of County Commissioners e s t a b -
l i s h e d t h e Yellowstone County Study Commission (County Study
Commission) and t h e B i l l i n g s Municipal C o u n c i l e s t a b l i s h e d
t h e B i l l i n g s Study Commission ( C i t y Study Commission). Each
s t u d y commission h e l d i n e x c e s s of 50 p u b l i c m e e t i n g s t o
examine b o t h p r e s e n t and a l t e r n a t i v e forms of c i t y and
c o u n t y governments. They i n v i t e d p u b l i c q u e s t i o n s and
s u g g e s t i o n s . I n a d d i t i o n , t h e c o u n t y s t u d y cornmission h e l d
f i v e p u b l i c h e a r i n g s and t h e c i t y s t u d y commission h e l d f o u r
p u b l i c h e a r i n g s from Play, 1975 t o J u n e , 1976, t o e l i c i t
p r e f e r e n c e s as t o c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of l o c a l government, views
on c o u n t y - c i t y government c o n s o l i d a t i o n , and r e a c t i o n s t o
t h e s t u d y commissions' t e n t a t i v e r e p o r t s .
Each s t u d y commission p r e s e n t e d a f i n a l r e p o r t t o t h e
public. The C i t y Study Commission d i s t r i b u t e d a p p r o x i m a t e l y
23,000 c o p i e s o f i t s f i n a l r e p o r t . This r e p o r t included a
summary of t h e commission's f i n d i n g s , key p r o v i s i o n s of t h e
c h a r t e r form of government which t h e C i t y Study Commission
proposed a s a n a l t e r n a t i v e t o t h e e x i s t i n g c i t y government,
t h e e n t i r e proposed c h a r t e r , a comparison between t h e t h e n
e x i s t i n g form of c i t y government and t h e proposed c h a r t e r
form, c e r t i f i c a t e s e s t a b l i s h i n g t h e t h e n e x i s t i n g p l a n of
government and t h e proposed c h a r t e r form, and a form of
official ballot.
he County Study Commission d i s t r i b u t e d a p p r o x i m a t e l y
26,000 s i m i l a r f i n a l r e p o r t s o f f e r i n g a proposed coinmissioner-
a d m i n i s t r a t o r c h a r t e r form o f c o u n t y government a s a n a l t e r n a -
t i v e t o t h e e x i s t i n g t r a d i t i o n a l c o u n t y commission form.
The c i t y v o t e r s on September 1 4 , 1976, v o t e d 7,238 t o
6,268 i n f a v o r o f t h e proposed c h a r t e r form of government t o
r e p l a c e t h e mayor-council form of government. The c o u n t y
e l e c t o r s on t h a t d a y , by a 9,720 t o 8,776 v o t e , r e j e c t e d t h e
proposed c h a r t e r form of c o u n t y government and r e t a i n e d t h e
c o u n t y c o m i s s i o n form.
More t h a n 1 0 q u a l i f i e d e l e c t o r s of b o t h t h e c i t y and
c o u n t y f i l e d a p e t i t i o n f o r j u d i c i a l r e v i e w o n September 30,
1976, i n t h e D i s t r i c t C o u r t , Yellowstone County, p u r s u a n t t o
s e c t i o n 16-5115.15, R.C.M. 1947. The e l e c t o r s c o n t e s t e d t h e
v a l i d i t y of t h e e l e c t i o n s and claimed s e c t i o n 16-5115.1,
R.C.M. 1947, was u n c o n s t i t u t i o n a l . These i s s u e s were t r i e d
by t h e D i s t r i c t C o u r t which made f i n d i n g s of f a c t and c o n c l u s i o n s
of law a f f i r m i n g t h a t t h e e l e c t i o n s of September 1 4 , 1976,
and t h e p r o c e e d i n g s l e a d i n g t h e r e t o w e r e v a l i d , and g r a n t e d
judgment t o t h a t e f f e c t . I t i s from t h e f i n d i n g s , c o n c l u s i o n s
and judgment t h a t t h i s a p p e a l i s t a k e n .
This Court has repeatedly s t a t e d it w i l l not overturn
f i n d i n g s o f f a c t and c o n c l u s i o n s of law i f s u p p o r t e d by
s u b s t a n t i a l e v i d e n c e and by t h e law. Evidence w i l l be
viewed i n t h e l i g h t most f a v o r a b l e t o t h e p r e v a i l i n g p a r t y .
Rule 52, M.R.Civ.P.; Luppold v. L e w i s , (1977), Mont . I
563 P.2d 538, 34 St.Rep. 227; Morgen & Oswood C o n s t r u c t i o n
Co. v . Big Sky of Montana, I n c . (1976), Mont . , 557
P.2d 1017, 33 St.Rep. 1121. The judgment of t h e ~ i s t r i c t
C o u r t i s presumed t o b e c o r r e c t and w i l l b e u p h e l d u n l e s s
c l e a r l y shown t o b e e r r o n e o u s ; t h e burden of such showing i s
upon t h e a p p e l l a n t . Kamp v . F i r s t N a t i o n a l Bank and T r u s t
Co., ( 1 9 7 3 ) , 1 6 1 Mont. 1 0 3 , 504 P.2d 987.
W e f i n d t h e f i n d i n g s o f f a c t and c o n c l u s i o n s of l a w
Of t h e ~ i ~ t r i C otu r t a r e s u p p o r t e d by s u b s t a n t i a l e v i d e n c e -
c
A p p e l l a n t s n e x t c l a i m t h e c i t y and c o u n t y v o t e r s were
n o t g i v e n t h e c h o i c e between t h e e s t a b l i s h e d form of govern-
ment and a n a l t e r n a t i v e form a s mandated by A r t . X I , S e c t i o n
9 ( 1 ) , 1972 Montana C o n s t i t u t i o n . Instead, appellants allege
t h e c h o i c e o f f e r e d w a s between two a l t e r n a t i v e forms of
government. I t i s o b v i o u s t h a t i n e a c h c a s e t h e c i t y and
c o u n t y s t u d y commissions p r e s e n t e d c h a r t e r forms of govern-
ment which d i f f e r e d i n b a s i c c o m p o s i t i o n from any t h e n
e x i s t i n g form. The c r u c i a l q u e s t i o n i s whether t h e e s t a b l i s h e d
(whether c a l l e d " p r e s e n t " o r " e x i s t i n g " ) forms of government
were o f f e r e d t o t h e v o t e r s a t a l l . The D i s t r i c t C o u r t found
t h e y were.
The b a l l o t s p r e s e n t e d t o t h e v o t e r s were i n t h e f o l l o w -
i n g forms:
B i l l i n g s C i t y Form Yellowstone County Form
F------------------- ---7 ------___
--
t - i
1
.-
-.
- -
.* , -_
.- - . ..
I
,
-.
- I' i . I
I
I
BALOT O$ALTER;MTWE BALLOT O!i ALTERiiBTIETE )
I
I
I _ _ ! - OF
FOfh ..- GOVER!lMEIT
_ _ __.
. - f FORFA Of LOCAL GOYEBi4?AEIIT
I --
I
( I3 the proposed form of
I majority of the votes cast on the question.
1 tion also fails. If the proposed form is
option requires only a plurality of
I
I option for adoption. . -
I
I d~
I PLEASE V ~ Y E1.
-. -1.
Vo16for Ons.
- - .
- . I
D - . Vote for One. _
For adoption of the charter form of city govern-
a
- 1
-- 1
1
I
I
I
FOR the zdoption of the self-government
charter proposed in the report of the Ye[-
bwstone County Study Commission.
1
1
I
ment proposed in the report of the Billings City I t - - I
I
i
I
- Study Commission.
For the present mayor-counci~form o f city
I
1
I
I
I
I
FOR the existing county commission
form of county government
I 2.
I government I
I
I I vote for ~ n a .
Sub-option to be included in the new form of
. , 2. I
Vote for One
9
I /
I I government, if it is adopted. Yellowstone County
elections: . * I
I
sub-option to be included in the proposed charter form
of c~ty government, it the proposed charter form ot city
government is adopted. Article Ill. Sect~on 3.06, Elec-
I
1
1
I
1
I
-
Shall be conducted on a partisan basis.
-
I1.
tion. The procedure tor the nomination and electfon of
a!l city officials shall be as prescribed by state law.
- - I
I
1 I
I
I
_ Shall be conducted on a non-paclsan basis.
' 1
1
I
I - ,
I I I
1 For Partisan elections.
-
J---------, , , , , , , , ,-,
- L
I I
I
1 i
I For on-partisan elections. ' * _
I. - - , , -
- - ,,, - -----------J
I
The b a l l o t form w a s a d o p t e d s o t h e v o t e r s would b e c l e a r l y
required t o vote positively, t h a t is, vote - t h e i r choice
for
and n o t a g a i n s t o n e o f t h e o t h e r forms. That i n t h e c i t y
e l e c t i o n t h e v o t e r s a d o p t e d a new governmental form, w h i l e
i n t h e c o u n t y v o t e r s r e t a i n e d t h e o l d form, is the strongest
e v i d e n c e t h e v o t e r s were f u l l y informed and n o t c o n f u s e d by
t h e b a l l o t s nor t h e i s s u e s .
B u t , a p p e l l a n t s a r g u e , t h e l e g i s l a t u r e i n 1975 changed
t h e form from " p r e s e n t " t o " e x i s t i n g " l o c a l government by
t h e a d o p t i o n of C h a p t e r 1 0 6 , Laws 1975, e n t i t l e d "AN ACT TO
CREATE A NEW TITLE I N THE REVISED CODES O F MONTANA DEALING
W I T H LOCAL GOVERNMENTv. The t i t l e c r e a t e d by C h a p t e r 106 i s
T i t l e 47A of t h e Revised Codes of Montana. Appellants claim
t h a t s e c t i o n 47A-3-202 e t seq., R.C.M. 1947, v a r i e d t h e
forms of l o c a l government from t h o s e under T i t l e s 1 and 1 6 ,
1
R.C.M. 1947.
U n t i l 1975, l o c a l governments d e v e l o p e d t h r o u g h many
y e a r s of growth and s t a t u t o r y change. T h e r e was no s i n g l e
government code a s s u c h ; rather, the various provisions
under which l o c a l governments o p e r a t e d w e r e s c a t t e r e d through-
o u t t h e whole Montana Code, b u t were m a i n l y found i n T i t l e s
1 and 1 6 .
1 I n d e e d , C h a p t e r 106, Laws 1975, i s p r e f a c e d by
t h i s declaration:
"WHEREAS, t h e e x i s t i n g s t a t e s t a t u t e s g o v e r n i n g
l o c a l government a r e c o n f u s e d , c o n t r a d i c t o r y ,
s c a t t e r e d and r e p e t i t i v e , r e s u l t i n g i n d e l a y o r
i n a c t i o n i n r e s p o n s e t o p r e s s i n g problems * * * . "
That was t h e s i t u a t i o n when T i t l e 47A w a s e n a c t e d . The
t r i a l c o u r t found, and w e c o n c u r , t h a t t h e r e l e v a n t p o r t i o n s
of S e c t i o n 47A-3-202 e t seq. contain t h e s a m e e s s e n t i a l
c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of form of government a s were p r e s e n t e d
under t h e former c o d i f i c a t i o n . A t most, it i s a recod-
i f i c a t i o n . Therefore, it follows t h a t t h e c o n s t i t u t i o n a l
mandates were observed and an alternative and the established
(whether called "present" or "existing") forms were presented
to the electors for their choice.
-
Lastly, appellants argue that section 16-6115.1, R.C.M.
1947 compels the selection of an "existing" form of government
and thereby violates the 1972 Montana Constitution:
Art. XI, Sections 3(1) and 9(1), 1972 Montana Constitution:
"Section 3(1). The legislature shall provide
nethods for governing local government units and
procedures for incorporating, classifying, merging,
consolidating, and dissolving such units and
altering their boundaries. The legislature shall
provide such optional or alternative forms of
government that each unit or combination of units
-
may adopt, amend, or abandon an optional or altern-
ative form by a majority of those voting on the
question." (Emphasis added.)
"Section 9 (1). The legislature shall, within four
years of the ratification of this constitution,
provide procedures requiring each local govern-
ment unit or combination of units to review its
structure and submit one alternative form of govern-
ment to the qualified electors at the next general
or special election." (Emphasis added.)
Art. 11, Sections 1 and 2, 1972 Montana Constitution:
"Section 1. All political power is vested in
and derived from the people. All government of
right originates with the people, is founded upon
their will only, and is instituted solely for
the good of the whole."
"Section 2. The people have the exclusive right
of governing themselves as a free, sovereign and
independent state. They may alter or abolish the
constitution and form of government whenever they
deem it necessary."
Appellants claim this is true because section 16-5115.1
states that unless the electors chose an alternative form of
government, then their "existing" form of government shall be
as defined by section 16-5115.1. In this manner appellants
claim the study commissions and the legislature locked the
citizens into a situation which prevented them from exercising
their rights.
We preface discussion with some of the rules which
apply generally t o a l l c o n s t i t u t i o n a l inquiry. I n Board o f
Regents of Higher E d u c a t i o n v . Judge, ( 1 9 7 5 ) , 168 Mont. 433,
443, 543 P.2d 1323, t h e C o u r t h e l d :
" ' * * * t h e C o n s t i t u t i o n must r e c e i v e a broad
and l i b e r a l i n t e r p r e t a t i o n c o n s i s t e n t w i t h t h e p u r p o s e
of t h e f r a m e r s and t h e p e o p l e i n a d o p t i n g i t ,
t h a t i t may s e r v e t h e needs of a growing s t a t e ;
t h e p r o p e r i n t e r p r e t a t i o n of any c o n s t i t u t i o n a l
p r o v i s i o n r e q u i r e s u s t o remember t h a t i t i s a
p a r t of t h e o r g a n i c law--organic n o t o n l y i n t h e
s e n s e t h a t it i s fundamental, b u t a l s o i n t h e
s e n s e t h a t i t i s a l i v i n g t h i n g d e s i g n e d t o meet
t h e needs of a p r o g r e s s i v e s o c i e t y , amid a l l t h e
d e t a i l changes t o which a p r o g r e s s i v e s o c i e t y
i s subject. '"
Nor c a n w e o m i t t h e wisdom of J u s t i c e O l i v e r Wendell
Holmes when he w r o t e :
" * * * t h e i n t e r p r e t a t i o n of c o n s t i t u t i o n a l
p r i n c i p l e s must n o t be t o o l i t e r a l . W e
must remember t h a t t h e machinery of govern-
ment would n o t work i f i t w e r e n o t allowed
a l i t t l e p l a y i n i t s j o i n t s . * * * " Bain P e a n u t
Co. v. P i n s o n , 282 U . S . 499, 501, 51 S.Ct. 228,
75 L.Ed. 482.
I n Martien v. P o r t e r , ( 1 9 2 3 ) , 68 Mont. 450, 464, 219 P .
817, t h i s C o u r t h e l d :
" W e e n t e r upon a c o n s i d e r a t i o n of t h i s
c a s e , b e a r i n g i n mind a r u l e of c o n s t r u c t i o n
d i c t a t e d by r e a s o n and s a n c t i o n e d by a u t h o r i t y
and l o n g u s a g e , t h a t whenever a n Act of t h e
l e g i s l a t i v e assembly i s a s s a i l e d a s u n c o n s t i -
t u t i o n a l , t h e question presented t o t h e c o u r t
i s n o t whether i t i s p o s s i b l e t o condemn b u t
whether i t i s p o s s i b l e t o uphold.
" I n t h e e a r l y c a s e of Brown v . Maryland, 12
Wheat 419, 6 L.Ed. 678, * * * Chief J u s t i c e
Marshall declared:
" ' I t h a s been t r u l y s a i d , t h a t t h e p r e s u m p t i o n
i s i n f a v o r of e v e r y l e g i s l a t i v e A c t , and t h a t
t h e whole burden of proof l i e s on him who de-
clares its unconstitutionality.' I t h a s been
i n v a r i a b l y h e l d by t h i s c o u r t t h a t t h e c o n s t i -
t u t i o n a l i t y o f a n Act o f t h e l e g i s l a t u r e w i l l
be held unless i t s u n c o n s t i t u t i o n a l i t y appears
beyond - r e a s o n a b l e d o u b t . "
a (Emphasis added.)
These r u l e s were r e c e n t l y r e s t a t e d by t h i s C o u r t b u t
w i t h a somewhat more r e s t r i c t i v e burden f o r t h e p r o p o n e n t :
"We cominence i n q u i r y i n t o t h e c o n s t i t u t i o n a l
q u e s t i o n s w i t h t h e w e l l - s e t t l e d r u l e t h a t when t h e
c o n s t i t u t i o n a l i t y of a s t a t u t e i s under s c r u t i n y ,
t h e s t a t u t e i s presumed t o be c o n s t i t u t i o n a l and
t h e p a r t y a t t a c k i n g i t h a s t h e burden of p r o v i n g
i t s i n v a l i d i t y . * * * T h i s p r e s u m p t i o n of
v a l i d i t y a p p l i e s t o a l l l e g i s l a t i v e e n a c t m e n t s and
it i s t h e d u t y of t h e c o u r t t o r e s o l v e
a l l c o n c e i v a b l e d o u b t s i n f a v o r of v a l i d i t y
whenever p o s s i b l e . " (Emphasis added.) Reeves
v . I l l e E l e c t r i c Co., ( 1 9 7 6 ) , Mont. I
551 P.2d 647, 650, 33 St.Rep. 542.
542. W have e a r l i e r i n t h i s o p i n i o n h e l d s e c t i o n s 47A-3-
e
203, e t s e q . , t o be c o d i f i c a t i o n s of t h e v a r i o u s forms of
l o c a l government u t i l i z e d under o l d T i t l e s 1 and 1 6 , Revised
1
Codes of Montana. W now h o l d s e c t i o n 16-5115.1,
e 2.C.M.
1947, t o b e of t h e same v e i n ; i t m e r e l y i s t h e " r o a d map" by
which o n e f i n d s h i s way i n t o T i t l e 47A. Nor d o e s t h i s
h o l d i n g c o n t r a v e n e any r i g h t s of t h e c i t i z e n s under A r t . 11,
S e c t i o n s 1 and 2 , by t e l l i n g them " t h i s i s i t " . A r t . XI,
S e c t i o n 3 ( 1 ) f i x e s r e s p o n s i b i l i t y upon t h e l e g i s l a t u r e t o
p r o v i d e o p t i o n a l o r a l t e r n a t i v e forms of government; c e r -
t a i n l y it c a n b e i m p l i e d t h a t t h i s i n c l u d e s t h e power of
d e f i n i n g whatever forms t h e y were t o make s u c h a l t e r n a t i v e s
to. T h i s a d d s t o , r a t h e r t h a n d e t r a c t s from, t h e r i g h t s of
t h e p e o p l e t o c h o o s e t h e i r own governments s i n c e t h e y now
have a d e f i n i t i o n o f t h e system.
Moreover, t h e 1972 Montana C o n s t i t u t i o n r e c o g n i z e s
changing c o n d i t i o n s i n s o c i e t y r e q u i r i n g o r d e r l y and unhur-
r i e d r e v i s i o n from t i m e t o t i m e of i t s governmental s y s t e m s .
T h a t i s t h e r e a l s p i r i t of it; t o s t i f l e t h a t s p i r i t by t o o
l i t e r a l l y i n t e r p r e t i n g l e g i s l a t i o n thereunder is not i n t h e
i n t e r e s t s of s o c i e t y . Fundamental p u r p o s e s must b e t h e
o b j e c t i v e and r e a s o n a b l e n e s s t h e watchword.
I t i s t h e n t o t h e end r e s u l t of a l l of t h e p r o c e e d i n g s
of t h e l e g i s l a t u r e , s t u d y commissions and e l e c t i o n s t o which
we must a d d r e s s o u r s e l v e s . Through t h e l e g i s l a t i v e e n a c t -
ments, governments were reviewed and t h e i r forms d e f i n e d ;
a l t e r n a t e forms were s t u d i e d , and o n e a l t e r n a t e s e l e c t e d
which seemed b e s t s u i t e d t o t h e s t u d y commissions and t h e
people. The p e o p l e were a f f o r d e d r e a s o n a b l e c h o i c e s between
t h e e s t a b l i s h e d form and a n a l t e r n a t i v e form and made t h e i r
selections. Now t o s a y t h e whole p r o c e e d i n g i s u n c o n s t i t u -
t i o n a l b e c a u s e of some vague c l a i m t h a t t h e r e m i g h t b e some
d i f f e r e n c e between t h e o l d and newer s t a t u t o r y d e f i n i t i o n s
o r t h a t those d e f i n i t i o n s coerce s e l e c t i o n , l e a d s t o an
absurd r e s u l t . C e r t a i n l y c o n s t i t u t i o n a l construction should
n o t r e a c h such a r e s u l t . S t a t e e x r e l . Ronish v . School
Dist. No. 1 of F e r g u s County, ( 1 9 6 0 ) , 136 Mont. 453, 348
W h o l d t h e c l a s s i f i c a t i o n of t h e e x i s t i n g form of
e
government under s e c t i o n 16-5515.1, R.C.M. 1947, n o t t o b e
a n i m p o s i t i o n of any p a r t i c u l a r form of government upon a
l o c a l body, b u t i n s t e a d t o be compliance w i t h t h e c o n s t i t u -
t i o n a l mandates of A r t . X
W e affirm the decision
Hon. R o b e r t M. H o l t e r , D i s t r i c t
,'
/ Judge, s i t t i n g i n p l a c e of M r .
.I/ J u s t i c e Frank I . Haswell.
/'
i
.d,/f%i,
W conc
e :
/f$d. J a c k D. ~ h a n s t r o m , s i t t i n g
'P n p l a c e of M r . J u s t i c e John C .
Harrison