AAC F A M I L Y A N D F R I E N D S » » » » » » » » » » » » » » » » » » » » » » » » » » » » » » » » » » » » » » » » Amendment 55: A tool for efficiency and flexibility
and passed by the people in the general elec- tion of 1973. Implementing legislation was adopted under Act 742 of 1977, the County Government Code. In 1970, the voters rejected the proposed
A
Arkansas Constitution of 1970 and Gover- nor-elect Dale Bumpers named a committee to study a possibility to presenting fragments of the document to voters, including the Lo- cal Government Article of the proposed Ar- kansas Constitution of 1970. Amendment 55 addressed several major issues pertaining to county government which clearly express a policy that local control and flexibility over local matters is preferred by the citizenry and engrained by Amendment 55 into the Arkansas Constitution. Section 1 of Amendment 55 granted exten-
sive legislative powers including “home rule” (not requiring legislative act for authority to en- act ordinances); and eliminated the quasi-legis- lative authority of the county court. Section 1 Power of quorum court provides: “(a) A county acting through its Quorum Court may exercise local control not denied by the Constitution or by law; (b) No county may declare any act a felony or exercise any authority not relating to county affairs; (c) A county may, for any public purpose, contract, cooperate, or join with any other county, or with any political subdivisions of the State or with the United States.” Te practical effect of this grant of authority to the quorum court was to give sufficient flexibility to handle local matters and eliminate the need for General Assembly approval for local authority over matters not denied by the state or federal government. (See: 28 Ark. L. Rev. 226, online at
arcounties.org. Search “Amendment 55.”) Section 2 of Amendment 55 further ex-
presses a policy for efficiency and provides in part: “(a) No county’s Quorum Court shall be comprised of fewer than nine (9) justices of the peace, nor more than fifteen (15) justices of the peace. Te number of justices of the peace that comprise a county’s Quorum Court shall be de- termined by law.” Te General Assembly un- der Act 742 of 1977 could have determined to
18
mendment 55 of the Arkan- sas Constitution, “Revision of County Government,” was pro- posed by House Joint Resolution
express a policy that local control and flexibility over local matters is preferred by the citizenry and ingrained by Amendment 55 into the Arkansas Constitution.
“A ”
set the number of justices of the peace districts for all counties the same, or at the minimum or maximum, but the law, as codified A.C.A. 14-14-402, affixes the number of justice of the peace districts based upon population and on a graduated scale {9 JP districts for popu- lation 0-19,999; 11 JP districts for population 20,000 to 49,999; 13 JP districts for popula- tion 50,000 to 199,999; and 15 JP districts for population 200,000 and above}. Te intent was to provide for a local legislative body small enough to conduct business on a periodic basis. Under prior law, the 1874 Arkansas Constitu- tion, allowed for justice of the peace districts to be apportioned for one justice of the peace for every 200 electors. Some say that 15, 13, 11 or even 9 may be too many justices of the peace to conduct business; and how they arrived at the 9 to 15 range or the population gradations is unclear. Nonetheless, these revisions resulted in making quorum courts more efficient and effec- tive by reduction in numbers. Similarly, A.C.A. 14-14-401 allows the county court to divide the county into township districts for the township office of constable. Te clear trend has been for the county courts to reduce the number of township districts and thereby constables. Te remainder of Section 2 of Amendment
55, subsection (b) explicitly grants extensive flexibility and efficiency: “Te Quorum court may create, consolidate, separate, revise, or abandon elective county office or offices except during the term thereof; provided however, that a majority of those voting on the question at a general election have approved said action.” Many counties have used these provisions to combine offices, separate offices, and revise of- fices. Tere are 17 combined offices of county clerk and circuit clerk. Forty-five counties have
mendment 55 addresses several major issues pertaining to county government which clearly
Mark Whitmore AAC Chief Counsel
now separated the office of sheriff and collector and five counties created the combined office of treasurer-collector (Johnson, Pulaski, Sebastian, Monroe and Lafayette). Tis trend evidences the efficiency of having the office of collector separate from sheriff or for establishment of combination of treasurer-collector. Debra Buckner, Pulaski County Treasurer
said, “It has been my observation and experi- ence over almost 13 years that the duties of the offices of treasurer and collector flow well together. We have a really good understanding of the entire cash process from assessor abstract, original tax charge, billing and collections, final tax settlement, and entity distribution than we would if we only had part of the process.” Rebecca Talbert, Garland County Collector,
said, “Te duties and tasks of sheriff and collec- tors offices are totally different. A tax collector is engaged in office operations such as balancing the original charge and monies collected, print- ing tax bills, publishing notices and collecting funds. Law enforcement operations have en- tirely different operations, skills and training. Te citizens may be better served by having an official focused on the duties of the office of col- lector.” Some counties, Pulaski and Faulkner have used this constitutional provision and the en- abling procedure authorized by A.C.A. 14-14- 601 et seq., to place the office of coroner under the office of county judge as an appointed of- ficial, provided the matter is approved by the voters. See: Attorney General Opinions: 2003- 186, 2002-351, 1997-383. Te AG has also opined that Amendment 55 does not allow the county to abandon the office of constable. See: Attorney General Opinions Nos. 1998-313 and 1977-023. Te AG also indicated that Amend-
COUNTY LINES, FALL 2013
Research Corner
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48 |
Page 49 |
Page 50 |
Page 51 |
Page 52 |
Page 53 |
Page 54 |
Page 55 |
Page 56 |
Page 57 |
Page 58 |
Page 59 |
Page 60