No, 12391 

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA 

RALPH GILDROY, an individiual citizen, 

and the South Central Montana Development 

Federation, an unincorporated association 

of counties, acting by and through its Board 

of Directors, 

Plaintiffs and Appellants, 

FORREST H. ANDERSON, Governor of the State 

of Montana, 

Defendant and Respondent. 

Appeal from: District Court of the First Judicial District, 

Honorable Peter G. Meloy, Judge presiding. 

Counsel of Record : 

For Appellants : 

Hickman and Moore, Harlowton, Montana 

Perry J. Moore argued, Harlowton, Montana 

Charles Maris, Roundup, Montana 

For Respondent: 

Hon. Robert L, Woodahl, Attorney Geneql, Helena, 

Montana 

Charles Dickman, Assistant Attorney General, argued, 

Helena, Montana 

Submitted: March 1, 1973 

Filed: MAR 2 8 1973 
PER CURIAM: 

This appeal is taken from an order of the district court 

of Lewis and Clark County granting a motion to dissolve a temporary restraining order, originally issued by the district 

court of Musselshell County, and granting motion to dismiss. 

Plaintiffs and appellants, Ralph Gildroy and the South 

Central Montana Development Federation, initiated this litigation 

in the district court of Musselshell County, and on September 3, 

1971, that court issued a temporary restraining order enjoining 

Governor Forrest Anderson from implementing Executive Order No. 

2-71. Governor Anderson filed a motion for change of venue to 

Lewis and Clark County and a motion to dismiss. The motions were 

denied by the Musselshell County district court and that denial 

was appealed to the Montana Supreme Court. This Court vacated 

the district court order and ordered the cause transferred to 

Lewis and Clark County. On September 6, 1972, the Lewis and 

Clark County district court entered the order from which this 

appeal is taken, 

There appears to be no dispute as to the facts. South 

Central Montana Development Federation is a private unincorporated 

association of persons from Wheatland, Golden Valley, Musselshell, 

Sweet Grass, Stillwater, Carbon, Yellowstone and Big Horn Counties, 

whose purpose is stated to be promotion of economic and social 

development in those counties, It appears a "Board of Trustees" 

controls the Federation and that Ralph Gildroy is a member trustee 

for Musselshell County. 

Senate Joint Resolution No. 13 adapted by the 42nd Montana 

Legislative Assembly in February 1971, was entitled: 

"A JOINT RESOLUTION OF THE SENATE AND HOUSE OF 

REPRESENTATIVES OF THE STATE OF MONTANA RESPECTFULLY URGING THE HONORABLE FORWST H. ANDERSON, 

GOVERNOR, AND THE STATE DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING AND 

ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT TO RETAIN THE SOUTH-CENTRAL 

MONTANA DEVELOPMENT FEDERATION INTACT. " 
It provided in pertinent part: 

"That it is the wish of the Montana state senate 

and house of representatives that the south-central 

Montana development federation continue as it is 

presently constituted [naming the eight member counties] 

and that it not be divided for purposes not related 

to the economic and social well-being of the people 

of the area", 

In August 1971, Governor Anderson issued Executive Order 

No. 2-71 dividing the fifty-six counties of the State of Montana 

into twelve multi-county districts, stating in pertinent part: 

"A consistent use of districts is also needed for 

effective coordination of a wide range of federal-aid 

programs, and to meet the objectives of the Office of 

Management and Budget, Executive Office of the President, for implementation of federal acts providing 

state assistance in planning, housing, education, welfare, community development, environmental protection 

and other fields1'. 

Three counties of the Federation, Musselshell, Wheatland 

and Golden Valley were placed in District 6 along with Fergus, 

Judith Basin and Petroleum Counties. The rest of the Federation 

counties were placed in and comprised District 7, under Executive 

Order 2-71. 

The Federation and Mr. Gildroy assert that the governor 

did not heed the wishes of the legislature in districttng under 

Executive Order 2-71 and assign two issues for review: 

1, Whether a Joint Legislative Resolution has any force 

and effect or whether it is a nullity, 

2, Whether Senate Joint Resolution No. 13 directed the 

governor to refrain from a particular act. 

Considering the second of the two presented issues, we find, 

from an examination of Senate Joint Resolution No. 13, that its 

directive portion merely states: 

"* * * it is the wish of the Montana senate and house 

of representative-at the south-central Montana 

development federation continue as it is presently 

constituted * * * and that it not be divided for 

purposes not related to the economic and social wellbeing of the people of the area ". (Emphasis added) 

It is a judicial principle too aften repeated to require 

citation, that courts in construing a statute or rule will give 

effect to the plain language used in its ordinary meaning and 
consider the statute in its entirety to determine legislative 

intent. Although Senate Joint Resolution No. 13 is neither a 

statute nor a rule, this principle nonetheless applies. 

A fair and reasonable reading of the entire Senate Joint 

Resolution No, 13 indicates to this Court: (1) That it is not a 

directive, and (2) that it does not preclude the action taken 

by the Governor in Executive Order 2-71. 

Perhaps, as appellants suggest, the use of term "wish" is 

attributable to poor draftsmanship. However, that does not make 

"wish" synonymous with "direct ", 

We do not believe the South Central Montana Development 

'I Federation cannot now continue as it is presently constituted." 

Executive Order 2-71 is directed only to "all state agencies, 

departments, boards, commissions, divisions, bureaus, offices 

and other state governmental entities." The order is not directed 

to counties or municipalities, nor is it directed toward private 

individuals or unincorporated associations such as appellants 

herein. Executive Order 2-71 does not divide the South Central 

Montana Development Federation; it does provide geographic districts 

for use by state agencies, 

Appellants' issue concerning whether a joint legislative 

resolution is a nullity, is not susceptible to a universally 

applicable answer. Appellants point out that joint legislative 

resolutions can properly be used for such purposes as to ratify 

amendments to the United States Constitution, create committees 

whose terms continue beyond the adjournment of the legislature, 

and direct that studies or inventories be made by the legislative 

council. Respondent points out that joint legislative resolutions 

do not have the force and effect of a general law, citing State 

ex rel. Peyton v. Cunningham, 39 Mont. 197, 103 P, 497. 

The effect and validity of a joint legislative resolution 

must be decided upon a consideration of the purpose intended to 

be accomplished and in light of the applicable provisions of the 

Montana Constitution, 
Article VII, Section 1, of the Montana Constitution 

provides that the governor "shall perform such duties as are 

prescribed in this constitution and by the laws of the state." 

A joint legislative resolution is not a general law 

and cannot be used to control the discretion of the governor. 

The order appealed from is affirmed.