Opinion ID: 2515085
Heading Depth: 5
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: The act considered by Bulgo granted a power uniformly by general law.

Text: Relying on the unchallenged portion of section 1 in Act 47, this court determined that Act 47 applied to a class of political subdivisions consisting of every county other than a county which adopts a charter providing for succession to the office of county chairman when a chairman-elect dies before January 2 following his election. Id. The Bulgo court noted that under Article VII, section 1, the thing that is required to have uniform application is the power given to, and exercised by, political subdivisions. Id. at 59, 430 P.2d at 326. The court further observed that [t]he power given by Act 47 is the power to hold special elections for successor county chairman [sic] where the chairman-elect dies before January 2 following his election. The Act confers this power upon every county in which the contingency occurs so long as the county is within the class of political subdivisions encompassed by it. The Act provides for the timing of the special elections in three different situations. The challenged provision covers one situation. Such timing provision does not confer any power and relates only to the exercise of the power that has been granted. Id. The Bulgo court concluded that Act 47, including the challenged provision, was a general law because [t]he challenged provision does not give the county of Maui any power which is different from that which the Act gives to the counties of Hawaii and Kauai. It neither favors nor discriminates against Maui. The contingency contemplated in the Act now exists on Maui. The provision brings Maui within the scope of the Act in the present situation. Id. at 59, 430 P.2d at 327.