Opinion ID: 1292155
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 4

Heading: delegation and adequate standards

Text: ¶ 7 The plaintiffs argue that the Legislature has improperly delegated its rule-making authority by allowing the county to establish procedures for jail operation. This Court has not previously addressed the issue of whether the statutory provisions allowing counties to privatize their jails is an unlawful delegation of legislative power. ¶ 8 Oklahoma's non-delegation doctrine is rooted in articles IV and V of the Oklahoma Constitution. Section 1 of article IV provides for the separation of the three branches of government. Section 1 of article V requires that [t]he Legislative authority of the State shall be vested in a Legislature consisting of a Senate and House of Representatives. . . . Based on section 1 of article V, it is a well-settled rule that the legislature must not abdicate its responsibility to resolve fundamental policy making. . . . [7] ¶ 9 This prohibition does not forbid the Legislature from delegating power to implement its statutorily-mandated policies. [8] Even though the Legislature may not delegate the power to make laws, it can delegate the authority to make rules and regulations in the implementation of statutory enactments. [9] To prevent the Legislature's role from being usurped, its ability to delegate rule-making authority is subject to the condition that the statutory scheme must establish [the legislative] policies and set out definite standards for the exercise of any agency's rule making power. [10] While it is well settled in this jurisdiction that the power to determine the policy of the law is primarily legislative and cannot be delegated, the power to make rules of a subordinate character in order to carry out the policy legislatively determined and to apply that policy to varying factual conditions, although sharing the attributes of legislative exercise of power, is in its major sense an administrative duty which may be delegated properly to an administrative body by the Legislature. [11] ¶ 10 When interpreting statutes, the intent of the Legislature controls, and to ascertain the legislative intent, all statutory provisions upon a particular subject will be considered and given effect as a whole. [12] An examination of all relevant statutory provisions is specific of the legislative intent that county jails would be subject to the same standards whether operated by the sheriff or a private entity. Section 744 of title 19 of the Oklahoma Statutes authorizes private operation of county prisons and provides that such jail services shall meet any standards prescribed and established for county jails, including but not limited to standards concerning internal and perimeter security, discipline of inmates, employment of inmates, and proper food, clothing, housing, and medical care. [13] Also relevant is section 68 of title 57 which states any state law governing jails shall apply to jail facilities operated by a private prison contractor. [14] ¶ 11 There are extensive guidelines already in place which have long applied to county-operated prisons and, under section 744 of title 19 and section 68 of title 57, apply to privately-operated prisons. Section 192 of title 74 requires certain standards for many areas of jail operations such as: admission and release procedures, security, sanitary conditions, diet, clothing, living space, discipline, prisoners' rights, staff training, safety, prisoner supervision and segregation of females, minors and the infirm. Under section 192 of title 74, the State Health Department is required to inspect county jails once a year and violations are to be reported to the district attorney. The Oklahoma Administrative Code, title 310, section 670, sets out additional standards for jail operations. These standards, under which counties have operated their jails, apply to and are nonetheless sufficient for private-jail operations. ¶ 12 The Legislature has enacted policy addressing how prisons should be operated and allowing privatization. Because the Legislature has provided that all county jails are subject to the same standards whether operated by a county or a private company, it is not necessary for the Legislature to create entirely new standards for privately-operated county jails when adequate standards already exist. The authority to set county-specific rules for the operation of county jails may be delegated because the rules are of subordinate character and necessary to carry out the legislatively-mandated policies. Each county's individualized policies and procedures will differ depending upon the resources and facilities that it has at its disposal. Further, these policies and procedures are subordinate to the myriad of statutes and regulations which govern jails and prisons. When all provisions concerning county jail facilities are viewed as a whole, there are adequate standards for the county to follow in implementing jail procedure. ¶ 13 Plaintiffs rely heavily on City of Okla. City v. State ex rel. Okla. Dept of Labor, [15] in which we found Oklahoma's Minimum Wages on Public Works Act [16] to be an unconstitutional delegation of authority. Originally, the Minimum Wage Act required the Labor Commissioner to investigate and determine the prevailing wage. [17] As initially written the Act provided standards for the Commissioner to follow and specified the types of information that the Commissioner was to consider in making a determination of the prevailing wage. [18] ¶ 14 The Minimum Wage Act, as amended by the Legislature, required the Oklahoma Labor Commissioner to adopt the prevailing wage as determined by the federal Department of Labor. In declaring the amendment unconstitutional, this Court said: the Act has provided no definite standards or articulated safeguards for the United States Department of Labor to follow in implementing the legislative policy declared in the Act. [19] Therefore, the amended Minimum Wage Act amounted to an unlawful delegation of Legislative authority. ¶ 15 The Department of Labor case is distinguishable from the present case. In the Department of Labor case, the Legislature did not make any attempt to impose existing standards on the Federal Department of Labor. Instead, the federal agency was given the power to determine the prevailing wage in Oklahoma with no direction from the Oklahoma Legislature. Unlike in Department of Labor, here existing standards apply to county jails whether operated by a county or a private company. Counties are ultimately responsible for insuring that their jails meet legislative and administrative standards. The only difference is that the counties now have the option to contract for private operation. In the case of privately-operated county jails, there has been no open ended delegation made as was the case in Department of Labor. ¶ 16 Plaintiffs argue that CCA is unlawfully being permitted to establish policies and procedures for the new jail. However, the plaintiffs have misstated the facts of the case. The management contract between CCA and the TCCJA states that CCA shall submit to the Authority (TCCJA), for review and approval, proposed Policies and Procedures. [20] Clearly, CCA has not been permitted to have unfettered discretion in setting policies for the jail's operation. Rather, they are permitted to assist in the drafting of subordinate policies; ultimate control over what policies will be implemented rests with the county. Therefore, the county acting through the TCCJA, not the TCCJA itself, is implementing the legislative policy by approving policies and operating procedures for the new county jail.