Opinion ID: 2307799
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 1

Heading: Legislative Acts

Text: We turn then to Acts of the Legislature in order to determine whether they have imposed any restrictions or limitations on the right and power of the City of Philadelphia to hold an election to fill the unexpired term of the Mayor, as provided in its Charter, at the next general or municipal election whichever first appropriately occurs. The Legislature pursuant to the authority expressly granted to it by Article XV, Section 1, of the Constitution, supra, adopted the First Class City Home Rule Act of April 21, 1949, supra. This enabling Home Rule Act was the parent of Philadelphia's Home Rule Charter, without which Philadelphia could not adopt this or any Charter. The enabling Act of 1949 did not give, as the City contends, absolute and unrestricted home rule to Philadelphia. On the contrary, the Act specifically provides that Philadelphia may frame and adopt its own local-government Charter, but such Charter shall be subject to such restrictions, limitations and regulations as may be imposed by the Legislature. The First Class City Home Rule Act of 1949 is entitled: An Act To carry into effect section one of article fifteen of the Constitution, giving cities of the first class the right and power to frame, adopt and amend their own charters and to exercise the powers and authority of local self-government, . . . imposing certain restrictions, limitations and regulations; . . . . The citizens of Philadelphia, in 1951 under and pursuant to the above-mentioned enabling Act of 1949, adopted the present Charter. The Charter itself specifically stated in its preamble that . . . we, the electors of Philadelphia, hereby adopt this `Philadelphia Home Rule Charter,' prepared by the Philadelphia Charter Commission under authority of the Act of the General Assembly of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, approved April 21, 1949, P.L. 665. Section 1-100 of the Charter defines the City's powers and recites that the City shall have and may exercise all powers and authority of local self-government pursuant to Section 1, of Article XV, of the Constitution, and the Act of the General Assembly approved April 21, 1949. Article XV, Section 1, provides, we repeat, that cities may adopt their own charters and may exercise the powers and authority of local self-government, subject, however, to such restrictions, limitations, and regulations, as may be imposed by the Legislature. It is clear, therefore, beyond any possibility of doubt, that the Constitution gave the Legislature the power to impose, even on the local self-government of a city, any restrictions and limitations the Legislature desired. The Legislature, in turn, in granting Philadelphia (or any other First Class City) the power of local self-government, imposed certain restrictions and limitations on the City's right and power of self-government. In particular, the enabling Act of 1949, specifically and pertinently limited the City's powers in and by Article II, Sections 17 and 18. These provide: Article II. General Grant of Powers; Limitations. Section 17. . . . Subject to the limitations hereinafter prescribed, the city taking advantage of this act and framing and adopting or amending its charter thereunder shall have and may exercise all powers and authority of local self-government and shall have complete powers of legislation and administration in relation to its municipal functions, including the power and authority to prescribe the elective city officers, who shall be nominated and elected only in the manner provided by, and in accordance with, the provisions of the Pennsylvania Election Code and its amendments, for the nomination and election of municipal officers.. . . Section 18. . . . Notwithstanding the grant of powers contained in this act, no city shall exercise powers contrary to, or in limitation or enlargement of, powers granted by acts of the General Assembly which are  . . . . (b) Applicable in every part of the Commonwealth. (c) Applicable to all cities of the Commonwealth. We therefore must examine the Pennsylvania Election Code [] and its amendments in order to determine whether they interdicted and prohibited the holding of a special election for Mayor of Philadelphia at a general election in an even-numbered year. The Election Code is a lengthy and comprehensive Act of 205 pages governing every aspect involved in the holding of elections in Pennsylvania. It is entitled, An Act Concerning elections, including general, municipal, special and primary elections . . . . Article VI of the Election Code is entitled: Dates of Elections and Primaries and Special Elections. Section 601 of Article VI specifically provides that the election of State officers and national representatives shall be at general elections, to be held in even-numbered years. Section 602 specifically provides that the election of all city officers shall be at municipal elections, to be held in odd-numbered years. The language of Section 602 is: The municipal election shall be held biennially on the Tuesday next following the first Monday of November in each odd-numbered year. All judges of courts of record of the various judicial districts and counties, and all county, city, borough, township, ward, school district, poor district and election officers shall be elected at the municipal election . . . . The language of Section 602 is mandatory and requires all city officers to be elected at the municipal election which shall be held in odd-numbered years. The City contends that this refers only to an election for a regular term of service, and not to elections to fill a vacancy or to other special elections. For each and all of the following reasons we disagree with this contention. In the first place, the word all is prima facie all-inclusive. In the second place, it is clear from other provisions of the Election Code and its amendments that the Legislature knew how to provide for an election to fill a vacancy (as well as for other exceptions) if and when it desired, because the Election Code of 1937 itself (a) provides for three specific exceptions to the applicability of Sections 601 and 602, and (b) by subsequent amendment provided a fourth exception. For example, Section 626 of the Election Code provides that whenever a vacancy occurs in the office of United States Senator, said vacancy shall be filled for the unexpired term . . . at a special election to be held at the time of the next general or municipal election . . . . Section 627 of the Election Code provides that whenever a vacancy occurs in the office of a Representative in Congress, . . . the Governor shall issue. . . a writ of election . . . for a special election to fill said vacancy . . . . The Governor may fix, in such writ of election, the date of the next ensuing primary or municipal election as the date for holding any such special election. Section 628 similarly provides that when a vacancy occurs in either house of the General Assembly, the presiding officer shall issue a writ of election for a special election to fill said vacancy and may fix the date of the next ensuing primary or municipal election as the date for holding any such special election. This was amended by the Act of May 16, 1940 [] and thus reenacted by the Act of April 13, 1942, [] to provide that The presiding officer may fix . . . the date of the next ensuing primary, municipal or general election as the date for holding any such special election. The intention of the Legislature as expressed in and by the Election Code of 1937 that all state and all city officers, including the Mayor, must be elected at the respective elections therein provided, is further demonstrated by the Act of May 23, 1949. [] This Act amended the Election Code by adding Section 628.1 which provides for elections to fill vacancies in the office of a member of the council or legislative body of any municipality. This Amendment had the effect of modifying Section 602 by specifically allowing a special election to fill councilmanic vacancies, and in practical effect changed, as we shall see, the law with reference to a councilmanic vacancy as laid down in Commonwealth ex rel. Maurer v. Witkin, 344 Pa. 191, 25 A. 2d 317. Significantly, and strikingly, the Legislature made no change with respect to an election to fill a vacancy in the office of the Mayor or in any other local office except Councilman, and therefore the Legislature once again clearly indicated its intention that Section 602 should govern all other elections for city offices including an election to fill a vacancy in the office of Mayor. It is clear from the aforesaid all-inclusive language of the Election Code, and especially when construed together with the aforesaid exceptions, that the only time a special election to fill a vacancy may be held in a different year than that prescribed for a regular term election, is when a vacancy has occurred in the office of United States Senator, or Congressman, or a Senator or Representative in the General Assembly, or in a councilmanic or municipal legislative office. This is fortified by the general canon of interpretation that the mention of a specific matter in a general statute implies the exclusion of others not mentioned ( expressio unius est exclusio altering ): Scott Township Appeal, 388 Pa. 539, 543, 130 A. 2d 695; Commonwealth ex rel. Maurer v. Witkin, 344 Pa. 191, 25 A. 2d 317; Lemoyne Borough Annexation Case, 176 Pa. Superior Ct. 38, 50, 107 A. 2d 149. When the framers of the comprehensive magnum opus known as the Philadelphia Home Rule Charter commenced to write the Charter, a careful analysis of the Constitution and of the Acts of Assembly hereinbefore set forth, as well as of two decisions of this Court (which will be hereinafter discussed) would have disclosed the following facts: (1) No provision of the Home Rule Charter could violate the Constitution of the United States, or the Constitution of Pennsylvania, or the Enabling Act of 1949, or the Election Code, or any prior decision of this Court; (2) the City could not (because of the prohibition in the enabling Act) exercise powers contrary to or in limitation or enlargement of powers granted by Acts of the General Assembly which are applicable in every part of the Commonwealth or applicable to all cities of the Commonwealth; (3) a Mayor of Philadelphia could be nominated and elected only in accordance with the provisions of the Pennsylvania Election Code and that Code required that an election for Mayor, whether for a full regular term or to fill a vacancy in the office, must be held in an odd-numbered year. Not only did the Pennsylvania Election Code so provide, as hereinabove set forth in great detail, but the Supreme Court had expressly announced in clear and forceful language that a vacancy in the office of Mayor could not be filled at a general election in an even-numbered year. The Charter framers therefore should have known that Section 3-500 of the Charter, which provided that an election to fill a vacancy for an unexpired term in the office of Mayor, should be held at the next municipal or general election first occurring more than 30 days before the next election, was unauthorized and illegal.