Opinion ID: 1111135
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 8

Heading: Statutes are interpreted to avoid absurd or discriminatory consequences.

Text: It is a well-settled principle of statutory construction that, where possible, courts will not allow statutes to have absurd or discriminatory consequences. [31] A construction that would lead to an absurdity or to discriminatory treatment will be avoided if it can be done without violating legislative intent. [32] If the interpretation advanced by Dawson is accepted  that each commissioner is appointed for the specific time period outlined in § 1, we would be constrained to hold the Legislature intended to discriminate between professions to be represented by membership on the Commission. Section 1 requires that membership shall consist of at least one person with a background in engineering or geology, one person with a background in labor or workers' safety, one person with a background in agriculture or soil conservation, one person with a background in transportation, one person with a background in economic development or banking, one person with a background in public utilities, one person with a background in natural resources, and two at large members. If Dawson's argument is followed to its logical conclusion, it would require this Court to determine that the Legislature intended for one member of these various disciplines to always be subject to shorter term limits than his/her colleagues. For example, if the person appointed to the one year term was educated in agriculture or soil conservation, that position  the one representing these interests  would always suffer from inexperience on the Commission. Certain interests would be diminished as this pattern of discrimination continued. There is nothing in the Mining Code to indicate that the Legislature intended this result. Were we to agree with Dawson's arguments there would automatically be three vacancies created on the Mining Commission  only six positions would be lawfully occupied. One of the reasons for staggering terms on state boards and commissions is to ensure that an incumbent Governor will not stack these entities in the favor of one political party.