Opinion ID: 1981494
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 3

Heading: the grand rapids police had authority to impound krezen's car

Text: The officers acted in conformity with the standard procedure of the police department of impounding all vehicles where the defendant was placed under arrest and there was no other driver present in the vehicle to take control of the vehicle. The reason for this policy, according to the officers who testified at the suppression hearing, was to protect officers [7] from claims filed by persons who suffered, or claimed to have suffered, thefts or other losses involving vehicles not impounded while the driver was under arrest. [8] Under our constitution, the powers granted generally to municipalities, and the specific powers granted by the Grand Rapids charter to its police, the Grand Rapids police had basic authority to impound the car of Sandra Krezen. [9] Const 1963, art 7, § 21 requires the Legislature to provide for the incorporation of cities and villages: The legislature shall provide by general laws for the incorporation of cities and villages. Such laws shall limit their rate of ad valorem property taxation for municipal purposes, and restrict the power of cities and villages to borrow money and contract debts. Each city and village is granted power to levy other taxes for public purposes, subject to limitations and prohibitions provided by this constitution or by law. The Legislature has indeed provided for the incorporation of villages, MCL 61.1; MSA 5.1201, cities of the fourth class, MCL 81.2; MSA 5.1592, and cities of the fifth class and home rule cities, MCL 117.7; MSA 5.2086. For villages [10] and fourth class cities, [11] the Legislature specifically provides statutes delineating the authority of the local governing bodies over their police and the general powers of the police. For fifth class and home rule cities, the Legislature provides two relevant provisions. First, MCL 117.3(j); MSA 5.2073(j) provides that a mandatory charter provision is [f]or the public peace and health and for the safety of persons and property. MCL 117.4j; MSA 5.2083 provides more generally for municipal powers: Each city may in its charter provide: (1) For the establishment of any department that it may deem necessary for the general welfare of the city, and for the separate incorporation thereof: Provided, however, That these provisions shall not be construed to extend to and include public schools; (2) For altering, amending or repealing any special act affecting any municipal concerns or existing municipal department, but the department in control of the public schools shall not be construed to be a municipal department; (3) For the exercise of all municipal powers in the management and control of municipal property and in the administration of the municipal government, whether such powers be expressly enumerated or not; for any act to advance the interests of the city, the good government and prosperity of the municipality and its inhabitants and through its regularly constituted authority to pass all laws and ordinances relating to its municipal concerns subject to the constitution and general laws of this state. [Emphasis added.] The general grant of power to municipalities which is authorized by Const 1963, art 7, § 21, and which is activated in the various state statutes concerning the charters for local municipalities, is further highlighted in Const 1963, art 7, § 22: Under general laws the electors of each city and village shall have the power and authority to frame, adopt and amend its charter, and to amend an existing charter of the city or village heretofore granted or enacted by the legislature for the government of the city or village. Each such city and village shall have power to adopt resolutions and ordinances relating to its municipal concerns, property and government, subject to the constitution and law. No enumeration of powers granted to cities and villages in this constitution shall limit or restrict the general grant of authority conferred by this section. There is simply no basis to assume that Grand Rapids does not have the power to authorize, implicitly or expressly, its police department to engage in activities incident to valid arrests such as impounding vehicles. Art 7, § 22 expressly states that such cities have power to adopt resolutions and ordinances relating to its municipal concerns, property and government, subject to the constitution and law. The Convention Comment to art 7, § 22 states that [t]he new language is a more positive statement of municipal powers, giving home rule cities and villages full power over their own property and government, subject to this constitution and law. The Grand Rapids City Charter establishes the city manager as the director of public safety, in charge of the police department. Grand Rapids Charter, § 96(a). The city manager shall prescribe all rules and regulations for the control and management of the police force.... § 96(d). Most important is the general grant of authority given by the charter to police officers: The Director of Public Safety and all City police officers and detectives shall have and possess the power and authority usually conferred upon metropolitan police. [§ 96(g).] So long as the local municipalities and their agents, such as the police in the instant case, do not circumvent the constitution or a preeminent state statute, the constitutional authority of the municipality is not abridged. Absent such a violation, this Court cannot hinder the local government's exercise of the police power. In the instant case, the parties have not briefed or argued whether or not the Grand Rapids police possess the basic power to impound cars. [12] Given the constitutional framework and the apparent grants of authority to the police, there is no basis in this case for abridging that authority.