Opinion ID: 1906006
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 5

Heading: applicability of sdcl 1-26 (sdapa)

Text: It is appellant's argument that under the South Dakota Administrative Procedures Act, SDCL 1-26-36(3), (4) and (6) specifically, the Board's decision may be reversed as being arbitrary, capricious and contrary to law. Before we reach the question of whether the Board's decision is reversible under any subsection of SDCL 1-26-36, we must determine whether a decision made by the Board of County Commissioners, Lawrence County, is even subject to SDCL 1-26. The question becomes whether the Lawrence County Board of Commissioners is an agency within the definition of that term as it is found in SDCL 1-26-1(1). [5] The statute then in existence read as follows: (1) `Agency' means each state board, commission, department, or officer, authorized by law to make rules or to determine contested cases, other than the Legislature and the courts and any agency under the jurisdiction of such exempt departments, and including the department of game, fish and parks as provided by § 41-2-32; (Emphasis added.) Where the term agency is defined by statute the statutory definition is controlling. 73 C.J.S. Public Administrative Bodies and Procedure, § 6. It would appear from reading the statute that the Lawrence County Board of Commissioners does not fit the definition given. The county commission is not a state commission with the authority to make rules or to determine contested cases, but, rather, is a commission with county-wide jurisdiction and certain statutory powers as are found in SDCL 7-8-20 to 7-8-26.