Opinion ID: 1789666
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 3

Heading: Proceedings of the 1973 Constitutional Convention

Text: A review of the proceedings of the 1973 Constitutional Convention, particularly the debates, makes it evident that no change was intended from the prior civil service provisions in the Constitution nor in their interpretations. That convention did not expand, contract or otherwise modify the concept of office of the governor. Rather, the convention re-enacted the precise term which had been included in the former constitution which had been subject to judicial scrutiny and interpretation in such cases as Murtagh. The following colloquy took place on the 94th day of the 1973 convention proceedings: Mr. Henry: Would you yield to a question from Mr. Stagg Mr. Dennery: Yes, sir. Mr. Stagg: Mr. Dennery, in the bottom of page 1 and the top of page 2, there is a considerable listing of people who are exempt or are not under the classified service. In about line 12, it mentions the offices of the governor. If I'm not too far wrong on my facts here, in recent months, the Centrex operators were changed from, I think, classified service, to be a part of the Division of Administration. I believe in addition to that, the guards out here on the parking lot may have similarly, or some other groups of employees were moved to the Division of Administration and therefore, I presume, out from under the classified service. When you say here simply, `the office of the governor,' how far does that extend and what is the ability of the governor to move people who are protected by being classified employees and shoved over into unclassified positions, and, thereby, able to be fired without cause. Mr. Dennery: Mr. Stagg, the only way I can answer that question is to refer you to a case in New Orleans many years ago when the mayor of the city at that time did exactly what you suggest could be done. The court slapped him down and said you could not enlarge `the office of the governor' by taking in extraneous divisions and say they are part of his office. It means the office of the governor in a normal sense of the word. (Emphasis added) XXXI Constitutional Convention of 1973, Verbatim Transcripts, December 7, 1973, p. 74. Confronted with the task of interpreting and applying Constitutional language (employees. . . of the office of the governor), the Court of Appeal in In Re Division of Administration and in this case, indirectly, relied in large measure upon the Legislature's intent when it created the Division of Administration in 1948 and upon the 1976 Legislature's expression of the intent and purpose of the 1948 legislation. [7] That reliance is not well-placed. The function of interpreting laws, and even more so constitutional provisions, is not legislative but judicial. In State Licensing Board for Contractors v. State Civil Service Commission, 240 La. 331, 123 So.2d 76 (1960) a case similar to the one at hand, the Legislature adopted a resolution, just as the Legislature has done in this case, stating that it was its intention in the 1956 act which created the State Licensing Board not to place its employees in the classified service of the state. Rejecting the legislative intent expressed in that resolution, this Court stated: To interpret laws is not a legislative, but a judicial function, and this fundamental rule of constitutional law has not only been uniformly observed in the pronouncements of the courts of this State, but has been enunciated by the highest tribunals in numerous other states of the union (citations omitted); and the rationale of the principle, based on separation of powers, is more compelling when, as in the case at bar, the earlier enactment is not couched in doubtful phraseology and is at the time of the Legislature's declaration of intent involved in litigation. (Emphasis added) Even if the Legislature in 1948 did intend, as the 1976 Legislature proclaimed, that the employees of the Division of Administration be in the unclassified service, such intention is irrelevant. The status of the employees of the Division of Administration is governed by the Constitution and the appropriate judicial interpretation of the Constitutional language employees. . . of the office of the governor. While those employees may organizationally [8] and functionally [9] be under or within that segment of state government designated office of the governor, they are not employees of the office of the governor within the meaning of Article 10, § 2(B)(10) of the Louisiana Constitution of 1974, that is, employees in the office of the person elected governor of the State of Louisiana.