Court Opinion

ID: 9565968
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-21 19:30:58.002496+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T09:18:23.011042
License: Public Domain

JOHNSON, Justice,
specially concurring.
While I concur with the analysis of the lead opinion, it goes further than necessary. The analysis should begin and end with reference to the bylaws of the Agency-
This ease is predicated on the refusal of the chairperson and the secretary of the Agency (1) to execute a resolution authorizing them to publish a notice of sale of the bonds and to execute the bonds, (2) to publish the notice of sale, and (3) to execute the bonds. The bylaws provide that the board of commissioners of the Agency may delegate to the executive director the duty of the chairperson to execute the bonds and other legal documents authorized by the board. The bylaws also provide that if the secretary of the agency refuses to execute the bonds or any other legal documents and instruments authorized by the board, the vice chairperson or another person designated by the board may perform these duties.
In my view, the board of commissioners of the Agency has full authority under these provisions to resolve the dilemma presented in the petition for writ of mandamus by simply delegating to the executive director and the vice chairperson the duties the chairperson and secretary refuse to perform.
With this in mind, this case looks remarkably like an attempt to obtain an advisory opinion from this Court.
BISTLINE, J. concurs.