Mississippi Advisory Opinions February 13, 1990: AGO 000007339 (February 13, 1990)

AGO 000007339.

Dear Mr. Mitchell:

Attorney General Mike Moore has received your letter of request and has assigned it to me for research and reply.

Your letter presents five (5) questions which we will restate and respond to in sequence.

QUESTION NO. 1: Is a commissioner permitted to go to the courthouse to work on his own beat books (or other beat books) without having a quorum of the election commissioners present? Can he be paid for coming in on days when a quorum is not present?

RESPONSE: Mississippi Code Annotated 23-15-153 (Supp. 1989) specifies the dates on which election commissions are required to meet for the purpose of revising the registration books and pollbooks. After convening on these dates, it is the opinion of this office that individual commissioners may perform the preliminary work of identifying those individuals who have died, moved away or otherwise have become disqualified as voters without a quorum of commissioners present. However, the official act of removing the names of those individuals who have, as a matter of fact, become disqualified, must be taken by the commission as a whole or a quorum thereof. As to the compensation of individual commissioners working when a quorum is not present, it is our opinion that section 23-15-153(2) which provides the per diem for the commissioners contemplates that the commission as a whole be in session. The commission cannot be in session if a quorum is not present. However, we recognize that the nature of the work requires that individual commissioners perform certain tasks preliminary to the action of officially revising the voting records by a quorum of the commission.

Therefore, if the commission determines, consistent with the facts, that in order to fulfill its' statutory responsibilities it is necessary for individual commissioners to work when a quorum is not present and the county board of supervisors, by lawful order, authorizes compensation for such work not to exceed the total number of days allowed by statute for revising the registration books and pollbooks, individual commissioners would be entitled to compensation for such work as authorized in said order.

QUESTION NO. 2: Does each commissioner control all work pertaining to his beat or is everything to be done by the whole commission regardless of beats, etc.?

RESPONSE: As indicated in our response to question no. 1, it is the opinion of this office that only the commission can take official action in revising the registration and poll books. Insofar as this "purging" function is concerned, we find no authority in the law for any official action to be taken by an individual election commissioner acting on his own . This would also apply to the appointment of pollworkers.

QUESTION NO. 3: Does the election commission decide by majority vote each item of business for all the beats collectively?

RESPONSE: Again, we find no authority for an individual commissioner to take official action. Any official business, whether it pertains to one district or the entire county must be conducted by the commission as a whole or a quorum thereof.

QUESTION NO. 4: What does the law say about the responsibility of the board of supervisors in the work of the election commission? Do they have to approve all monies paid to or by the commission? If so, are they responsible for being certain that the law is being followed?

RESPONSE: This question pertains to the duties and responsibilities of the board of supervisors rather than the election commission. Therefore, we cannot respond with an official opinion. See Mississippi Code Annotated 7-5-25 (Supp. 1989). However, we can state that we find no authority for an election commission to authorize the payment of county funds on its own.

QUESTION NO. 5: What happens to the election commissioners who refuse to work with the majority of commissioners (as long as the commission acts according to law) and who split off to work on their own?

RESPONSE: If an individual commissioner exceeds his lawful authority he could be held personally liable for his actions and could bring into question the validity of the elections conducted by the commission.

Sincerely,

MIKE MOORE ATTORNEY GENERAL

BY: Phil Carter Special Assistant Attorney General

PC:mfd