Oregon Advisory Opinions May 22, 1963: OAG 63-72 (May 22, 1963)
Collection: Oregon Attorney General Opinions
Docket: OAG 63-72
Date: May 22, 1963
Advisory Opinion Text
OAG 63-72.
Secretary of State
You request an opinion as follows:
"May a county central committee, as authorized and ORGAnized under ORS 248.060 and ORS 248.070, invest county central com
mittee funds, the specific investment being in the form of debentures of a savings and loan company?"
The creation of a county central committee for each major political party is provided for by our statutes. A major political party is authorized to elect two committeemen from each election precinct in the county at the general primary election. ORS 248.020. These committeemen are the representatives of the party and constitute a county central committee. ORS 248.030. Their first meeting and ORGAnization are prescribed by ORS 248.060 and 248.070.
The nongovernmental character of these party officers is summed up in 29 C.J.S., Elections, § 85, p. 110, as follows:
"Officers of a political party, although provided for by statutory law, may not be regarded as public or governmental officers. So, the position of party committeemen is not usually regarded as constituting a public office, under the view that such position is merely a party position, carries with it no salary, fees, or emoluments, and such committeemen represent the members of political parties, are accountable to them alone, are not required to qualify as are other officers, and do not represent the public at large or exercise any of the sovereign powers of the state. * * *"
The framework within which political party officers govern party matters is drawn in State ex rel. Mills v. Stewart, (1922) 64 Mont. 453, 210 P. 465, as follows:
"In the absence of legislative enactment, a political party is governed by its own usages and establishes its own rules. Members of such parties may form them, reORGAnize them, and dissolve them at their will. [citing cases] Political party results from voluntary association of electors, and not from operation of law, and, in the absence of legislative regulations, possess plenary powers as to its own affairs. * * *"
See Opinions of the Attorney General, 1948-1950, p. 225; 1958-1960, p. 285.
In this state, the Legislative Assembly has outlined the authority of a county central committee and has placed a restriction upon a portion of its funds. ORS 248.150 declares:
"The county, state and city central committee of each major political party is the highest party authority and may make proper rules, regulations and resolutions for all matters of party government which are not controlled by this chapter or other laws of the state. The county central committee shall have power, by resolution of the committee or its managing or executive committee, to levy upon and collect from the nominees of its party within the county an assessment for the purpose of paying expenses of ORGAnizing the committee, the expenditures to be incurred in the management of party matters and the promotion of party success in the ensuing campaign. * * *"
By legislative enactment, therefore, a county central committee is vested with authority over "all matters of party government which are not controlled by this chapter or other laws of this state." Secondly, money derived from an assessment of party nominees is limited to distinct purposes.
Neither ORS chapter 722, governing savings and loan associations, nor any other statute, otherwise regulates the funds of a county central committee. Consequently, money in the party coffers, not derived from an assessment, is subject to the control and discretion of the committee.
We note that ORS 722.330 limits investment in certain savings and loan associations on the part of "Executors, administrators, guardians, trustees and all other fiduciaries holding funds in a fiduciary capacity." Statutes of this kind do not control the discretion of a testator or settlor nor take from them the right to invest an executor or trustee with discretion to make investments. Reily v. Fleece, (1935) 259 Ky. 330, 82 S.W. (2d) 341, 344; Everett v. Downing, (1944) 298 Ky. 195, 203, 182 S.W. (2d) 232; Marshall v. Frazier, (1938) 159 Or. 491, 534, 80 P. (2d) 42, 81 P. (2d) 132. They limit the fiduciary. For this reason, ORS 722.330 does not prevent a political party, acting through the duly constituted authority of the county central committee, from investing funds which belong to the party.
Money obtained by an assessment upon the candidates of a political party's county committee, made in accordance with party rules, may be employed for a proper party purpose where no statute decrees how the funds shall be used. Drummond et al. v. Townes et al., (1932) 169 S.C. 396, 169 S.E. 81. However, where a statute provides for the assessment of party candidates to defray the expenses of a primary election, expenditures for other expenses may not be made with the assessment money. Stevenson et al. v. Sherman et al., (Tex. Civ. App. 1950) 231 S.W. (2d) 506, err. ref.; Small v. Parker, (Tex. Civ. App. 1938) 119 S.W. (2d) 609; Kauffman v. Parker, (Tex. Civ. App. 1936) 99 S.W. (2d) 1074.
Accordingly, it is our opinion that the county central committee may purchase with county central committee funds the debentures of a savings and loan company provided that money derived from the assessment of party nominees
is not diverted from the purposes specified in ORS 248.150.