Wyoming Advisory Opinions August 25, 1999: AGO 1999-004 (August 25, 1999)

Wyoming Attorney General Opinions

1999.

AGO 1999-004.

FROM: Gay Woodhouse Attorney General

Michael L. Hubbard Deputy Attorney General

QUESTIONS PRESENTED:

What are the restrictions on the Miner's Hospital Fund? If the fund were used for other than the stated purpose, what ramifications would result?

Is there a mechanism to free the Miner's Hospital Funds for other uses?

SHORT ANSWERS:

1) So long as the funds are spent in a manner reasonably calculated to provide hospital services to disabled or incapacitated miners then the purpose of the land grant is fulfilled. Any other use may result in litigation.

2) Congress could amend the Act of Admission to free the funds for other uses.

DISCUSSION

A. USE OF FUNDS

Pursuant to the Act of Admission the State of Wyoming received land grants from the federal government. The land grants found at Section 11 of the Act of Admission were provided in various amounts for specific purposes. For example, Section 11 provides for the following:

for a hospital for miners who shall become disabled or incapacitated to labor, while working in the mines of the state, 30,000 acres. (Emphasis added.)

Unlike other land grants found in Section 11, the above-quoted land grant for a miners' hospital did not specify a specific location for the hospital. Chapter 81 of the 1890-1891 Session Laws provided for the establishment of a hospital for miners. (1890-1891 Wyo. Sess. Laws Ch. 81.) Section 1 of the Act provided, the "hospital shall be located by a vote of the people, as hereinafter provided, which shall be a state charitable institution." Section 2 explained:

The objects of said hospital shall be to provide sustenance, care and medical and surgical attention for all miners, who shall become disabled or incapacitated to labor while working in the mines of the state, and who shall be in need of such sustenance, care or medical or surgical attention. (Emphasis added.)

Section 13 of the Act provided for a vote of the people to determine the location of the miners' hospital at the general election to be held in November of 1892. "Every city, town and village in the State of Wyoming, at or within three (3) miles of which shall be employed no less than one thousand (1,000) miners, shall be eligible as a seat for such hospital." Any city, town or village meeting this criteria could be nominated as a candidate for the location of the miners' hospital. Thereafter, a vote was held "For Seat of the Wyoming Miners' Hospital." All votes cast for any city, town or village not eligible for the hospital were excluded from the vote. See Section 19. As we know, Rock Springs was selected as the site for the miners' hospital.

In 1893, the Wyoming legislature appropriated money for the building and equipment of a hospital at or near the town of Rock Springs in Sweetwater County. (1893 Wyo. Sess. Laws Ch. 18.) A statewide mill levy (3/4 of the mill) was imposed as the "State Hospital building tax" to build the new hospital. An additional 1/4 of one mill was imposed for maintenance of the hospital, which tax was known as the "State Hospital maintenance tax." (1893 Wyo. Sess. Laws Ch. 18, 2 and 3.)

The Revised Statutes of 1899 located the State Miners' Hospital at Rock Springs, "to provide sustenance, care and medical and surgical attention for all miners who shall become disabled or incapacitated to labor while working in the mines of the state, and who shall be in need of such sustenance, care or medical or surgical attention, and to such other persons as may be admitted under the laws, rules and regulations established for the government thereof." The Revised Statutes of 1899 also changed the name of the hospital from the Wyoming State Miners' Hospital to 'The Wyoming General Hospital." R.S., Chapter 3, Sections 660-661.

In 1947, the Wyoming legislature conveyed the Wyoming General Hospital located at Rock Springs to Sweetwater County. The same act abolished the Wyoming General Hospital. Section 2 of the 1947 Act provided in part:

That while said property is operated and maintained as a hospital for miners who shall become disabled or incapacitated for labor while working in the mines of the State, or shall make provision for the hospitalization of such miners in such institution, the income from land granted to the State of Wyoming the United States of America under the provisions of the Act admitting said State to the Union, approved July 10, 1890, . . . and the income from proceeds derived from the sales of said lands or portion thereof, shall, as they accrue, be paid to said county to be used for the purposes for which said Federal Grant was made.

(1947 Wyo. Sess. Laws Ch. 64.)

In a formal opinion dated July 21, 1983, Op. Atty Gen. No. 83-012, this office explained that the above-quoted statute was repealed in 1974 by the Funds Consolidation Act that placed the miners' hospital land income fund as an account within the general fund and the miners' hospital permanent land fund was made an account within the permanent land fund. (1974 Wyo. Sess. Laws Ch. 16.) The opinion also explained that the only other reference to the miners' hospital was in the Act of Admission. As noted in the 1983 opinion:

[B]ecause there is no current Wyoming statute directing that funds received as the result of a grant of 30,000 acres of land to support a miners' hospital be paid to any specific hospital, it appears that these monies could be paid to any hospital that treats miners who have become disabled or incapacitated to labor while working in the mines of the State.

We would also note that there is no current Wyoming statute that designates Rock Springs, or any other location in Wyoming, as the seat for the miners' hospital.

Section 12 of the Act of Admission provided in pertinent part:

and the lands granted by this section shall be held, appropriated, and disposed of exclusively for the purposes herein mentioned, in such manner as the legislature of the state may provide. (Emphasis added.)

In Article 18, Section 2 of the Wyoming Constitution, Wyoming agrees to accept the grants of land from the federal government with the conditions and limitations that may be imposed by the acts or acts of Congress making such grants or donations. Article 18, Section 2 provides:

The proceeds from the sale and rental of all lands and other property donated, granted or received, or that may hereafter be donated, granted or received, from the United States or any other source, shall be inviolably appropriated and applied to the specific purposes specified in the original grant or gifts. (Emphasis added.)

In United States v. New Mexico, 536 F.2d 1324 (10th Cir. 1976), the Tenth Circuit Court of Appeals held:

The wording of the Enabling Act evidences a determination by Congress that the health needs of New Mexico miners could best be provided by a separate hospital for miners. To imply a more expansive purpose for the trust than that stated in the Enabling Act is to indulge in a license of construction which Congress intended to prevent.

Id. 536 F.2d at 1327.

The court explained that since the purpose of the grant was to establish and maintain a miners' hospital, the funds could not be spent at other hospitals even though such money is being used to provide health care for miners. Furthermore, the hospital must be operated as a licensed and certified general hospital. At a minimum the hospital must afford surgical care. Id. 536 F.2d at 1328-1829.

B. EXISTENCE OF A TRUST

More recently, a Utah court has questioned whether or not the language of the federal land grants for a miners' hospital created a "trust." In United States Mine Workers of America v. State of Utah, 6 F.Supp.2d 1298 (D. Utah 1998), the court held that Section 12 of the Utah Enabling Act does not create a trust relationship with the State as trustee and disabled miners as the beneficiaries. The court explained:

The Enabling Act gives wide discretion to the State to use the proceeds from the land grants in the manner that it designates as appropriate. The University Rehabilitation Center provides care to disabled miners free of charge and this is sufficient compliance under the Utah Enabling Act. Article XX of the Utah Constitution does not create a trust but merely emphasizes that the land should be used in the manner provided by law. This case is distinguishable from United States v. New Mexico, in that the New Mexico Enabling Act is vastly different from the Utah Enabling Act. Finally, school trust lands are unique in that they are held in trust pursuant to the Utah Enabling Act, the Utah Constitution and the School and Institutional Trust Lands Management Act and therefore the use of these land grants does not apply to Section 12 of the Enabling Act and the grants for a miners' hospital. (Emphasis added.)

Id. 6 F.Supp.2d at 1306-1307.

Wyoming was admitted to the Union in 1890, four years before the State of Utah in 1894. The New Mexico Enabling Act was effective July 20, 1910, twenty years after the Wyoming Act of Admission. The Wyoming Act of Admission does not contain the trust language found in the New Mexico Enabling Act. In addition, the Wyoming Constitution does not contain the trust language found in the Utah Constitution with regard to the acceptance of the federal land grants. See Article XX of the Utah Constitution.

The Utah Enabling Act is similar to the Wyoming Act of Admission in that the Utah Enabling Act simply provides the following:

for a miners' hospital for disabled miners, fifteen thousand acres; . . . and the lands granted by this section shall be held, appropriated, and disposed of exclusively for the purposes herein mentioned, in such manner as the legislature of the State may provide.

This language is similar to the language found in Section 11 of the Wyoming Act of Admission and identical to the language of Section 12 of the Wyoming Act of Admission. By comparison, the language of the New Mexico Enabling Act at Section 10 provides:

That it is hereby declared that all lands hereby granted, including those which, having been heretofore granted to the said Territory, are hereby expressly transferred and confirmed to the State, shall be by the said State held in trust, to be disposed of in whole or in part only in manner as herein provided and for the several objects specified in the respective granting and confirmatory provisions, and that the natural products and money proceeds of any of said lands shall be subject to the same trusts as the lands producing the same.

Disposition of any of said lands, or of any money or thing of value directly or indirectly derived therefrom for any object other than that which such particular lands, or the lands from which such money or thing of value shall have been derived, were granted or confirmed, or in any manner contrary to the provisions of this Act, shall be deemed a breach of trust. (Emphasis added.)

Id. 6 F.Supp.2d at 1304.

The Utah court noted "the New Mexico Enabling Act actually specifies clearly that the lands shall be held in trust and further, it does not give any discretion whatsoever to the New Mexico legislature." Id. 6 F.Supp.2d at 1304. The court also explained "[T]he Enabling Act of New Mexico and Arizona 'marked a complete and absolute departure from the enabling acts under which other states were admitted to the Union'," citing Murphy v. State, 65 Ariz. 338, 181 P.2d 336, 344 (1947). Of the first forty-eight states to enter the Union, only New Mexico and Arizona specify that lands are to be held in trust. Id. 6 F.Supp.2d at 1304-1305. Citing from Murphy v. State, supra, the court explained:

Where land was granted by the United States to the state for various purposes the acts of admission, the organic acts, or the enabling acts as passed by Congress were each specific as to the purpose for which the land was granted, but all left to the legislatures of the states full power and authority to determine how the granted lands were to be sold or leased and how and by whom the moneys derived from disposition of the lands were to be kept and preserved for the purposes for which the lands had been granted. (Emphasis added.)

Id. 6 F.Supp.2d at 1304-1305.

The court in United Mine Workers of America v. State of Utah, supra, explained, "[I]t is clear to this court that the intent of Congress changed dramatically from the time the Utah Enabling Act was passed to the time of passage of the New Mexico-Arizona Enabling Act." In addition, the court noted, "it is equally clear that at the time of the Utah Enabling Act Congress' intent was to give wide discretion to the state legislature when it came to the disposition of funds and it was not the intent of Congress that the lands be held in trust." Id. 6 F.Supp.2d at 1305. (Emphasis added.)

The court also notes that many of the cases cited in support of the trust argument come out of Arizona and New Mexico. See Lassen v. Arizona, 385 U.S. 458, 87 S.Ct. 584, 17 L.Ed.2d 515 (1967); United States v. New Mexico, 536 F.2d 1325 (10th Cir. 1976). Such cases do not necessarily control the interpretation of the Utah Enabling Act, nor the Wyoming Act of Admission. The court concluded:

Because Congress gave the State wide discretion in the manner in which the funds would be disposed of, the plain language of the statute does not create a trust in the traditional sense. This court would agree that the lands granted for a miners' hospital should not be used for a prison or a park or for that matter even a hospital that charged disabled miners for treatment in the same manner it charged all of its patients. However, the manner in which the State chooses to accommodate disabled miners is left to the discretion of the legislature under the Utah Enabling Act . . .. The fact that the legislature chose to use the funds for a rehabilitation center which treats other people in addition to miners is allowable. So long as disabled miners can use the center free of charge then the purpose of the grant has been complied with. (Emphasis added.)

Id. 6 F.Supp.2d at 1302-1303.

The State of Utah had never used the money from the land grants for a separate stand alone miners' hospital. In 1959, the money was transferred to the University of Utah for the purpose of establishing a rehabilitation center.

C. NEEDS ASSESSMENT

Interpreting the plain language of the federal land grants for the Wyoming miners' hospital there is nothing to suggest that Congress intended to create a trust. Further, there is a strong presumption that the plain language of the statute expresses Congressional intent. Id. 6 F.Supp.2d at 1302. Section 11 of the Act of Admission provides:

for a hospital for miners who shall become disabled or incapacitated to labor, while working in the mines of the state, 30,000 acres.

Section 12 provided in pertinent part that the lands would be "disposed of exclusively for the purposes herein mentioned, in such manner as the legislature of the state may provide." The Wyoming Constitution provides at Article 18, Section 2 that the proceeds "shall be inviolably appropriated and applied to the specific purposes specified in the original grant or gifts." Obviously, the money was to be used to provide hospital services for miners who become disabled or incapacitated while working in the mines of the state. As previously noted, the land grants did not specify where the miners' hospital would be located. In fact, a popular election was held in 1892 to determine where the state miners' hospital would be located. The legislature has the discretion to locate the hospital where it deems appropriate. The funds should be used to provide the greatest benefit to the disabled miners of the State of Wyoming. A needs assessment would appear to be within the discretion of the legislature and would appear to be an appropriate use of the funds. The needs assessment would be an appropriate way to determine the most effective use of the funds throughout the State of Wyoming.

The manner in which the State chooses to accommodate disabled miners is left to the discretion of the legislature. The legislature is given wide discretion when it comes to the disposition of the fund for the stated purpose, i.e., "for a hospital for miners who shall become disabled or incapacitated to labor, while working the mines of the state." We think that so long as these funds are spent in a manner reasonably calculated to provide hospital services to miners then the purpose of the land grant is fulfilled. Any other use of the funds would most likely result in litigation.

There is a mechanism to free the funds for other uses, namely federal legislation amending the Act of Admission. In fact, in 1996, Congress designated and ratified Utah's assignment of the miners' hospital funds to the University of Utah.

If we may be of further assistance, please contact us.