Monier v. Gallen

Decision Date05 May 1980
Docket NumberNo. 80-020,80-020
Citation414 A.2d 1297,120 N.H. 333
PartiesRobert B. MONIER, President of the Senate and Individually et al. v. Hugh J. GALLEN, Governor.
CourtNew Hampshire Supreme Court

Richard A. Hampe, Concord, by brief and orally for plaintiffs, Robert B. Monier and Alan D. Rock.

Frederick J. Griffin, Jr., Concord, by brief and orally for plaintiffs, George B. Roberts, Jr. and John B. Tucker.

Paul McEachern, Portsmouth legal counsel to the Governor, by brief and orally for defendant Hugh J. Gallen, Governor.

Thomas D. Rath, Atty. Gen. (Steven J. McAuliffe, Asst. Atty. Gen., orally), for the State.

BROCK, Justice.

This is a petition for declaratory judgment brought against Hugh Gallen, as Governor by certain members of the General Court in their capacity as president of the senate, speaker of the house, chairman and vice-chairman of the legislative fiscal committee and as individual taxpayers. The plaintiffs seek a judicial declaration that the creation of twelve new positions within the Governor's office, proposed in connection with a federally funded comprehensive children and youth project, is unlawful absent prior legislative fiscal committee review and approval. See RSA 14:30-a; Laws 1979, 434:22. The case is before this court on an interlocutory transfer by the Superior Court (Johnson, J.) pursuant to RSA 491:17 and our Rule 9.

In March 1979, the Governor submitted "the state of New Hampshire's proposal to create a comprehensive youth service agency " to federal authorities. (Emphasis added). On June 1, 1979, the Governor's office was awarded $286,000 in federal funds for that purpose by the Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention, Law Enforcement Assistance Administration, Department of Justice. On September 6, 1979, the Governor, pursuant to Laws 1979, 434:22, submitted a request to the legislative fiscal committee for approval of twelve new personnel positions which would result from the acceptance of the federal funds. The fiscal committee denied the Governor's request, and the Governor now seeks to establish the same positions without the approval of the fiscal committee.

On October 10, 1979, the Governor requested the executive council to approve acceptance of the federal grant under RSA 124:4. The executive counsel approved the fund request on October 16, and designated the office of the Governor as the appropriate recipient with certain conditions. The comptroller of the State of New Hampshire then issued a warrant appropriating funds for the grant, specifying that the funds be added to the program appropriation unit for the Governor's office. The Governor proposes to appoint to his personal staff, to supervise and to control those persons employed to fill the positions established by receipt of the federal grant funds. In addition, the Governor intends that these persons will not only carry out the terms of the grant, but will be assigned by the Governor the principal duties of reviewing current State policies and programs affecting the lives of New Hampshire youth, analyzing the need for alternate or additional policies on programs on a statewide basis, and advising the Governor as to the most effective means of improving and developing State policies and programs related to youth.

The questions of law transferred to this court without ruling are:

I. Do the proposed new federally funded positions in the office of the Governor related to children and youth fairly come within the meaning of the exception for the Governor's "personal staff and consultants" found in Laws 1979, 434:22 so as to make legislative fiscal committee approval of those positions unnecessary to their valid establishment?

II. If the answer to question I is "No," are the provisions of Laws 1979, 434:22 void as an unconstitutional encroachment by the legislature upon the powers vested in the chief executive by the New Hampshire Constitution?

We first consider the question of whether the establishment of the new federally funded positions relating to children and youth within the Governor's office comes within the "personal staff and consultants" exception to required legislative fiscal committee approval. Laws 1979, 434:22.

Laws 1979, 434:22 provides that "no new personnel positions, except those . . . for personal staff and consultants, may be created by the acceptance of federal monies . . . unless such positions are approved by the fiscal committee of the general court . . . ." It is clear, therefore, that the Governor, with the concurrence of the executive council, can apply for, receive and use federal funds to establish new positions on his "personal staff" without the need for fiscal committee approval. Plaintiffs claim, however, that the "personal staff and consultants" exception does not apply to the de facto creation of a "state agency" within the Governor's office. Relying upon legislative history, they argue that the exception was intended to apply only to persons acknowledged as being on the Governor's staff, within his office, performing administrative, receptionist and clerical tasks, not those performing essentially "agency" functions within agencies created by gubernatorial executive order.

Proper interpretation of this statute, Laws 1979, 434:22, requires both an understanding of its constitutional context and the history surrounding its adoption. This court has recognized the Governor's constitutional power to create "agencies" by executive order. Opinion of the Justices, 118 N.H. 582, 587, 392 A.2d 125, 129 (1978); Jeannont v. N. H. Personnel Comm'n, 116 N.H. 376, 359 A.2d 638 (1976). The exercise of that power, however, cannot "exceed the Governor's constitutional authority or conflict with appropriate legislative mandates . . . ." Opinion of the Justices, 118 N.H. at 587, 392 A.2d at 129; O'Neil v. Thomson, 114 N.H. 155, 316 A.2d 168 (1974).

The General Court, having the authority under N.H.Const. pt. II, art. 5, to create or abolish nonconstitutional agencies, officials or positions, enacted Laws 1979, 434:22. The effect of this statute is to place limitations upon the power of the executive branch to accept federal grants-in-aid under RSA ch. 124 when acceptance will result in the creation of new personnel positions. It was adopted as a result of the legislature's concern that the executive could, without prior legislative approval, create State agencies by executive order, thereby creating new positions entailing express or implied future burdens upon the State budget.

The transcript of the committee of conference on the 1978-1979 State budget contains extensive discussion by its members regarding the intent behind Laws 1977, 600:112. Such discussions can often serve as an aid to the courts in construing a statute. See 2A Sutherland, Statutory Construction § 48.10 (4th ed. 1973). Speaker Roberts said the concern was not with personal staff but "the concern is about the creation of agencies . . . (with) some continuing obligations to pay for them." After preparing language to deal with this problem, the legislators permitted the Governor only to hire "personal staff and consultants." The president of the senate in response to a question from Chairman Tucker of the house appropriations committee as to the "legislative intent," said that while "a new agency" would need fiscal committee approval, gubernatorial "personal staff and consultants" would not.

While recognizing the reasons for legislative concern in this area, the Governor responds that in this instance he has not created an executive order agency and argues that, unlike persons hired to fill newly created agency positions, appointees to his "personal staff" do not represent a potential burden on the State treasury. This is so because they have no expectation of continued employment beyond the present Governor's term of office; they have no rights, privileges or permanent benefits under the classified system and are not unclassified employees subject to removal proceedings in accordance with RSA 4:1 (Supp.1979). Cf. Jeannont v. N. H. Personnel Comm'n, 116 N.H. 376, 359 A.2d 638 (1976).

There is, however, in the record before us an abundance of evidence which indicates that the closely integrated positions to be created under the comprehensive youth services grant are, because of their unitary purpose, scope and number, in fact an entity more analagous to a State agency, created either by executive order or statute, than to individual members of a gubernatorial staff. The grant as approved by federal authorities pledges "complete state financial support" beginning with fiscal year 1982. Further, the program and office being created would exist for a period of three years, a period transcending both gubernatorial and legislative terms of office.

We further note that the 1979 legislature reenacted with substantial amendments specific authorization for an executive branch agency to deal with the problems of children and youth. RSA 170-D:4 (Supp.1979) provides that the commission on children and youth shall:

I. Research and identify the needs of children and youth in New Hampshire.

II. Review state services and policies affecting children and youth, identify problems, and recommend solutions.

III. Review and recommend appropriate legislative initiatives to promote the welfare of children and youth.

IV. Assist other agencies and individuals in assessing and improving the quality and availability of services to children and youth in New Hampshire.

V. Promote participation by young people and parents in all commission activities.

Money was appropriated and then the legislature provided in section 5 that "every effort shall be made to apply for federal funds for carrying out the purposes of RSA 170-D . . . ." Laws 1979, 472:5. These purposes closely parallel those of the grant at issue. The scope and kind of "legislative activity" that we find here distinguishes this case from that found in Opinion of...

To continue reading

Request your trial
5 cases
  • N.H. Health Care Ass'n v. Governor
    • United States
    • New Hampshire Supreme Court
    • January 21, 2011
    ...of powers doctrine. See N.H. CONST. pt. II, art. 41; Opinion of the Justices, 116 N.H. at 412, 360 A.2d 116; cf. Monier v. Gallen, 120 N.H. 333, 336, 414 A.2d 1297 (1980) (while Governor may create executive branch agencies, “[t]he exercise of that power ... cannot exceed the Governor's con......
  • Opinion of the Justices
    • United States
    • New Hampshire Supreme Court
    • June 23, 1981
    ...operation of government, and that consequently there must be some overlapping of the power of each branch. Monier v. Gallen, 120 N.H. 333, 339, 414 A.2d 1297, 1300 (1980); Opinion of the Justices, 87 N.H. 492, 493, 179 A. 344, 345 (1935). The drafters of our constitution recognized this pol......
  • Smith Ins., Inc. v. Grievance Committee
    • United States
    • New Hampshire Supreme Court
    • December 23, 1980
    ...Art. 37. This court has consistently recognized, however, that the three branches cannot be completely separate. Monier v. Gallen, 120 N.H. ---, ---, 414 A.2d 1297, 1301 (1980); Opinion of the Justices, 118 N.H. 582, 585, 392 A.2d 125, 217 Under the separation of powers article of the New H......
  • Maxi Drug N., Inc. v. Comm'r, N.H. Dep't of Health & Human Servs.
    • United States
    • New Hampshire Supreme Court
    • August 22, 2006
    ...Laws 1994, 412:1).The minutes of a committee hearing may serve as an aid to the court in construing a statute. See Monier v. Gallen, 120 N.H. 333, 336, 414 A.2d 1297 (1980) (relying upon transcript of the committee of conference). The Senate Committee on Public Institutions, Health and Huma......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT