8 rvou od control, fire protection ing that the State has an may receive a minimum sceives for road and high- d the remainder is appor- 1 county bears to the coral «ates census. € cities, may be expended streets, including bridges ins, and che improvement which it is declared that projects, and unless it is «, oF construction of ade- allocated for any of the age facilities are a cause tribute to the prevention ke the allocation for the 1 sewage projects, in con- ¥ project, the board must ure has in the acc found dition to the alleviation € the construction of any struction of such project loyment, The board must encement of the construc- 29 t0 the relation between » of unemployment, Not- vrize the immediate con- facility otherwise eligible. © Works Board, 26 A.C. be one proposed by these 0 relation to the problem re a need for such relief nit unemployment would ¢ administered i accord- 5 that the act made a gift Section 31 of Article IV «s in violation of Section 4d more than one item of of Article IV, Section 34. purpose has a reasonable fy into that question is at >etween the declared pur- Fes, 1946) ATTORNEY GENERAL'S OPINIONS 8 pose of the act which was to alleviate and prevent unemployment, and the substan. tive provisions, which were che appropriation of money to be allocated to local agencies for the formulation of plans and acquisition of sites for the construction of public works. The coure held further thar there was but one item of appropriation for bur a single purpose, which was expressed in the act, ie, prevention and allevi- ation of unemployment; that the Legislature had nor made gifts of public moneys 1 counties ot municipal corporations nor imposed taxes for purely local purposes; and that the money was appropriated for a public purpose, primarily for the benefit of the people of the State by alleviating and preventing unemployment, and any incidental or secondary benefit to municipaliies oF private persons did not render the appropriation one for an unconstitutional purpose In view of the similarity between the act upheld in the case of City of Los Angeles v. Post War Public Works Review Board, supta, and that proposed by Sen- ace Bill 90 and Assembly Bill 60, which, it would seem were drafted co comply with the rules set forth in thar case, itis t0 be anticipated that the appellate court would follow the rules laid down in that case and uphold the constieutionality of the proposed act. Tem 4 of the Governor's Proclamation convening the First Extraordinary Ses- sion of the 56th Session of the Legislature, is as follows: “To consider and act upon legislation co appropriate money for public works.” The bills under consideration seem clearly to come within this item of the call, and there would, therefore, be no constitutional objection to them under Constina tional Arcicle V, Section 9 Opinion No. 45-250—February 11, 1946 SUBJECT: COUNTY INITIATIVE ORDINANCE TO REQUIRE SUPER. VISORS TO CONTRACT WITH HOSPITAL DISTRICT TOR CARE OF ALL COUNTY CASES, WOULD EXCEED INITIATIVE POWER PREPARED FOR: STATE SENATOR, NINTH DISTRICT, PLACERVILLE, PREPARED BY: ARIEL C. HILTON, DEPUTY ATTORNEY GENERAL, We have your zequest as to whether in @ county where « hospital district might be formed under the provisions of Statutes of 1945, Chapter 932, an ordinance could be adopted by direct vote of the people under Sections 1600 et se9. of the Hrections Code, to require that the Supervisors azrange to have such hospital care for all county cases as wel, inorder co eliminate the cost of two hospitals for the Article IV, Section 1 of the California Constitution provides for the powers and referendum which are reserved by the people and Sections 1600 to 1621, inclusive, of the Elections Code set out the method whereby the electors of @ county may exercise this initiative power, Section 2500 of the Welfare and Institutions Code provides that every county shall relieve and support chose persons of initia86 ATTORNEY GENERAL'S OPINIONS (von.7 incapacitated by age, disease, or aecidene, lawfully resident cherein, when such per- fons are not supported and relieved by their relatives or friends, their own means, by State hospitals, or by other State or private institutions, and Section 200 of the code states that the board of supervisors in each county may provide for the care and maintenance of the indigent sick or dependent poor of the county, and for that Purpose may levy the necessary property or poll taxes, or both, Section 202(a) of the Welfare and Institutions Code gives authority to che board of supervisors of a county to contract with an agency such as che hospital district above referred to and reads as follows: “The board shall not let the care, maintenance, or attendance of such indigent sick or dependent poor by contract to any person. Howeves, in cases of unusual diffculey or which require creatment or the use of facil available in the county hospital, ese board may secure ties not immediatel by agreement, for the indigent sick, hospital s county, at cost from any public hospical, clinic, rest home or sanitarium, OF ae an agreed race from any private hospital, clinic, rest home or sani tarium in the State, Such agreements shall be made only with those hos. Pitals clinics, rest homes or sanitariums which are qualified to render andl ate actually rendering services to the sick, economically and efficiently and the books of which reflece accurately in monthly statements the per diem cose of hospital service.” crvice within of without the It is therefore apparent that the general system which was provided by the [silt forthe care of the indigen sick places sat responsibil with the count boards of supervisors ‘The courts in California have, where possible, given a liberal construction to those acts which have been the subject of initiative or referendum in order to make fhese reserved powers effective, The general rule, however, is that initiative end referendum provisions apply oaly to acts which ace legislative in charscter nd ne noc applicable to chose dealing with administrative or executive functions. (Hopping 300 aU City of Richmond, 170 Cal, 605; Duyer v. Cty Connell of Berbolos 200 Cal. 505; Chase v. Kalber, 28 Cal. App. 561.) A board of supervisors exercises legislative, executive and judicial powers in Performing its various duties. The determination must therefore be mode cen Rbether an ordinance such as the one above proposed is adminisuadve or legit {ive in charactet, In Hopping v. Richmond, 170 Cal, 605, it was stated that a matter is lepisacive in character where ie affects the electorate as a whole and i tikely wo cogage the attention and arouse cither the favor or opposition of every vorer, Yet smitting the general interest of the community in the matter of street improve, mmeins (Chave v. Kalber,28 Cal. App. 561) and in the constuction ofa tll brilge SGatemn x. Board of Supervisors, 195 Cal, 686; Newsom v. Board of Supertizons sip Cal 262), i was held that in neither instance were these problems subject {nis reserved power of the people and, chat if this power were to he excrelsed the pministrative and discretionary powers of the board of supervisors, vated in thers by the provisions of the State law, would be repeated. Fen, 1946) In Chase v. Kalbe and important to consid 1 particular act of legis greatly impair or wholly i will then be presume reserve 10 themselves thi In the present situa the constant administrat discretionary power to Public agency such as « Of a resolution by the b rendered and the funds board and a decision to Ie should be noted thy district (Statutes 1 ‘care for the indigent sic 10 operate the hospical a Therefore, che hospital d It is our opinion th Of the supervisors in rel subject for initiative ac Fequire the supervisors ( an interference with the visors and is noc within 1 Opi SUBJECT: SUBSTITU GUISHED, AND T BY RETURN OF PREPARED FOR: DEP PREPARED BY: ‘I. A ‘The firse question pr Is nor every p to take the place of substituce employee? In the comment cont in pare by our opinion N Gen. 144). You state char hhas raised the question « particularly in that some service in the same school rights have been secured accordingly.Wou.7 herein, when such pers end: and Section 200 of the ay provide for the care he county, and for that oth, Section 202(a) of ard of supervisors of a bove referred to and attendance of such sson. However, in + the use of facili > board may secure bin or without the rest home or sani- ly with those hos- ified to render and lly and efficiendly statements che per b was provided by che ssibilisy with the county eral construction to. ndum in order to make ive and ve in character and are we functions. (Hopping ty Council of Berkeley, + is hae init 1nd judicial powers in rerefore be made as t0 ministrative or legisla was stated thae a macter 1 whole and is likely to ion of every voter. Yet ster of street improve- suction of a toll bridge Board of Supervisors tse problems subject t0 we t0 be exercised, the exvisors, vested in them Fes, 1956) ATTORNEY GENERAL'S OPINIONS 87 In Chate v, Kalber, 28 Cal. App. 561, the court also states that it is proper and important ro consider che consequences of applying the power of initiative to islation. If ic is found that the inevitable effece would be 4 pasticulae act of I _greatly impair or wholly destroy some other governmental power which is essential, ic will then be presumed that the people did nor intend such result and did not reserve co themselves this initiative power. In the present situation the care of the indigent sick is a matter which requites the constant administrative atcention of the board of supervisors and theit use of discretionary power to decide the mode and manner of care. A contract with a public agency such as the proposed hospital dstrice would be the proper subject of a resolution by the board after consideration of the details of the service to be rendered and the funds available. This would be an administrative funetion of the board and a decision to contract after an offer co perform by the hospital district. Ik should be aoted that the act providing the procedure for setting up the hospital dliserice (Statutes 1943, Chapter 932) does nor require that such distrce provide care for the indigent sick, but gives che hospital's board of directors full authority to operate the hospital and prescribe who shall be admitted and upon what terms, Therefore, the hospital district is under no compulsion to contract with the county 1c is ov opinion that an ordinance which lays down a policy for the guidance of the supervisors in relation to the care of the indigent sick may be the proper subject for initiative action, buc an ordinance which would itself effectuate or require the supervisors to effectuate a contract with a hospital diserice constitutes an interference with the executive and administrative powers of the boned of super. visors and is not within the initiative power, Opinion No. 45-308—February 11, 1946 SUBJECT: SUBSTITUTE AND PROBATIONARY ‘TEACHERS DISTIN. GUISHED, AND RIGHTS OF SUBSTITUTE TEACHERS BY RETURN OF TEACHERS FROM MILITARY LEA’ PREPARED FOR; DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION, § PREPARED BY: I, A, WESTPHAL, JR, DEPUTY ATTORNEY GENERAL ‘The firs question presented in your letter of November 2, 1945, reads Is not every person employed by the governing board of district to take the place of a certificated employee absent in military service a substicuce employee? In the comment contained in the letter you note that your question is prompred in pare by our opinion No. 45-230, rendered on October 1, 1945 (6 Ops. Cal. Aty. Gen, 144). You state that the return of teachers to the schools from military service has raised the question of the stanis of reachers employed during their absence, particularly ia chat some of the lateer teachers ate now in their fourth year of service in the same school district and therefore ie is important to ascertain if tenure tights have been secured so that the school districts affected may adjust their affuics accordingly,