Does the rule against cross-district nominations to the Mississippi Gulf Coast Convention Bureau apply to all 9 county-appointed members or just the 5 district-tied seats?

Plain-English summary

The Mississippi Gulf Coast Regional Convention and Visitors Bureau has a 15-member board, with the Harrison County Board of Supervisors appointing 9 of those members. The 2013 enabling legislation says: "(n)o supervisor may nominate any person from another supervisor's district to be a member of the bureau."

The Board attorney asked whether this prohibition applies to all 9 appointed seats or only to the 5 seats tied to specific supervisors' districts.

The AG: all 9.

Section 3(2)(a) of HB 1716 (2013) requires the Board to appoint 9 members "with at least one (1) member from each district of a supervisor upon the recommendation of such supervisor. No supervisor may nominate any person from another supervisor's district to be a member of the bureau…."

The Mississippi Supreme Court's Chandler case sets the rule: when statutory language is "plain and unambiguous and conveys a clear and definite meaning, there is no occasion to resort to rules of statutory interpretation." The 2007 Collins opinion (citing Marx v. Broom) confirms the meaning of an unambiguous statute cannot be restricted or enlarged.

HB 1716 says "no supervisor may nominate any person from another supervisor's district." No carve-out for the additional 4 seats beyond the 5 district-tied ones. The prohibition applies to all 9 nominations.

Section 7-5-25 limits AG opinions to prospective questions; the AG declined to validate or invalidate past appointments, providing only forward-looking guidance.

What this means for you

For Harrison County supervisors

Under the opinion, the bar that "no supervisor may nominate any person from another supervisor's district to be a member of the bureau" applies to all nine seats the Harrison County Board of Supervisors fills, not just the five tied to specific supervisors' districts. The opinion reaches that by reading the language as "plain and unambiguous," which under Chandler applies as written, with no carve-out for the four seats beyond the five district-tied ones. So a supervisor's nominations for any of the nine seats are limited to residents of that supervisor's own district. The opinion speaks to future appointments only; under Section 7-5-25 it does not validate or invalidate any past appointment.

For county attorneys advising similar boards

The opinion applies a settled interpretation rule: where a local and private law's nomination restriction is unambiguous, it is read as written and "cannot be restricted or enlarged" (Collins, citing Marx v. Broom). It does not read in an implied exception for seats the law does not separately carve out. The opinion does not address residency outside the county, vacancies, member terms, compensation, or board size; it answers only whether the cross-district bar reaches all nine seats.

Common questions

Q: Does the cross-district nomination bar apply to all nine county-appointed seats or just the five district seats?
A: All nine. The opinion holds the restriction "applies to the nominations of all nine bureau members appointed by the Harrison County Board of Supervisors," because the statute "does not limit this to a subset of the bureau members."

Q: Can a Harrison County supervisor nominate a resident of another supervisor's district to the Bureau?
A: No. HB 1716 (2013) says "[n]o supervisor may nominate any person from another supervisor's district to be a member of the bureau," and the opinion applies that to every one of the nine seats.

Q: Did the AG rule on appointments already made?
A: No. The opinion states that under Section 7-5-25 the office issues opinions on prospective questions only and "offer[s] no opinion on the validity of any past appointments," providing guidance for the future only.

Q: Why did the AG read the bar to cover all nine seats?
A: Because the language is plain. The opinion cites Chandler that an unambiguous statute applies as written with "no occasion to resort to rules of statutory interpretation," and Collins (citing Marx v. Broom) that the meaning of an unambiguous statute "cannot be restricted or enlarged." Since the law states the bar without limiting it to a subset, it reaches all nine.

Background and statutory framework

The Mississippi Gulf Coast Regional Convention and Visitors Bureau is established by Local and Private legislation:

• Chapter 926, H.B. No. 1716, Local and Private Laws of 2013: enabling legislation
• Section 3(2)(a): structure of appointments
  • 9 members appointed by Harrison County Board of Supervisors
  • At least 1 member from each supervisor's district
  • "No supervisor may nominate any person from another supervisor's district to be a member of the bureau"
• Other 6 members appointed by other entities (cities, etc.)

Statutory interpretation:

• Chandler v. City of Jackson Civil Service Comm., 687 So. 142, 144 (Miss. 1997): plain and unambiguous statutes apply as written
• MS AG Op., Collins (Feb. 2, 2007) (citing Marx v. Broom, 632 So. 2d 1315, 1318 (Miss. 1994)): unambiguous statutes cannot be restricted or enlarged

AG limits:

• Section 7-5-25: AG opinions are prospective; no validation/invalidation of past appointments

Citations and references

Statutes:

• Miss. Code Ann. § 7-5-25, AG opinion authority
• Chapter 926, H.B. No. 1716 (Local and Private Laws of 2013), Mississippi Gulf Coast Regional Convention and Visitors Bureau

Cases cited:

• Chandler v. City of Jackson Civil Service Comm., 687 So. 142, 144 (Miss. 1997), unambiguous statutes
• Marx v. Broom, 632 So. 2d 1315, 1318 (Miss. 1994), no restriction/enlargement of unambiguous statutes

Prior AG opinions cited:

• MS AG Op., Collins (Feb. 2, 2007), unambiguous statute meaning

Source

• Landing page: https://attorneygenerallynnfitch.com/divisions/opinions-and-policy/recent-opinions/
• Original PDF: https://attorneygenerallynnfitch.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/08/T.Holleman-August-2-2022-House-Bill-No.-1716-2013-Reg.-Session.pdf

Original opinion text

August 2, 2022

Tim C. Holleman, Esq.
Attorney, Harrison County Board of Supervisors
1720 23rd Avenue
Gulfport, Mississippi 39501

Re: House Bill No. 1716 (2013 Reg. Session)

Dear Mr. Holleman:

The Office of the Attorney General has received your request for an official opinion.

Background

The Mississippi Gulf Coast Regional Convention and Visitors Bureau is governed by a 15-member board, with the Harrison County Board of Supervisors appointing nine of the members. Chapter 926, H. B. No. 1716 (Local and Private Laws of 2013). The enabling local and private legislation provides that "(n)o supervisor may nominate any person from another supervisor's district to be a member of the bureau." Id.

Question Presented

Does the prohibition contained in Chapter 926, H. B. No. 1716 (Local and Private Laws of 2013) against a supervisor nominating a person from another supervisor's district to be a member of the Mississippi Gulf Coast Regional Convention and Visitors Bureau apply to the nominations of all nine members appointed to the bureau or only the five members that are required to be appointed from each of the five supervisors' districts?

Brief Response

The legislation establishing the Mississippi Gulf Coast Regional Convention and Visitors Bureau provides that no supervisor may nominate any person from another supervisor's district to be a member of the bureau. This restriction applies to the nominations of all nine bureau members appointed by the Harrison County Board of Supervisors.

Applicable Law and Discussion

As an initial matter, we note that opinions of this office are issued on prospective questions of law pursuant to Mississippi Code Annotated Section 7-5-25. Official opinions do not validate or invalidate past actions. In our phone conversation, you stated that you are seeking this opinion for clarification on future appointments. We offer no opinion on the validity of any past appointments and provide the following for future guidance only.

Section 3(2)(a) of House Bill No. 1716 provides, in part: "The board of supervisors of Harrison County shall appoint nine (9) members of the bureau with at least one (1) member from each district of a supervisor upon the recommendation of such supervisor. No supervisor may nominate any person from another supervisor's district to be a member of the bureau…." Chapter 926, H. B. No. 1716 (Local and Private Laws of 2013) (emphasis added).

"Where the language used by the legislature in a statute is plain and unambiguous and conveys a clear and definite meaning, there is no occasion to resort to rules of statutory interpretation." Chandler v. City of Jackson Civil Service Comm., 687 So. 142, 144 (Miss. 1997). Further, the meaning of an unambiguous statute cannot be restricted or enlarged. MS AG Op., Collins at *1 (Feb. 2, 2007) (citing Marx v. Broom, 632 So.2d 1315, 1318 (Miss. 1994)).

H.B. 1716 unambiguously states that no supervisor may nominate any person from another supervisor's district. The statute does not limit this to a subset of the bureau members. Thus, the prohibition against a supervisor nominating a person from another supervisor's district applies to the nominations of all nine bureau members appointed by the Harrison County Board of Supervisors.

If this office may be of any further assistance to you, please do not hesitate to contact us.

Sincerely,

LYNN FITCH, ATTORNEY GENERAL

By: /s/ Beebe Garrard
Beebe Garrard
Special Assistant Attorney General