15.307 Legislative committee on conflict of interest; appointment, duties and powers; prohibitions; violations.

351 words·~2 min read·/mi/chapter-15/15-307

A research copy — for the controlling text, always check the official state or federal source. Not legal advice.

Sec. 7.

There is created a special committee of the legislature on conflict of interest (herein referred to as the committee) to consist of 3 members of the senate and 3 members of the house of representatives, at least 1 of whom from each house shall be a member of the minority party, to be appointed in the same manner as standing committees of the senate and the house. The committee shall have the following duties and powers:

(a)It shall establish, by majority vote, its rules and procedures;

(b)Its members shall serve without compensation, but shall be entitled to actual and necessary expenses while on the business of the committee;

(c)It may, upon the request of any member of the legislature, render advisory opinions to legislators as to whether under the facts and circumstances of a particular case a legislator is interested directly or indirectly in a contract with the state or any political subdivision thereof which shall cause a substantial conflict of interest;

(d)It may insure that the identity of persons involved in any request for advisory opinions shall not be disclosed in the request, advisory opinion or otherwise.

Any member of the legislature who is licensed as an attorney is prohibited from appearing in any nonadversary or nonministerial proceeding before any state department, office, board or commission of the executive branch of government.

Any member of the legislature willfully violating the provisions of this act shall be subject to appropriate disciplinary action by the house of which he is a member.

History: 1968, Act 318, Eff. Sept. 1, 1968

Compiler's Notes: Section 191 of Act 227 of the Public Acts of 1975 repealed MCL 4.401 to 4.410, 168.901 to 168.929, 15.321 to 15.330, 15.301 to 15.310, and 15.341 to 15.348. The Michigan Supreme Court, however, in Advisory Opinion on Constitutionality of 1975 PA 227, 396 Mich. 123, 240 N.W.2d 193 (1976), held Act 227 of the Public Acts of 1975 unconstitutional for being in violation of Mich. Const., Art. 4, § 24.