Issues Paper, Central Utah Project

Page 196

Mr. Arthur L. Monson Page 4 November 18, 1977 case held that creation of a water conservancy district is a , "judicial" function. The court reached that conclusion in deciding issues of due process rather than issues concerned with whether appointment of directors was a legislative or judicial function.2 However, courts in other jurisdictions have reached the issue of whether appointment of the board of directors of a water conservancy district is unconstitutional delegation to the judiciary of a legislative function. In People v. Lee, 213 P.2d 583 (Colo. 1923), the court, in upholding the Colorado Water Conservancy Act against the contention that appointment of the Board of Directors by the judiciary delegated a legislative function to the court in violation of the separation of power provision of the Colorado Constitution, stated: " . . . The provisions of the Conservancy Act relating to the hearing upon the petition to create a district and the protesting petition or petitions, and the making of an order dismissing either the original petition or the protesting petition, and in case the proper petition has been filed and the protesting petition has either not been filed or else dis­missed, the making of an order establish­ing the conservancy district, confer upon the court power which cannot be otherwise considered than as judicial. One of the alleged legislative powers conferred upon the district court is the power to appoint three directors of the conser­vancy district, and also to appoint three appraisers. The power of appointing officers is more executive than it is legislative. 2 However, it appears a creation of a conservancy district with the exception of the appointment of the board of directors is a proper judicial function under Utah law. Young v. Salt Lake City, 67 P. 1066 (Utah 1907).