Montana Attorney General Opinion 15-563

Opinion No. 563 Elections-Bond Election-Poll Book ----Omission of Name of Elector from Poll Book. HELD: An elector, to be entitled to vote at a county bond election, must be a taxpayer whose name appears upon the last preceding completed as- sessment roll. 'There an elector is registered under one name and has property assessed to him under a somewhat different name, and is for that reason left off the poll book, he ma~', under Section 57!), R. C. M., 1921, procure a certifi- ca te of omission of name from poll book to he presented to the judges of elec- tion and so be entitled to yote. June 27, 1934. 'l'he facts relating to your request for an opinion will appear in the following; discussion. You are proceeding under Chapter 188, Laws of 1931, an Act re- lating to county bonds. Section 12 of this Act pro\'ides that all qualified electors of the county shall be qualified to yote and no property assessment or tax paying qualifications shall be re- quired. On page 551 of the Session Laws of 1933 is contained the constitutional amendment relative to qualifications of electors, whiCh provides in part, as follows: "If the question submitted concerns the creation of any levy, debt or liability the person, in addition to pos8essing the qualifications above men- tioned, must also be a taxpa~'er whose name appears upon the last preceding cOlllpleted assessment, roll, in order to entitle him to vote upon such question." It is my opinion that the adoption of this constitutional amendment modifies Section 12 of Chapter 188 of the Laws of 1931 to the extent that additional qualifications are required of electors at such election in that each elector must he a taxpayer whose name ap- pears upon the last preceding completed assessment roll. 'Where a man is registered under one name and has property assessed to him under a somewhat different name, either spelled somewhat differently or the full name used in one instance and iuitials used ill another, the county clerk whose duty it is to prepare the OPIXIQXS OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL 391 election rolls has no method of de- termining whether or not the parties so named are identical and may be justified and warranted in lea\'ing them off the rolls. Certainly if such names have not been considered in determining the sufficiency of the pe- tition and, after excluding such names. the peti tion has been found sufficient, no harm has -been done by such act. However. I believe that a person who is duly registered and whose name also appears as a taxpayer upon the last preceding completed assessment roll is entitled to vote even though there ma~' be a discrepancy in the manner in which such names appear in the dif- ferent lists. You ask what steps should be taken so that electors so omitted may legally he permitted to vote at the bond elec- tion. I would call your attention to Section 579, R. C. M., 1921. We are always safe in proceeding in accord- ance with a statute of this character. 'l'herefore, all electors who have com- plied with the terms of this statute and are entitled to vote may procure from your office certificates which they can _ present, and leave with the judges of election. If you, in so far as pos- sible, assist persons entitled to yote whose names are omitted, it would seem that no criticism could properly be made against your office, and that those entitled to \'ote would be given that privilege.