Mich. Comp. Laws » Michigan Compiled Laws / Chapter 45 / Act 139 of 1973
Michigan Compiled Laws

Mich. Comp. Laws § 45.551 (2026)

Optional unified form of county government; authorization; effect of adoption.

✓ current as of July 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section MI-LEGlegislature.mi.gov JustiaChapter on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

OPTIONAL UNIFIED FORM OF COUNTY GOVERNMENT


Act 139 of 1973


45.551 Optional unified form of county government; authorization; effect of adoption.

Sec. 1.

    A county which has not adopted a charter, or elected a charter commission which has not been dissolved pursuant to Act No. 293 of the Public Acts of 1966, being sections 45.501 to 45.521 of the Michigan Compiled Laws, may adopt an optional unified form of county government. A unified form of government adopted pursuant to this act shall supersede the existing form of government of the county.

History: 1973, Act 139, Eff. Mar. 29, 1974

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 8 cases, 1980–2012 · leading case: Oakland Cnty. Comm'r v. Oakland Cnty. Exec., 296 N.W.2d 621 (Mich. Ct. App. 1980).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Oakland Cnty. Comm'r v. Oakland Cnty. Exec., 296 N.W.2d 621 (Mich. Ct. App. 1980). · cites it 6× “On August 6, 1974, the electors of Oakland County voted to adopt an optional unified form of county government as provided for by 1973 PA 139 , MCL 45.551 et seq.; MSA 5.302(51) et seq.”
Am. Fed'n of State, Cnty. & Mun. Employees v. City of Detroit, 704 N.W.2d 712 (Mich. Ct. App. 2005). “139 of the Public Acts of 1973, as amended, being sections 45.551 to 45.573 of the Michigan Compiled Laws, the county executive may veto the resolution.”
Shimkus v. Hickner, 417 F. Supp. 2d 884 (E.D. Mich. 2006). · cites it 2× “However, in November 1978, the Board of Commissioners adopted the Optional Unified Form of County Government (OUFCG) pursuant to Public Act 139 of 1973, Mich. Comp. Laws § 45.551 et seq. According to Michigan law, when a county opts for the OUFCG, certain boards, commissions,…”
Bay Cnty. Exec. v. Bay Cnty. Bd. of Commissioners, 342 N.W.2d 96 (Mich. Ct. App. 1983). “In January, 1979, the Bay County electorate adopted the "optional unified form of county government”, described in MCL 45.551 et seq.; MSA 5.302(51) et seq.”
Harbor Tel. 2103, LLC v. Oakland Cnty. Bd. of Commissioners, 654 N.W.2d 633 (Mich. Ct. App. 2002). “” MCL 45.551. 14 With respect to a county that adopts the optional unified form of county government designating a county executive, MCL 45.”
Police Officers Ass'n v. Oakland Cnty., 354 N.W.2d 367 (Mich. Ct. App. 1984). · cites it 2× “The electorate of Oakland County has adopted the optional unified form of county government and has chosen to lodge administrative and executive power in an elected county executive pursuant to MCL 45.551 et seq.; MSA 5.302(51) et seq.”
Bay Cnty. Exec. v. Bay Cnty. Bd. of Commissioners, 443 N.W.2d 168 (Mich. Ct. App. 1989). “, to eliminate the Bay County Department of Corporation Counsel, which had earlier been created in accordance with the optional unified form of county government act, 1973 PA 139 , MCL 45.551 et seq.; MSA 5.302 (51) et seq.”
Houston v. Governor, 295 Mich. App. 588 (Mich. Ct. App. 2012). · cites it 3× “403(1) to change the membership of the apportionment commission for certain counties: “In a county with a population of 1,000,000 or more that has adopted an optional unified form of county government under 1973 PA 139 , MCL 45.551 to 45.573, with an elected county executive,…”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.