mayor “shall have the sole power of appointing and removing any member of the department as chief of police,” for the proposition that the chief of police must be an active member of the department at the time he is appointed. Terre Haute argues that Ind.Code § 19-1-29.5-13 “simply provides that, if a member of the department is appointed chief and his service terminates, he is to be returned to his former rank. The statute simply does not guarantee any similar protections for a nonmember appointed as chief.” Appellee’s Brief at 13. We conclude that the language of the statute is reasonably susceptible to more than one construction. Consequently, we will examine the substance and history of Chapter 29.5 in its entirety to discern the Legislature’s intent. See Deaton, 582 N.E.2d at 885 (<HOLDING>). In 1971, the Legislature' passed Ind. Code §
holding that government contracts must be read as if they included clauses required by law recognizing rule of statutory construction that statutes must be read as a whole and sections which are part of the same general statutory scheme must be construed together and each given effect if it can be done by any reasonable construction holding that related provisions should be read together holding that statutory provisions cannot be read standing alone instead they must be construed in light of the entire act of which they are a part holding that the words and provisions of a statute must be construed in a harmonious way