July 11, 1967
Hon. Milton J. Schlller, Chairman Opinion No. M-104
Contingent Expense Committee
House of Representatives Re: Telephone charges of
Austin, Texas members of the House
of Representatives.
Dear Mr. Schlller:
Your request for an opinion reads as follows:
"House Simple Resolution No, 448 by Wayne,
a copy of which Is attached, was passed during
the Regular Session of the Sixtieth Legislature.
'For many years, long distance telephone
charges have been authorized and paid for from
the Contingent Fund of the House of Representa-
tives for the Individual Members of the House
and charged to their respective contingent
accounts.
'Pursuant to the provisions contained on
Page 7 concerning telephone service, an official
opinion Is respectfully requested as follows:
'Is It legal for the State of Texas to pay
for the monthly telephone charges of a business
telephone, located In the House Member's district,
to be used for official state business, with such
charges posted to the Individual Member's contln-
gent expense account?
"We will appreciate your official opinion on
this matter at your earliest convenience."
In Terre11 vs. King, 118 Tex. 237, 14 S.W.2d 786 (1929),
It was held that a Resolution was an appropriate and constitutional
-471-
Hon. Milton J. Schlller, page 2 (M-104)
method to direct the expenditure of a portion of appropriation for
the expenses of members of the Legislature between aesslons. In
that case, the Court upheld a portion of the Resolution whereby
members of an interim committee would receive certain expenses ln-
curred In the conduct of the committee’s duties. The Court stated:
“It Is manifest that certain expenditures
must be made by the state, In the way of leglsla-
tlve expenses, or the grant of legislative power
could never be effectually exercised. No one would
question legislative disbursements for comfortable
assembly halls and commlttee rooms, or for clerks,
stationery, etc. Within the same category of
legitimate expenses of the Leglslature or of either
house comes reimbursement to members for actual
expenses reasonably Incurred In order to perform
duties devolving on duly authorized committees of
the Legislature, or of either house, when such
committee members are called to other points than
the capital, or when called to the capital other-
wise than during the sessions of the Legislature.’
14 S.W.W 792.
It Is noted that at the time Terre11 v. King, supra, was
decided, Section 24 of Article III did not provide for an annual
salary, but merely a per diem during the time that the Legislature
was in session, and therefore performance of official duties wag not
on an annual basis except for such Interim committee work as was
assigned to Interim committees created by the Legislature. In 1960,
Section 24 of Article III of the Constitution of Texas was amended
30 as it now reads as follows:
“Members of the Legislature shall receive
from the Public Treasury an annual salary of not
exceeding Four Thousand, Eight Hundred Dollars
($4,800) per year and a per diem of not exceeding
Twelve Dollars ($12 per day for the first one
hundred and twenty t 120) days only of each Regular
Session and for thirty (30) days of each Special
Session of the Legislature. No Regular Session
shall be of longer duration than one hundred and
forty (140) days.
“In addition to the per diem the Members of
each House shall be entitled to mileage In going
to and returning from the seat of government,
which mileage shall not exceed Two Dollars and
-472-
Hon. Milton J. Schlller, page 3 (M-104 1
Fifty Cents ($2.50) for every twenty-five (25)
miles, the distance to be computed by the nearest
and most direct route of travel, from a table of
distances prepared by the Comptroller to each
county seat now or hereafter to be established; no
Member to be entitled to mileage for any extra
Session that may be called within one (1) day after
the adjournment of the Regular or Called Session."
It Is noted that the foregoing constltutlonal amendment
now provides In addition to per diem and traveling expenses an
annual salary for members of the Legislature, thus recognizing that
official duties of members of the Legislature are performed through-
out the year and are not limited to duties performed while the Legls-
lature Is In session. Therefore, In determining what expense3 are
allowed to be paid out of the Contingent Expense Appropriation for
members of the House of Representatives, It Is necessary to examine
the provisions of House Simple Resolution No. 448 of the Regular
Session of the 60th Legislature. The provisions of House Simple
Resolution No. 448 applicable to your question read as follows:
"RESOLVED,That the Contingent Expense Com-
mittee Is hereby authorized and directed to credit
each Representative an amount as determined by the
Committee on House Administration not to exceed
$200 a month during any period the Legislature Is
not In sesslon. This amount Is authorized to pay
for the employment of a private secretary and for
expenditures for stationery, supplies, postage,
telephone tolls, telegraph tolls, answering service,
and rental of electric typewriters and transcribing
equipment. Expenditures authorized hereunder shall
be paid out of the Legislative Expense Fled of the
60th Legislature or any other funds appropriated for
the use of the House of Representatives; . . .
I,
. . .
"RESOLVED,That the Contingent Expense Com-
mittee Is hereby authorized to pay for telephone
service and office supplies ?'or use of tne House
&ring any period the Legislature 1s not in session,
same to be paid from the Legislative Expense Fund of
the 60th Legislature or any other funds appropriated
for the use of the House of Representatlves on vcuchers
approved by the chairman of the Contingent Expense Com-
mittee and the Speaker and In accordance with regula-
tions governing such expenditures +pprc.ved by the
Speaker; . . . . (Emphasis added)
-473-
Hon. Milton J. Schlller, page 4 (M-104)
In view of the foregoing provlslons, you are advised that
It Is legal for the State of Texas to pay telephone tolls and tele-
phone services Incurred In the performance of official duties by
members of the House of Representatives regardless of where the
telephone Is located. Whether the particular bill for telephone
service and/or telephone tolls submitted by members of the House
of Representatives to the Contingent Expense Committee Is Incurred
In connection with the official duties of members of the House of
Representatives Is within the determination of the Contingent Ex-
pense Committee.
SUMMARY
A Resolution Is an appropriate and constitutional
method to direct expenditure of a portion of appro-
priation In financing expenses Incurred by members of
the Legislature In the conduct of their official busl-
ness while the Legislature Is not In session. House
Simple Resolution No. 448 of the Regular Session of the
60th Legislature authorizes the payment of telephone
tolls and telephone service Incurred by members of the
House of Representatives In connection with their of-
ficial duties.
Prepared by John Reeves
Assistant Attorney General
APPROVED:
OPINION COMMITTEE
Hawthorne Phillips, Chalrman
Kerns Taylor, Co-Chairman
J. H. Broadhurst
V. F. Taylor
Neil Wllllams
Ralph Rash
STAFF LEGALASSISTANT
A. J. Carubbl, Jr.
-474-