Untitled Texas Attorney General Opinion

. Honorable Geo. I-I. Sheppard Comptroller of Public Accounts Austin, Texas Dear Mr. Sheppard: Opinion No. O-5366 Rer Whether or not the Board of Regents of a State institutionmay delegate to one of its members the power to give the advance written consent to an employee to travel outside the State, and to approve the expense acoount of such employee for payment. You make the following request for an opinlonr "Section 6 of House Bill No. 272, Acts of the'RegularSession of the Forty-seventhLegls- lature, which is the General AppropriationBill for EducationalInstit~utions of Higher Learning, reads, in part, as follows: "'No traveling expenses shall be in- curred by Board Members, heads of ln- stitutions,or'by any employee of any of the schools, or other agencies named therein, inside or outside of the boundaries of the State of Texas, except for state's business, and no travel shall be performed outside the state except upon the advance written consent of the sohool’s board of re- gents or directors,' "May the Board of Regents either by minutes or resolution delegate to one of Its members the power to give the advance written consent to an employee to travel outside the state and to approve the expense account of such employee for payment?" . ,- Honorable Geo. H. Sheppard - page 2 - (O-5366) Your inquiry should be answered in the negative. Boards such as you mention are legal entities and are required to function as such. As such entity, the board functions precisely as an individualState officer functions -- personally. It has several times been ruled by this Department that such boards may not function by individual action, but may function only in the orderly way of board proceedings. In Opinion No. O-1126 this departmentheld that the Texas State Parks Board had no authority to delegate its pow- ers to another, but that it could perform its duties only through board action. In Opinion No. O-5292 this departmentheld as follows: "From your question we understand that the Commission (State Commission for the Blind) desires to make a general authoriza- tion for expendituresand delegate to one or more of its individualmembers or to Its exeo- utive secretary authority to approve all expendituresfor payment without the neces- sity of further action by a majority of the Commissione In our opinion this can not be done anh we therefore answer your question in the negative." In Opinion No. O-5333 we held that the Board of Control may not delegate to another the authority to ap- prove a voucher claim for the issuance of a warrant for payment. The courts have also held the same thing, the latest decision perhaps being Webster et al v. Texas & Pacific Motor TransportationCo., et al, 166 S. W. (2) 75, where Mr. Chief Justice Alexander thus discusses and announces the rule: "It Is a well establishedrule in this State, as well as in other States, that where the Legislature has committed a matter to a board, bureau, or commission,or other administrative wmw, such board, bureau, or commission must act thereon as a body at a stated meeting, or one properly called, and of which all the members of such board have notice, or of which they are given an opportunity to attend. Consent or acquiesoenceof, or agreement Honorable Geo. H. Sheppard - page 3 - (O-5366) by the individualmembers acting separately, and not as a body, or by a number of the members less than the whole acting colleotive- ly at an unspheduledmeeting without notice or opportunityof the other members to attend, is not sufficient.+ * *. "The purpose of the above rule, which re- quires the board to act as a body at a regular meeting or at a called meeting, upon proper notice,,is to afford each member of the body an opportunityto be present and to impart to his associates the benefit of his experience, counsel, and judgment, and to,.bringto bear upon them the weight of his argument on the matter to be decided by the Board, in order that the decision, when finally promulgated, may be the composite judgment of the body as a whole. m * * * . Merely Indulging'the presumption of continuous session under these circumstances would not solve the problem of affording a reason- able opportunityto all members to be present. We are of the opinion that the applicationwas not passed on by the Commission as a body, in the manner contemplatedby law. * * *' The duties imposed, and the powers conferred by law upon public officers and boards are personal -- a trust -- and may not be delegatedby~thetnto another, except, of course, In those instanceswhere the statute expressly permits another'to perform them, as in the familiar oase of a deputy. Even deputies do not perform such duties through delegationby their superior, but in virtue of their own power under the statute. Very truly yours ATTORNEY GENERAL OF TEXAS APPROVED JUL 18, 1943 /s/ Ocie Speer /S/ Gerald C. Mann BY Ocie Speer ATTORNEY GENERAL OF TEXAS Assistant APPROVED OPINION OS-MR-ELB COMMITTEE By B.W.B. Cbairman