Untitled Texas Attorney General Opinion

February 6, 1939 Hon. John F. May County Attorney Rarnes-County Karnes, Texas Dear Sir: Opinion No. 0-161 Re: Refunding premiums on deputy tax co>-~ lector's official bond for years 1925- 1938 Your letter of January 17th,'addresse&to Hon. 'Gerald C. Mann, Attorney General of Texas, has been received whereIn you state that the Commissioners I Court desires an opinion as to whether or not the expenditure of refunding the'premlum on the official bond of the deputy tax assessor-collector of taxes by the Commissioners' Court for the years 1925-1938, inclusive, would be legal or Illegal. Under the authority of Casey vs. State (Tex. Civil appeals) 269 SW 428, writ of error denied, and former rulings of this Department, such premium on the deputy tax collector's bond prior to the amendment of Article 3899, effective Janu- ary 1, 1936, was not such Item of expense as the Commissioners' Court would be authorized to pay. You are respectfully advised, therefore, that It Is the opinion of this Department that any payment or expenditure of refunding the premium on the deputy tax assessor-collector's official bond for the years 1925-1936 would be illegal. Permit us to herein set forth certain portions of Article 3899 as amended, effective January 1, 1936: "Art. 3899. Expense Account (a) At the close of each month of his tenure of office each officer named herein who Is compensated on a fee basis shall make as part of the report now required by law, an Itemized and sworn statement of all the actual and necessary expenses incurred by him in the conduct of his office, such as station- erg, stamps, telephone, premiums on offlclals' bonds, including the cost of surety bonds for - -- Hon. John F. May, February 6, 1939, page 2 o-161 his Deputies, premium on fire, burglary, theft, robbery insurance protecting public funds, tra- veling expenses and other necessary expenses... Such expense account shall be subject to the audit of the County Auditor; if any, otherwise by the Commissioners' Court; and if it appears that any item of such'expense vas not incurred by such officer or such Item waspnot a necess- ary expense of office, such item shall be by such auditor or court rejected, In which case the collections of such item may be adjudicated In any court of competent jurisdiction. The amount of salaries paid to Assistants and De- puties shall also be clearly shown by such- officer, giving the name, position and amount paid each; and. In no event shall any officer show any greatep amount than actually paid any such Assistant or Deputy. The amount of such expenses, togetherwith the amount of salaries paid to Assistants, Deputies and Clerks~ shall be paid out of the fees earned by such of- ficer ...................... "(b) Each,officer named in this Act, where he receives a salary as compensation forkhis' services, shall be empowered and permitted to purchase and have charged to his county all rea- sonable expenses necessary In the proper and legal conduct of hLs office, premiums on offi- cials' bonds, premium on fire, burglary, theft, robbery insurance protecttng publtc funds and including the cost of surety bonds for his Dep- uties, such expenses to be passed on, ijre-deter- mined and allowed in kind and amounts, as nearly as possible, by the Commissioners' Court one each month for the ensuing month, uponthe application by each officer, stating the kind, probably amount of expenditure and the necessity for the expenses of his office for such ensuing month, which ap- plication shall, before presentatlon to said court, first be endorsed by the County Auditor, If any otherwise the County Treasurer, only as to whether funds are available for payment of such expenses................. II .......Eaeh officer shall, at the close of each month of his tenure of office, make an Itemized and sworn report of all approved expenses 'lncurrec.by him and charged to his county, ~accompanylng 'such re- port with invoices covering such purchases and re- -.- . Hon. John F. May, February 6, 1939, page 3 0-161 quisitions Fssued by him in support of such report. If such expenses be Incurred In connection with any particular case, such report shall name such case. Such report, invoices and requisitions shall be subject to the audit of the County Auditor; If any, otherwise by the CommlssFoners' Court, and If It appears that any item was not incurred by such officer, or that such item was not a neces- sary OP legal expense of such office, or purchased upon proper requlsltlon, such Iternshall be by said County Auditor or court rejected, in which case the payment.of such item may be adjudicated in any court of competent jurisdiction." All such approved claims and accounts shall be paid from the Officers' Salary Fund unless otherwise provld- ed herein," It Is evident that the Legislature Intended that such condltlons contained in the above provisions should be corn- plied with by the officer as a condltlon precedent to allowing, as a matter of right, such expenses .~ as authorized therein. It is our opinion that Article 3899, as amended, can be liberally interpreted to allow such officials, as an item of expense, the premium on the bonds of their authorized deputies. Such conditionsfound fn the provisions of the Article quoted seem to be substantlallg the same as contained fin the artlc1.eprior to the amendment and the courts have construed such conditions not intended as a limftatlon on the power of the Commissioners' Court in matters of this kind.. As it ap- pears that the Commissionersf Court may use its sound discre- tion as to whether or not the facts other than the failure of the officer to comply with the above provisions would entitle such expense to be allowed, we are further of the opfnlon that while the county could not be held liable for the expenditure of refunding the actual and necessary premium paid on the deputy tax collector's official bond for the years 1936 and subsequently it Is within their sound discretion whether or not such payment could be made, the exercise of which by the Commissioners' Court would not be iilegal. Trusting that the above answers your questions, we remain e--t Hon. John F. May, February 6, 1939, page 4 o-161 Very truly yours ATTORNEY GENERAL OF TEXAS By s/ Wm. R. King .'. Assistant WmK:AW APPROVED: S/Gerald C, Mann ATTORNEYGENERAL OF TEXAS