/- -
Auwrm. TEXASI 787ll
June 22, 1976
The Honorable Pratis L. Duff Opinion No. H-839
Director
Texas Department of Health Re: Ray renewal fees
Resourcea under the Texas Sanitarian
1100 West 49th Street Act be.increased to more
Austin, Texas 78756 than $10.00.
Dear Dr. Duff:
you have asked if the State Board of Health has the
authority to raise the annual renewal fee for professional
sanitarian licenses above $10.00 if a lower fee is no longer
. adequate to cover the administrative costs of the Department
of Health Resources.
There are two pertinent sections of the Texas Sanitarian
Registration Act, article 4477-3, V.T.C.S. They read:
Section 6. Every professional
sanitarian registered under the provisions
of this Act who desires to continue in the
field of sanitation shall annually pay to the
Board a fee to be fixed by the Board for the
annual renewal of each license, but the
fee for renewal of license shall not be
fixed in excess of Ten Dollars ($10.00). . . .
. . .
Section 8 (cl. All expenses necessary to
administering the provisions of this Act shall
be paid out of the special Sanitarians Regis-
tration and License Fund, mentioned under
Subsection (b) above, so that the passage of
this Act shall never become a financial
burden or obligation to the State of Texas.
Q. 3541
The Honorable Fratis L. Duff - page 2 (H-839)
If the fees and charges set out herein prove
to be inadequate to pay all costs created by
this Act, the Board is hereby authorized
to increase such fees and charges in such
amount as will make the administration of
the Act financially self-supporting without
incurring any new or additional financial
obligation to the State of Texas.
Courts will endeavor to harmonize and reconcile various
provisions of the same statute. --
Cole v. State, 170 S.W. 1036
(Tex. Sup. 1914); 53 Tex.Jur.2d, Statutes-O. Both
sections of this Act were passed at the same time and neither
has been amended since its original passage. A statute
should be construed as understood at the time of its nassaqe.
Railroad Commission of Texas v. Texas and New 0rleans‘R.R.O
&r 42 S.W.Zd lO¶ ne??!iv.App. ---lESTii rP31,rit
ref'd). A cardinal rule in statutory construction is that
the statute should be given the effect and scope intended by
the Legislature. 53 Tex.Jur.ad, Statutes S 125 and cases
cited therein.
It seems apparent that at the time of the passage of
this Act the feeling of the Legislature was that a $10
annual renewal fee would be sufficient to administer the
Act. Section B(c) of the Act expresses the legislative
intent that the "passage of this Act shall never become a
financial burden or obligation to the Stateofexas."
(Emphasis added). In order to carry out this expressed
intent the Legislature authorized the Board to increase the
fees "in such amount as will make the administration of this
Act financially self-supporting without incurring any new or
additional financial obligations to the State of Texas."
In our view, sections 6 and 8(c) of the Act must be
read together, and are not in irreconcilable conflict. The
overall expressed intent of the Legislature is that the
administration of the Act should be financially self-supporting,
and in view of the expression of the Texas Department of
Health Resources that inflationary pressures have made it
impossible to administer the Act under the $10 ceiling, an
increase above $10 is in our opinion authorized by the
statute so long as such increase is reasonable.
Q. 3542
The Honorable Fratis L. Duff - page 3 (H-839)
SUMMARY
Where it is impossible to administer the
Texas Sanitation Act without increasing the
certificate renewal fee to more than $10.00,
the State Board of Health is authorized to
increase the fee to a reasonable amount
above that figure.
-Very truly yours,
//jii&c* Attorney General of Texas
&PROVED: v
/
Opinion Committee
jwb
Q. 3543