Untitled Texas Attorney General Opinion

Auwrx~ 11.TEXAS
PRICEDANIEL
ATTORNEY
GENERAL
March 8, 1948
..

Ron. Robert L; Kirk opinion Bo:V-515
Count Attorney
Lamb Eounty Be: ~avellng expense OS
Llttle?lald. Texas the sherlif ‘and hi.8
deputies.
Dear S&r:
Your re&est for ag opinion from ,thia ofiice
011the above subject matter is as follows:
‘IIn accordance with the rspuitiements
of the enactment of the 50th Legislature,
regarding the supply and pay for transpor-
tatlon for sherlffband their tleputles, the
Conrulsslonere ,Court of, Lamb Cotmty~have,se-
lected aeotion (c) oi,.said act aa the mm-
ner of ‘c&ring for aaid tranaporation in
The Comi8sionera Court have
The’aot does noVstate from what
funds thk expense shall be paid.

“Row ,ehall thls’oone$ be’pald,and iroll
what fundr?”
Lamb County has a,p6pulation of~l7,606 l.nhabi-
tanta socording t&the,1940 f,tieral oenaua. We are in-
formeQ’fr~ *he Com@trolle*is offioe’~tbat the county OS- :
tioirla ln IAm~~County’in:lg47~vere oinipenaatea’on a lee
basis. ThwC~trollerlti office at this tlrs Haagnot re-
ceive&a~oertiflitd oopy of the ordbr of the CUmirrlo8aers’
Court ot I&8b County de~termining whether thd oowty oi-
fioersare’to be compensated ori a fee or salary basis i’Or
the year 1948, aa reqialr?U:by ‘Section 2 of Artlale 3912%.
The lan$uage’ of your request, however, vould,lmply that
the county,offi~era’ are .on,a ?ee barla aU this oplnlon.
la bawl on ruoh,m.aewmptlan.
.’ You ,&ate i.n~‘your Gqueet, that the ComlealOn-
era’ Oburt of Lamb,County har &etermine$ to provide for

..‘:
.,
: : ;,. .,,,.,’ ,, ,’ *.,
,. ” y “t ‘, ,. .,’ :, ,‘,*: ,,
. ‘I’
,,,, .I,,‘.‘,,, :+ ,:‘.!
‘a ._., ., I:.
 Hon. Robert L. Kirk, pqe 2 (V-515)

tlw mare11 expense of the sheriff end hl deputies in
aooardance7v th the provisionsof Section 1 9c) of B. 8,
501, Acts of the 50th Legislature, 1947. You further
atate that the Codaalonera~ Court Is ,allowing the
ahorlff and h3a deputlee eight cents (8p?) per mile for
eaoh mile traveled in the performance of OifiCialduties.
SoeWon l(c) of R. 8. 501 povlaea as followa:
“Alternatively eueh Fault7 Coamla-
alonare Courts may allow sheriffs and
their deputies in their respective coun-
ties to use and operate cars on official
buelfmaa vhich cars are personally owned b
by them f’or which such officers
paid not leas then s%x o nts (6#!“,$ %a
nor more than ten tents t104) per lnilefor
each a&lo treveledin the performance of
0rr30m twie8 0r them orme.”
It v&a held in hourOpinion No. V-293 that the
prov38ioam of 8. 8. !Sl wore man&tory: In other worfla,
the OQaiuo~ofmrat U4nM mast prov3tla traveling expense
for the aimrIfT an& his 6eputiea under one of the four
aubditlriana. St was furtherheld in our Opinionlo. V-
472 that 8. 8, 501 is applicableto all coptl&f of th$a
Steto whet&w amh oounties wer0 on a ‘tee or salary
baas. See also epinion IV04 V-343. We quote the follow-
sag from op3n3oIl Ipa. v-472:

t&oo&a8ee Or aherlffa thro bout
. Sabl~oiai~ Y icle 3899
(a) of Ar
uao 8pplicaMo tb cwnt%oe v?ion of?&ra
on a fee ksia,

.
*It u&u br ~natedthat P. Br 501 is

.'
.
.. '
*
*
Hon. Robert L. Klrk,page 3 (V-515)

It la our opinion that H B
501 ai9e&des aubdivialon (1) Section’
19 of Art. 3912e, V. 0. 5. . .‘”
Prior to the enactment of Ii. B. 501, the tra-
veling expense of the sheriff and hia deputies provided
for in Artiole 3899(a) was paid out of~feea earned b
such offiaers. Hood v.’ State, (Clv. App.) 73 S. W. 12d)
611. Following the reasoning in Oplnion.Re~. V-472, It
is our opinion that H, B. 501, Acts of the 50th Legls-
ytye, supersedessubdlvlalon (a) of Article 3899, V.
insofar as It pertains to the traveling expense
oh thi sheriff.
Since aubdlvlsion (0) provides that the county
shall “pay” the officers for the use of their cars and
makes no provision for any fee of office for such pur-
pose, and since the eaiergencyclause (Section 2) of’&
B. 501 atatea that prior to the present Act theve was
no adequate law providing for transportation for sher-
iffs and their deputies, it is our opinion that the Leg-
islature Intended to provide them with traveling expense
regardless of whether’ the fees of office were .sufficlent.
Therefore, the Leelsleture plaoed a mandatory duty on
the Commlsslonera Courts of this State to provite ate-
quate transportation. This can only be done in fee
counties by paying traveling expense out of’the general’
fund of the county. In view 0s the w0g0iag, it is our
o9lnion ‘that transportation for the sheriff of Lamb COW-
ty should be paid out of the oeneral Fund of the county.
suMMARY
Traveling expansevof aheriifs and
their deputies in fee counties should
be paid out of the General Fund. Ii. B.
501, R. S., 50th Leg. 1947.
Yours very truly,
APPROVED: ATTORREY
ORRRRALOF TRXAS

John Reeves
JRrmv