Untitled Texas Attorney General Opinion ( 2005 )


Menu:
  •                              ATTORNEY GENERAL OF TEXAS
    GREG       ABBOTT
    April 29,2005
    Mr. Paul Mallett                                      Opinion No. GA-03 18
    Executive Director, Commission on State
    Emergency Communications                           Re: Whether certain members of the Commission
    333 Guadalupe Street, Suite 2-212                     on State Emergency Communications    are entitled
    Austin, Texas 78701-3942                              to receive compensatory per diem (RQ-028%GA)
    Dear Mr. Mallett:
    You ask whether certain members ofthe Commission           on State Emergency Communications
    are entitled to receive compensatory per diem.’
    The Commission on StateEmergency Communications (the “Commission”) is created under
    subchapter B of chapter 771 of the Health and Safety Code. See TEX. HEALTH & SAFETY CODE
    ANN. §§ 771.031-.039 (Vernon 2003). The Commission is “composed ofnine appointed members
    and three ex officio members.” 
    Id. § 771.031(a).
    The executive director of the Public Utility
    Commission, the executive director ofthe General Services Commission, and the Commissioner of
    Public Health, or their designees, serve as nonvoting ex officio members. See 
    id. $771 .031@).2
    The
    lieutenant governor and the speaker of the house of representatives each appoints two members to
    serve as representatives of the general public. See 
    id. § 771.031(c).
    The governor appoints five
    members, as follows:
    (1) one member who serves on the governing body of a regional
    planning commission;
    (2) one member who serves as a director or is on the governing body
    of an emergency communication district;
    (3) one member who serves on the governing body of a county;
    ‘See Letter from Paul Mallett, Executive Director, Commission on State Emergency Communications, to
    Honorable Greg Abbott, Texas Attorney General (Oct. 27,2004) (on file with opinion Committee, also avoidable af
    http:Nwww.oag.state.tx.us)[hereinafter Request Letter].
    ‘The Texas general ServicesCommissionhas been renamed the TexasBuilding and ProcurementCommission,
    and the Texas Department of Public Health has become a part of the Texas Department of State Health Services.
    Mr. Paul Mallett    - Page 2                           (GA-03 18)
    (4) one member who serves on the governing body of a home-rule
    municipality that operates a 9-l-l system that is independent of the
    state’s system; and
    (5) one member as a representative            of the general public.
    
    Id. 5 771.031(d).
    Section 771.034 of the Health and Safety Code provides that “[tlhe expenses of a member
    of the commission shall be paid as provided by the General Appropriations Act.” 
    Id. 5 771.034.
    You acknowledge that “the ex officio members, who serve by reason of their state office, are not
    entitled to compensatory per diem.” Request Letter, supra note 1, at 1. You also note that section
    574.005 ofthe Government Code prohibits local elected and appointed members ofthe Commission
    from receiving compensatory per diem. See id.’ You ask whether the remaining members of the
    Commission - the public representative appointed by the governor and the four public members
    appointed, respectively, by the lieutenant governor and the speaker of the house - are entitled to
    receive compensatory per diem. See 
    id. at 2.
    We limit our answer accordingly.
    Section 659.032 of the Government Code provides that “[a] member of a state board is
    entitled to a per diem in an amount set by the General Appropriations Act for the member’s service
    on the board.” TEX. GOV’T CODE ANN. 5 659.032(a) (Vernon 2004). ‘State board” is defined for
    purposes of this provision as “a board, commission, committee, council, or similar agency in the
    executive or judicial branch of state government that is composed of two or more members. The
    term does not include a board, commission, committee, council, or similar agency whose
    membership is elected by vote of the people.” 
    Id. 5 659.03
    1. Because the Commission is a part of
    the executive branch, it is a “state board” whose members are entitled to receive per diem.
    ‘Section 574.005 provides, in relevant part:
    (a) In this section:
    (1) “Local government” means a county, a municipality, a special district or
    authority, or another political subdivision of this state.
    (2) “State agency” means a deparhnent, commission, board, office, council,
    authority, or other agency in the executivebranch of state government that is created by
    the constitution DIa statute of this state, including a university system 01institution of
    higher education as defined by Section 61.003, Education Code.
    (b) An individual who holds an elected or appointed local government office may be
    appointed to the governing body of a state agency if otherwise eligible. The individual
    may not receive compensation for sewing on the governingbody ofthe state agency but
    may be reimbursed as provided by other law for a reasonable and necessary expense
    incurred in the performance of an official function.
    TEX.GOV’TCODEANN.5 574.005(a)-(b)(Vernon 2004)
    Mr. Paul Mallett    - Page 3                          (GA-0318)
    The 2003 General Appropriations Act describes three kinds of per diem. Only the first is
    relevant to your question. Article IX, section 4.04(a)( 1) of the General Appropriations Act provides,
    in relevant part:
    (a) As authorized by [section] 659.032, Government Code, the per
    diem of state board and commission members consists of:
    (1) compensatory       per diem, if specifically authorized by law,
    at $30 per day[.]
    General Appropriations Act, 78th Leg., R.S., ch. 1330, art. IX, 5 4.04(a)(l), 2003 Tex. Gen. Laws
    5023, 5893-94. “Compensatory per diem” constitutes a fixed compensation at a daily rate, in
    contrast to reimbursement for expenses. See Tex. Att’y Gen. Op. No. JM-349 (1985) (“[tlhe kind
    of flat rate compensatory per diem established by the Appropriations         Act does not represent
    reimbursement for expenses but compensation for services”). Thus, under this provision, the five
    public members of the Commission are entitled to receive compensatory per diem at the rate of $30
    per day ifspecifcally authorized by law. See General Appropriations Act, 78th Leg., R.S., ch. 1330,
    art. IX, 5 4.04(a)(l), 2003 Tex. Gen. Laws 5023,5894.
    Section 4.04(a) itselfrefers to section 659.032 ofthe Government Code, which in turn refers
    to subsection 4.04(a) ofthe General Appropriations Act provision. See id.; TEX. GOV’T CODE ANN.
    $659.032 (Vernon 2004). However, neither subsection 4.04(a), section 771.034 of the Health and
    Safety Code, nor any other provision of law specifically authorizes the payment of compensatory per
    diem. See General Appropriations Act, 78th Leg., R.S., ch. 1330, art. IX, 5 4.04(a)(l), 2003 Tex.
    Gen. Laws 5023,5894; TEX. HEALTH & SAFETYCODE ANN. § 771.034 (Vernon 2003). We believe
    the most reasonable approach is to construe section 4.04(a) to require a specific grant of
    compensatory per diem in the enabling legislation that creates a governmental body.“ Jn the situation
    you pose, no such grant appears in chapter 771 of the Health and Safety Code, the Commission’s
    enabling legislation.
    4Theamount of compensatory per diem may not be specified, but merely the fact of its availability. Section
    659.033 of the Government Code provides:
    (a) A law setting the amount of per diem for members of a state board is
    suspended to the extent of conflict with this subchapter.
    (b) The law setting the amount of per diem for a member of a state board is not
    suspended if the General Appropriations Act does not set the amount of per diem to
    which the member is entitled.
    (c) A law setting a limit on the number of days for which a state board member
    is entitled to a per diem is not suspended by this subchapter.
    TEX.G~V’TCODEANN.
    5 659.033 (Vernon 2004) (emphasis added).
    Mr. PaulMallett      - Page 4                     (GA-0318)
    It has been suggested, however, that subsection (d) of section 4.04 of article IX of the 2003
    General Appropriations Act provides the necessary authorization for the payment of compensatory
    per diem by the Commission. See Request Letter, supra note 1, at 2. That provision states:
    (d) An agency that has a “Schedule of Exempt Positions and Per
    Diem of Board (or Commission) Members” following the agency’s
    appropriations may expend appropriations for board or commission
    member compensatory per diem in an amount not to exceed the
    amount specified in the schedule for each respective fiscal year.
    General Appropriations Act, 78thLeg., R.S., ch. 1330, art. IX, § 4.04(d), 2003 Tex. Gen. Laws 5023,
    5894. We must first determine whether subsection (d) is an item of appropriation or a non-
    appropriating rider.
    In Jessen Associates v. Bullock, 
    531 S.W.2d 593
    (Tex. 1975), the Texas Supreme Court
    considered a rider to the appropriation for the University of Texas which read as follows:
    The Board of Regents of The University of Texas System is hereby
    authorized (1) to expend such amounts of its Permanent University
    Fund bond proceeds and/or other bond proceeds and such amounts of
    its other available moneys as may be necessary to fund one or more
    ofthe following projects either in whole or in part, (2) to accept gifts,
    grants, and matching grants to fund any one or more of such projects
    either in whole or in part, and (3) to acquire, construct, alter, add to,
    repair, rehabilitate, equip and/or furnish any one or more of such
    projects for The University of Texas at Austin: (1) Alterations and
    Additions to Law School        [,]
    Jessen 
    Assocs., 531 S.W.2d at 597
    (footnote omitted). The court held that this rider “was not
    intended by the Legislature to appropriate funds, and therefore was not an ‘item of appropriation.“’
    
    Id. at 596.
    According to the court, the purpose of the rider was to “direct the use of’ funds
    appropriated elsewhere “bygiving express legislative approval to the projects specified.” 
    Id. at 600.
    By the same reasoning, section 4.04(d), the provision at issue here, is not an item of appropriation.
    If subsection (d) is not an item of appropriation, it must necessarily constitute a rider. See
    generally 
    id. Article III,
    section 35 of the Texas Constitution provides that “[n]o bill (except general
    appropriation bills, which may embrace the various subjects and accounts, for and on account of
    which moneys are appropriated) shall contain more than one subject.” TEX. CONST. art. III, 5 35.
    A rider is valid if it merely “detail[s], limit[s], or restrict[s]” the use of appropriated funds. Tex.
    Att’y Gen. Op. No. V-1254 (1951) at 8. A rider may not, however, enact general law. See Tex.
    Att’y Gen. Op. Nos. DM-116 (1992) at 2-3 (rider may not require Department of Aging to “use the
    service standards, systems, billing and audit procedures, and provider bases used by the Department
    of Human Services”); MW-585 (1982) at 2-3 (rider is invalid as “a general directive to the’state
    Board of Barber Examiners          to take specific affirmative action”); MW-51 (1979) at 4-5 (rider is
    invalid because it directed State Board of Control to “establish a maximum and a minimum monthly
    Mr. Paul Mallett - Page 5                      (GA-0318)
    charge for state employee parking”); V-1254 (1951) at 12 (rider is invalid because it required all
    state-owned passenger vehicles to be sold not later than October 1, 195 1). Nor may a rider amend
    or conflict with general law. See Tex. Att’y Gen. Op. Nos. JC-0178 (2000) at 3-4 (rider may not
    change formula for allocation of funds for distribution of emergency medical services and trauma
    care funds where statute sets formula); JM-167 (1984) at 2-3 (rider may not confer affirmative duty
    to “enter into a contract with the Texas Lions League or a similar organization to provide
    rehabilitation services to blind adults at the Texas Lions Camp for Crippled Children” where statute
    places decision to enter such a contract within the discretion ofthe Commissioner ofHealth); H-321
    (1974) at 3 (rider may not repeal statutory freedom of choice accorded to inmates of Department of
    Corrections in selecting medical care).
    Subsection (d) does not purport to amend section 659.032 of the Government Code, which
    provides that “[a] member of a state board is entitled to a per diem in an amount set by the General
    Appropriations Act for the member’s service on the board.” TEX. GOV’T CODE ANN. 5 659.032(a)
    (Vernon 2004). On the other hand, subsection 4.04(a)(l) of the Appropriations Act, as we have
    noted, refers to section 659.032 of the Government Code and declares that the per diem of state
    board and commission members consists of “compensatory per diem, if specifically authorized by
    law.” General Appropriations Act, 78th Leg., R.S., ch. 1330, art. IX, § 4.04(a)(l), 2003 Tex. Gen.
    Laws 5023, 5893-94. Because section 4.04(d) is a rider to the General Appropriations Act, it may
    not be construed to constitute a specific law. If subsection (d) were deemed to do so, it would
    necessarily do more than detail, limit, or restrict the use of appropriated funds. Indeed, it would
    constitute a general law within the Appropriations Act and, as such, would be invalid under article
    III, section 35 of the Texas Constitution. In order to avoid this conclusion, we interpret the meaning
    of subsection (d) to lie in its limiting language: “in an amount not to exceed the amount specified
    in the schedule for each respective fiscal year.” 
    Id. 9 4.04(d),
    at 5894. Construed thus, section
    4.04(d) merely details, limits, or restricts the use of appropriated funds.
    We are supported in this view by a number of statutes that specifically authorize the payment
    of compensatory per diem in an agency’s enabling statute. See, e.g., TEX. FIN. CODE ANN.
    5 15.207(b) (Vernon Supp. 2004-05) (“For each day that a commission member engages in the
    business of the commission, the member is entitled to: (1) per diem, including compensatory per
    diem       .“); TEX. HEALTH & SAFETY CODE ANN. $ 461.009 (Vernon 2001) (A member of the
    Commission on Alcohol and Drug Abuse “is entitled to receive: (1) the compensatory per diem
    authorizedby the General Appropriations Act for each day spent in performing the member’s official
    duties      .“); TEX. HUM. RES. CODE ANN. 5 101.005(a) (Vernon 2001) (members of the Citizens
    Advisory Council “are entitled to the compensatory           per diem authorized by the General
    AppropriationsAct”);T~~.T~~C0~~ANN.§5.101(t)(V            emon 2002) (“A member ofthe [Technical
    Advisory] committee may receive compensatory per diem for serving on the committee                 .“).
    Chapter 771 of the Health and Safety Code, on the other hand, contains no specific authorization for
    a member of the Commission         on State Emergency Communications           to receive payment for
    compensatory per diem. See TEX. HEALTH & SAFETY CODE ANN. $5 771.001-,108 (Vernon 2003
    & Supp. 2004-05).
    We conclude therefore that the five public members of the Commission        on State Emergency
    Communications are not entitled to receive compensatory per diem.
    Mr. Paul Mallett   - Page 6                 (GA-0318)
    SUMMARY
    The five public members of the Commission        on State
    Emergency Communications are not entitled to receive compensatory
    per diem.
    BARRY R. MCBEE
    First Assistant Attorney General
    DON R. WILLETT
    Deputy Attorney General for Legal Counsel
    NANCY S. FULLER
    Chair, Opinion Committee
    Rick Gilpin
    Assistant Attorney General, Opinion Committee
    

Document Info

Docket Number: GA-0318

Judges: Greg Abbott

Filed Date: 7/2/2005

Precedential Status: Precedential

Modified Date: 2/18/2017