Case Information
*1 I OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF TEXAS AUSTIN I ~RO”Et-3 SELLERS
/ ATTORNEY GENERAL
Honorable Roy L. HLll
county Attorney
mlnneas counw Ballingor, Texas
Deer Slrr
of this SL::
as follows:
letter reoelved to the authority ellmf the county ide from her regular the respeotive Com- of County funds for ve already ruled on this erstend tNs method a? keeping prevalent over Texas, and if e mail me a'oopy of the opinion.
If you do not have this question prepared from e former opinion, then will you please edvlse, if In your opinion the Cowaissloners Court has the euthorityj to have their individual accounts kept, and pay for suoh services with County Funds?" *2 Eon. Roy L. Hill, Page 2
The letter of the County Judge addressed to you, a& referred to in your letter es quoted above is l,n psrt as follcVs:
"In th6 case of Stephens et al v. lrdllls County 113 9. U. 2 D page 944. The court passed on whether or not there was a contract betveen tha County Trea- 8urer and the Commls8ioner Courtj for paylag the Treasurer extra money for tha work she did for the oonualasl.otiers outalda of her regular offloial duties as County Treasurer.
'The question I vent to knw la, can the Corn-- missioners oourt pay out of their reed and bridge fund money to the Count7 Treasurer for keaplng separate books for eaoh Comlaaloners preolnot, making a mota- thly itemized stetement es to the receipts, and dls- trubments for eaoh Commissioner pmoinot, l aoh mouth, and then oomplllng at tha end of the year all this .ttormstlon, Into an annual report for eaoh Comnla- l loMM preoinot.
"This of oourae will be over, and above the salary she receives for porforisfng her regular of- floial duties as County Troaauror.”
Generally speaking, the Laglalaturo has the power to ~r$i; the duties and to fix the 0 nsation of the County F 1 of the State Conatltuthon).
(See Section 44, Article 3942 and 5943, Vernon*a Annotated Civil Statutes Artiolas $41, are applioable to the County Treasurer and fix the maximum oompensation as aazm relates to only the duties of hla office and ~OVO no appli- oatlon to extra servloes as referred to in your latter.
Opinion No. O-59 of this Department holda that it is permlsslble for 8 County !Preasurer to aooept compensation for servicea rendered beyond the duties of his offlca where the per- formance of suoh services called for la olearly not within the soope of the offloiel &uties of the office which he holds.
It is apparent that keeping the aooounts of eaoh oounty ocmslplssioner ia an addition to is not a part of the offioial (See the oaae of Stephens et al duties of the County Treasurer. v. Mills County, 113 9. W. (2d) 944).
BOX%. Roy L. Hill, Pege 3
It is well established in this State, 8s stated in Texas JurlsprudeMe, Vol. 11, P. 564:
"Comtulssloners~ Courts are courts of limited juris- d,iotlon, in that their authority extends only to matters pertaining to the goner81 welfare of their respective oounties and that their powers em only those expressly or Fmplledly oonferred upon them by law, that Is, by the Constitution and atatutes of the State."
The cese of Stephen et al v. Wills County, supn, stron& indloates that the Comiasloners@ Court hes the legal euthorlty to contraot with the County Treasurer for the purpose of keeping the aooounts of each County Ccemlssloner, and suoh servloes 81% additional to end not a p8bt of his duties 88 County Tn8surer.
For the purposes of this opinion we must presume that the Comnissloners* Court of your oounty is oomplylng vLth the provialons of Article 6740, V. A. C. S., as interpreted by the Supreme Court of this State in the case of Stovall v. Shiverq 103 9. W. (2d) 363, end that the road end bridge fund of the oounty, other than the funds derived from registration of auto- aobilea reoelved under Artlole V. A. C. S., vhloh we 6679~lo, hpve held should be oerried in a separate and distinct ro8d end bridge fund eooount, is C8rriOd in a Sing10 8ooount and is frm time to time apportioned to the four Commlssioners~ preolnots respectively es was done in the 0888 of Garland v. Sanders, 114 9. W. (2d) 302. If this assuaptlon 1s oorreot, we knov of no reason why the Commissioners 1 Court may not employ the County or eny other person to keep the aocounts of eaoh Treesurer, oounty oomlsslomr for his nspeotive preolnot and pay for suoh servloes out of the road and bridge Fred of the oounty since there is no duty imposed upon the County Treasurer or any other offloer to keep suoh a detailed record and report of the receipts and disbursements for each oommissioner~s precinct.
If the road bridge fund is not carried in a single eooount but is divided Into four separate and dlstlnot aooounts there would be no necessity for such extra bookkeeping for the County Treasurer's books would at all times show the amounts *4 ga. R0y L. Roll, P8g8 4
OredftOd end OhRFged to eaoh C?f said preoiacta and the ~~SPQC- tive belanoe in ench, if any.
Yours very truly ...F.~, ATTORREY GiEHEIUL OF TgxAs ArdeLl William ;' ,a AOai8tont _ .~ Aum