Case Information
*1 OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF TEXAS AUSTIN
uay 17, 1939 *2 II0n . 3. J. Dartez, Lay 17, 1939, Page 2
23 of this Act provides a registration fee of &lO.OO, and Section 20 thereof providns (I renowal fee of i2.50 payable annually on or before the’firot day of ?:over.bcr. Lection 27 of the Texas harbor Law crates the *8tate Board of Barber Examiners’ sund,v with the follow- lan .-uag e :
I . The secretary ahall keep a record of’ all pro- ceedln&*of the Board and shall be the custodian of all such records shall receive aad receipt for all money by the Board. All money so received shall be immediately deposited with the [atate Treasurer, v.ho shall same to a special fund to be as ‘state Board of 3ar- credit ber ixanin?rs Fund,’ which money shall be drawn from said special fund upon claims made therefor by the aoard to tho Coffiptroller; and if found correct, to be approvod by him and vouchers issued therefor, and countersigned nnd peid.by the State Treasury, -.hlch special fund is hereby appropriated for the-purpose of carrying out all the provisions of this Act. That al:nually at the close of business on ::uqst 31 each year a cor;plete report of tho buslnzes transaction by the Board showing all receipts and disburs-ments skull be made by the aoard to tho Governor of the Ltate of Texas. ” . .
Unlike rest of our statutory special Funds, the balance funds tLr_rein at the end of clven year, cvPr and above sdrinistrative expenses, does not pass into the Cencrsl Fund, b;lt In the Ltate Board of’ barber ::xaminers’ E’und to accumulate rerains fro- year to year a~contlnulng fund subject to biennial approprla- tions. But in answering your inquiries, we Lusti look the last biecnial daportzcntnl bill, rather than to this appropriation mtida by Section 27, Article 734a, ?enal Code, blanket of al; moneys in the .;tatc ljoard of tiarbcr : xcn?inersl Zund for the purpose or carrying cut the provisions OP the Texns %rbzr Low, because the operation of the latter enactment, as m appropriation by Article 8, Tection 6, Constl:ution of ‘iaxes, 1s linltcd, masure, to two years from the date of its enactment in lS2S.
?~cnate Bill !:o. 138, Chapter 504, Act? i.egular Zession, 45th i.cgisl?turs, being the dopnrtzcntal for appro?rintiGn years ending ;A.ul:ust 31, 1038, and Anust 31, 1’:3S, pr0vidi.s for . xamluers, a budgeted appropriation State Board of Zarbcr fcr salaries and r~lctanance in the total sun of ,62,420.00 for each of ebld years, and provides additionally as follows:
753 B4@pmi4 ..Y ,. . Ron, X. J. Cartez, Pay 17, 1939,. Page 3
“The foregoing amount8 for the &ate hoard of Barber I,xamlners arci hereby ,approprlated out of the Ltate Board Barber z.xamlners aund, composed of any b~lanceo on hand at the end of any preceding fiscal’ year and sny fees and other receipts collected by soid board and deposited in said fUIId during and for each of the fiscal yc,:ars ending August 31, 1938, and Au:~uot 31, 1939, less transfers the Ganeral Fund as provided by Statute and/or this appro- priation Act. Is appropriated and ordered trans- There ferred ~Z.ighteen Hundred Ge;enty-five Doll&r8 por year from the State board of Barber ~xaminc~rs Fund tci tbe General Revenue Fund for the purpose or paying the cost oi governmental scrviccs rendered to @aid Board by the Stata Departments supported by the General Fund.”
Answering your second question first, it is our opinion that same should receive a negative answer. k ruling by this Department that the State Board of zarber Lxamlnors could Issue vouchers whereon warrants could lawtully issue, to cover salaries and admlnlotretive l~ncurred during fiscal year ending August 31, 1939, but to be paid from moneys coming into ‘the state Board of Barber Examiners * zaa from annual renewal fees after termination of such flsoal year during the succeeding flsc3l year, would be tantamount to saying that the above cited dnportnental should be effective for a lonqcr term than two years, in contravention 0T Article 8, jectlon 6, Constitution that no appropriation OS money shall ts ‘i’exas, providing, in part, made for a longer term than two years.
In addition to this constitutional inhibition, he have Article 12, Hevised Civil Statutes, providing, in part, that “the fiscal year of State shall termioate on the 3let day of Aupust OS each year and appropriations of the utate Government shall con- form thereto.”
Boreover, we have the express language of tbc above cited in connection u,ith the departmental appropriation b111, providing, budget for the t‘tate Board of Sarbcr Lxaniners, that the ar,.ounts so specifically ltezized are appropriated out of the state Board of Ber- ber txaniners’ irund, “cox>csed of any balnncea on hand at the end of any preceding fiscal year and any fees and other receipts by said board end deposfted in said fund during and for each of the years ending iiup;ust 31, 1938, aud ;iuEust 31, 1939 ,‘I etc. annual renewal fees poyuble :Lvcmber 1, 1939, and ollo- !:anifeotly, catcd -t,o’t,he State Board of Darbcr Examiners’ <and after Xu{:uZt :jl, 1939, u.ould not be v.ithln the foreg;lng appropriation, so as to be subject to warrants dravin pursuant to said appropriation for the bieanlux ending hugust 31, 193Q.
f *4 eon; tZ. J. Daitez, Kay 17, 1939, Page 4
Our negetive answer to your second question also finds . . support letter ln former-oulnions of this Department, one of v.hlch 1s a
o.>lnion of dtii.8 December 16, 1931, written by ilon. Elbert Looper, th;.n Assistant Attorney General, end direoted to iion. C. v.
~2crral1, Chalnaan, Lailroad Commission of ‘Texas.
‘By your first question you ask If the L;tate Board of Dar- bar Xramlners oan operate Flthout requesting any aarrants to be issued against the Ztote Board of Liarbcr .kxemlnersQ r*lmd until such time as there shall have bosn aolloated sufficient revenue to take care of cutstandlng obl$gatlons, as a general statement OS your second question, and embraaed Eithln and this mii:ht Cuirly be Interpreted its mope. Eowever, assuming thst you xean to inquire If the Board year, and may lawfully incur oblicatlons during a certain is anti- issue harrants th.:refor against r.hlch it future revenuee clpated will come into the State Board of Earber i.xaeiners’ i+‘und during that f iscel year, we answer such question affirmatively.
The case of Perguson, et al v. Johnson, et al, 67 S. F. (Zd) 372, that obligations wq be is authority for the proposition incurred and liabilities contracted for during any fiscal year by boards and commissions oven though Sunds to. pay warrants drawn in payment thereof are not at the time actual1 in the sp:?cial fund ln question, but It is reasonably antic ~~~t~~~~s~~~~~~~e~~:~nues sufficient to ceet such obligat=; w 3ut as ne reed this case, it
funds during the same fiscal year. does not m::!en to sapthat- or com?Qission ceri enticlpate pro- speatlve revenues for the succeeding flocnl year or nny other fi5ot31 year, except the one during which the obllgotlons and expenses were incurred, and our answer to your first question is so limited.
Yours very truly BY
PbX:N
hPPRO’iF?D
ATTOiCXNEY GC:;.RAL 07 l25XA.S