The Honorable Jimmy "Red" Milligan State Representative P.O. Box 68 Yellville, AR 72687-0068
I am writing in response to your request for an opinion on the following question:
Does Article Four (4) of the enclosed Marion County Budget Ordinance violate the Separation of Powers doctrine?
RESPONSE
The answer to this question is "no," in my opinion.
The provision in question, which is part of the appropriation ordinance that adopted the county budget for calendar year 2001 (hereinafter "Ordinance"),1 is entitled "Transfers" and provides as follows:
Any transfer of monies between the various Funds of the County or between the four major categories of expenditures — Personal, Supplies, Other Services and Charges, and Capitol Outlays or between line items expenditure codes — shall be made only with prior approval of the Marion County Quorum Court. Provided, however, all transfers budgeted for in the annual budget shall be exempt from the provisions of this section.
It is my opinion that this provision was properly enacted pursuant to the Quorum Court's authority over the appropriation function. Article
An appropriation measure is defined in the County Code as follows:
(a)(1) GENERALLY. An appropriation ordinance or amendment to an appropriation ordinance is defined as a measure by which the county quorum court designates a particular fund, or sets apart a specific portion of county revenue in the treasury, to be applied to some general object of expenditure or to some individual purchase or expense of the county.
A.C.A.
In accordance with the language emphasized above, the Marion County Ordinance in question, through the adoption of the annual budget, designates funds and establishes expenditure categories and line item expenditure codes. Articles 2 and 3 of the Ordinance then restrict expenditures to the established categories or line items and to the specified funds; and Article 4, about which you have inquired, requires Quorum Court approval of any transfers between these "Funds" or general expenditure categories or line items. See Ordinance. In my opinion, these provisions are generally authorized pursuant to the Quorum Court's exclusive power to appropriate county funds. The appropriation is presumed to be reasonable and the burden rests on the challenging entity to prove unreasonableness. See generally Union County v. Union CountyElection Commission,
It is therefore my opinion that Article 4 of the Ordinance does not violate separation of powers.
Assistant Attorney General Elisabeth A. Walker prepared the foregoing opinion, which I hereby approve.
Sincerely,
MARK PRYOR Attorney General
MP:EAW/cyh
