DENNIS E. KENEALY, Corporation Counsel Ozaukee County
You have asked for my opinion as to whether Ozaukee County is required to pay, or whether it may pay, the bar dues of the Ozaukee County District Attorney and Assistant District Attorneys in light of an earlier opinion issued at 74 Op. Att'y Gen. 165 (1985).
In my opinion, the county is not required to pay the bar dues of the district attorney and her assistants. However, a district attorney or assistant district attorney may elect under section
In 74 Op. Att'y Gen. at 166, the attorney general concluded that there was no Wisconsin statute expressly conferring on county boards the power to pay state bar dues of circuit judges. You indicate that the opinion might not be applicable to district attorneys because of sections
Section
The other statute to which you refer, section
The [county] board may provide for reimbursement to any elective officer, deputy officer, appointive officer or employe of any expense out-of-pocket incurred in the discharge of his [or her] duty in addition to his [or her] salary . . . including without limitation because of enumeration, traveling expenses within or without the county or state [and] tuition costs incurred in attending courses of instruction clearly related to his [or her] employment . . . .
In my opinion, the district attorney and assistant district attorneys no longer fall under the provisions of section
Under section
Similar statutory changes affecting circuit court judges led the court to conclude in Committee to Retain Byers v. ElectionsBoard,
Based on the significant statutory changes in the office of district attorney and the court's decision in Byers, I conclude that section
I have also considered and rejected the proposition that language in article
[T]he Wisconsin Supreme Court has determined that the sheriff "represents the sovereignty of the State" and is "accountable only to the sovereign. . . ." Although we might question the Wisconsin Supreme Court's classification of the county sheriff as an officer of the state, that court's determination based as it is on an interpretation of the Wisconsin Constitution is not subject to revision by . . . [others than the Wisconsin Supreme Court].
Soderbeck v. Burnett County, Wis.,
You mention in your request that the district attorney has chosen to maintain her benefits under the county benefit program pursuant to section
A district attorney or other employe of the office of district attorney who was employed in that office as a county employe on December 31, 1989, and who received any form of fringe benefits other than a retirement, deferred compensation or employe-funded reimbursement account plan as a county employe, as defined by that county pursuant to the county's personnel policies, or pursuant to a collective bargaining agreement in effect on January 1, 1990 . . . may elect to continue to be covered under all such fringe benefit plans provided by the county after becoming a state employe.
Hence, a district attorney or assistant district attorney may opt for the county fringe benefit plan if he or she was employed by the county in the district attorney's office on December 31, 1989, and received any form of fringe benefits as a county employe as defined by the county's personnel policies or pursuant to a collective bargaining agreement. Payment of bar dues could reasonably be considered a fringe benefit that the county could choose to provide. To the extent that the cost of the county benefit program exceeds the cost of participation in the state program under chapter 40 the county picks up the cost. Sec.
DJH:LS *Page 164
