Case Information

*1 The Attorney General of Texas ~trbruary 21. 1986

JIM MAl-fOX Opinion No.JM-420 Eonorable Guy Rardin supreme COJrl Building District Attorney P. 0. Box 12548 P. 0. Box 1592 Rc: Expenditure of $27,650 allocated AWm, TX. 78711.2548 51214752501 Psmpa, Texas 79065 by legislature the benefit the Telex 910187C1387 of ths district of the 31st attomsy TeIec~Pier 51214750288 and 223rd judicial districts Dear Mr. Eardin:

714 Jackron, Suite 700

Dallas. TX. 75202-4508

You inquire &out the funding for the office you hold as district 214rI42a944 for the ,J:ist and 223rd judicial districts. Section 24.133 of

the Government Code, formerly article 199, section 31, V.T.C.S., provides that thl! 31st judicial district shall be composed of 42.24 Alberta Ave.. Suite 160 counties, includj.og Gray County. Section 24.401 of the Government El Paso, TX. 799052792 91515353484 Code, formerly article 1996, section 3.050, V.T.C.S., establjshes

223rd judicial district composed of Gray County. 1001 Texas. Sulle 700 Your questic,n concerns the management of the $27,650 which Houston. TX. 77002.3111 state has allocate’i to your office for office expenses other than your 71312215886 own salary. Chr.ptar 46 of the Government Code, Professional Prosecutors Act, p,rovides for this appropriation: 808 eroadway. suite 312 ,.ubl,ock, TX. 794013479 EXPENSES. (a) Each prosecutor Sec. 46.004. @Y&747-5238 is ent::tled to receive not less than $22,50@ a year flea the state to be used by the prosecutor 4209 N. Tenth. Sulle S to hell1 defray the salaries and expenses MCAllml. TX. 78501-1885 That money may not be used to supplement the prosecutor’s salary.

200 MaIn Plaza. Sub 4w (b) Each prosecutor shall submit annually San Antonio. TX. 78X6-2797 the couptroller of public accounts a sworn account 512/2254191 shoving how this money was spent during the year.

[Porme~ly V.T.C.S. art. 332b-4, $41. An Equal OPPOftUnilYl AffirmaWe Action Employer The district attxcney is entitled sppropriat,Lon. Government Code 546.002(l). The current

Appropriations Act provides a maximum of $27.650 per district per year in multi-county districts. Acts 1985, 69th Leg., ch. 980, art. IV, at 7722.

Pou state that the Gray County Commissioners Court has in effect completely takea ,this amount away from your office when your budget

, 4 Ronorable Guy Pardin - Page i! (Jn-428) . The court hnls established a procedure whereby the full was submitted.

amount of $27,650 is deducted from your office budget and the counties comprising the 31st district allov tbe balance of your office budget es their portion to ‘b’e paid for the expenses of the office.

The counties that cwprise the are responsible for paying the salaries the district attornay’s staff and the expenses of his office. Government Code 0141.106, 41.107. The Professional Prosecutors Act provides following:

(a) It is th’e purpose of this chapter to increase the effectiveness lav enforcement in this state and tc Increase the funds available for use in prosecutic’n.

(b) The connn:lssionere court in each that has a prosecutor to this chapter shall provide the funds necessary to carry out the purpose of chapter and shall continue

provide funds for the office of the prosecutor in an ar.ount that 1~s equal to or greater than amount of funds provided the office by the county’ on August 27, 1979. This subsectjon does not apply to 101~1 supplementation salary of the prosecutor,. ‘This provision became effectfve on August

Government Code 046.006.

27, 1979. Acts 1979, 66th ‘Leg., ch. 705, at 1709 (codified as V.T.C.S.

art. 332b-4). The five counties in district must continue funding your offic’e in an amount at least equal to the amount of funding each one prov1tie.d on that date. See Broom v. Tvler County Commissioners Court, !;.,W.2d 435 (Tsx. Civ. App. - Eeaumont 1977, no writ); Attorney General Opinions E-572 (1973) (applying provisions in article 3912k, V.T.C.S.. which prevents court from rsettiog sslorias lower than they were on effective date of statute). We do not know bov much funding each county provided the distrfct attorney’s in 1979; thus, we cannot determine whether thefr present funding is sufficient.

Pou also state that for the past two years, each itea you have submitted for payment to the various ccunties has been refused brceuse you did not include in your budget. This yesr, you put a contin- gency item in your budgr:t which the commissioners court summarily struck; thus you again will be unable to pay for unexpected office expenses.

Attoruey General Opinion JP-70 (19S3) discusses the role of the commissioners COUIX in adopting the budget county’ 6 *3 Aoootable Guy Aardin - Pega; 3 (JM-428)

prosecuting It expressed following opinion about state funds for the district: attorney’s office:

In our oplnlot~ the fuuds received by a district attorney pursuenz to the Profeesionel Prosecutors Act may be used in his sole discretion

putposes authorimrd under the statute and are not to control by the court. Section 4 of article 332b-4 states that tbe state funds are payablo to the district attorney aud are to be used by the district attorney. See Acts 1981, 67th Leg., Appropriations Act. Judiciary - Comptroller’s Department, 19 (‘payments Section shall be made dlkectly to district attorney’).

[See also Acts 1,985, 69th Leg., ch. 980, art. IV at7722;J

Section 41.106 of thgr Government Code applies to budgeting county funds. The distric,t attorney prepares his budget and submits Attorney the commissioners #court, subject their veto. General Opinions J?4-313 (1.985) ; R-922 (1976); R-656 the commissioners court my veto an item in (1975). In our opinion, your proposed budget vhic’l allocates funds to contingencies, but it may not prevent you from using the state funds received under chapter 46 of the Governmelt Code for contingencies.

SUMMARY when a distrkt receives state funds for his office expenses under section 46.004 of the Government ,:odc. the counties composing the district must cqnitinue to provide funds for his in an amount at least equal to the amount of funds provided for the office by the county on the effective date the act. Punds received under statut:e are not subject to appropria- tion or control’by the commissioners court.

J I-M MATTOX Attorney General of Texas JACX HIGHTOWER

First Assistant Attorney General

Rouoreble Guy Bardin - Page 4 Uti-428)

MARY KELLER

Executive Assistant Attome:, General

ROBERT GRAY

Special Assistant Attorney General

RICK GILPIN

Chairman, Opinion Comittee

Prepared by Susan L. Garriam

Assistant