Case Information
*1 . Opinion No. M- 887
Honorable Joe Resweber
County Attorney Re: County Auditor's responsibility Harris County Courthouse Houston, Texas 77002 under a contract between the
commissioners court and the United States government for a Concentrated Employment Project under MDTA and Dear Mr. Resweber: the ECA.
Your request for an opinion on the above subject matter asks the following questions:
" 1 . Does the County Auditor have the re- sponsibility under State statutes to specify the accounting method to be used for these funds and have the responsibility to audit these funds?
” 2 . If the first question is answered in the affirmative, should the CEP funds be deposited with the County Treasurer? If the first question is answered in the
“3. affirmative, should the County Auditor follow the accounting methods and auditing procedures speci- fied in the federal contract whenever they con- flict with county accounting methods and auditing procedures?
“4 . If first question is answered in the affirmative, should the County Auditor follow the accounting methods and auditing procedures specified in the federal laws and regulations whenever they conflict with county accounting methods and audit- ing procedures?
"5 . If the first question is answered in the affirmative, should the grant monies be placed in the County depository in conformance with applicable state statutes and the County's depository contracts or does the Commissioners Court have the option of depositing these funds in another bank? If so, should that bank qualify in conformance with the County depository laws?
"6 . Various actions by the Harris County com- missioners Court have been taken in regard to the C.E.P. Grant program and these actions have been entered on the minutes of the Commissioners Court. If the first question is answered in the affirmative, should the County Auditor audit and approve a claim based upon an entry in the Commissioners Court's minutes concerning a requisition relating to the Concentrated Employment Program in question, inasmuch as there is some doubt as to whether these items are proper to be included in the minutes of the Harris County Commissioners Court?"
In Attorney General's Opinion M-605 (1970) it was held: "Under the provisions of Paragraph 11 of Article 2351, V.C.S., the Commissioners Court may enter into a contract with the United States gwernment to administer the Concentrated Em- ployment Project under the Manpower Development and Training Act (MDTA) and the Economic Oppor- tunity Act (EOA)."
In view of Attorney General's Opinion M-605 (1970), the commissioners court entered into a contract with the United States government to administer the Concentrated Employment Project under the Manpower Development and Training Act (MDTA) and the Economic Opportunity Act (EOA).
Pursuant to this contract the commissioners court has agreed to be responsible for the task set forth in the "statement
of work to be performed under this The commissioners contract.” court has agreed to "use accounting procedures which shall accu- rately allocate each expenditure incurred in the performance of this project.*
The commissioners court has further agreed that it "will employ qualified accountants to keep the Fiscal records under this contract. All Fiscal records will conform to the re- quirements specified in the Department of Labor HA - Manual Trans- Sheet No. 65 - dated Sept., 1969 mittal
"Title 2500 Accounting
Chapter 2510 Accounting for Redelegated Funding of MA Programs
Section 2511 Contractors/Sponsor apcru cost reporting procedure";
and that it "will maintain records on, and properly document, all 'In-Kind' contributions to the cost of the contract.” 1651, Vernon's Civil Statutes, requires that
Article the County Auditor shall have, general oversight of all books and records of all officers of the county. Article 1653, Vernon's Statutes, provides that the County Auditor shall examine Civil the books and accounts of any officer relating to the finances of the county, and Article 1656 provides that the County Auditor shall prescribe the forms to be used in the accounting of revenues and other funds and fees belonging to the county.
In answer to your first question you are advised that the County Auditor does not have the responsibility for specify- ing the accounting method to be used for funds disbursed pursuant to the contract in question, as such accounting methods are spelled out in the contract itself.
Answering your second question you are likewise advised that the c&P grant monies prwided for in contract are not to be deposited in the County Treasury, but are to be deposited in a special bank account specifically provided for in contract documents.
Honorable Joe Resweber, page 4 (M-887)
In answer to your third question you are advised that the accounting procedtires specified, in the contract control the disbursement of federal monies specified in the contract.
In view of our affirmative answer to the first question, we answer your fourth question by stating that auditing pro- cedures specified in the contract control Over any county account- ing methods and auditing procedures.
It also follows, in answer to your fifth question, that the provisions of Paragraph (c) of Section 23 of the general pro- visions for cost reimbursement do not require the special bank account to be a county depository.
In reply to .your sixth question, we have con.cluded that the County Auditor is not required to audit and apprwe claims re- lating to the employment program prwided for in the contract in accordance with its terms.
Summarizing our answers to your questions, we express the opinion that the commissioners court, in entering the con- tract with the federal government, becomes a sponsoring agent for the United States government in carrying out the Concentrated Employment Project under Manpower Development and Training Act and the Economic Opportunity Act: and consequently, such CEP funds do not become county funds subject to the various statutory provisions relating to the handling of county monies. Such funds are not deposited tis state or county funds but are dealt with as trust funds pursuant to the federal contract. See Attorney General's Opinion No. C-530 (1965).
SUMMARY Under the provisions of a contract between the commissioners court and the United States government to administer the Concentrated Employment Project under the Manpower Development a,nd Training Act (MDTA) and the Economic Opportunity Act (EOA); CEP funds do not become county monies a~nd are therefore not subject to the auditing procedures applicable to county funds.
. [*]
,C yerp truly yyyrs, Atto hey General of Texas if
Prepared by John Reeves
Assistant Attorney General
APPROVED:
OPINION COMMITTEE
Kerns Taylor, Chairman
W. E. Allen, Co-Chairman
Sam L. Jones, Jr.
Gordon Cass
John Banks
James Quick
MEADE F. GRIFFIN
Staff Legal~Assistant
ALFREDWALKER
Executive Assistant
NOLA WHITE
First Assistant