Untitled Texas Attorney General Opinion ( 1968 )


Menu:
  •             _   .
    .   .
    THIC    ATIWDRNEY   GENERAL
    OF 7JFExAs
    Ausn~.    T-s      78712
    AlTORNlCY       CIWERAL
    August 2, 1968
    Honorable J. W. Edgar               Opinion NO.M-263
    Commissioner of Education
    Texas Education Agency               Re:   Whether the Central Edu-
    Austin, Texas 78711                        cation Agency may assign
    a staff member, under the
    proposed agreement with
    the United States Office
    of Education, and continue
    to pay his State salary
    and benefits under a
    partial.lyreimbursable
    agreement during the period
    of assignment to duties in
    Washington, D.C., and re-
    Dear Dr. Edgar:                            lated question.
    You have requested the opinion of this office upon
    certain questions, the first of which is as follows:
    "1. May Central Education Agency assign a
    staff member, under the agreement proposal by
    the U. S. Office of Education, and continue to
    pay him State salary and benefits (partially
    reimbursable) during the time of such assign-
    ment to duties at Washington, D. C.?"
    In connection with the foregoing question you have
    stated that pursuant to a proposed agreement between the Central
    Education Agency and the United States Office of Education a
    staff member of the Central Education Agency would be assigned
    to the Washington, D. C. office of the United States Office of
    Education as an Education Fellow. This staff member would spend
    a period of ten months as an assistant on the staff of the
    United States Commissioner of Education and following such as-
    signment would return to the Central Education Agency. You have
    stated that the purpose of the Fellowship program is to provide
    your employee with the opportunity to gain an understanding of
    the Federal-State-local educational relationships and become
    knowledgeable about the role of the United States Office of
    Education therein.
    Tha annual current State salary of the staff member
    -1272-
    .
    Hon. J. W. Edgar, page 2     (M-263)
    being considered for assignment is $9,840.00. Under the pro-
    posed agreement between the United States Office of Education
    and the Central Education Agency, the staff member would be
    retained on the payroll of the Central Education Agency during
    the period of his assignment. However, under the proposed
    arrangement, the United States Office of Education would reim-
    burse the Central Education Agency at the annual rate of
    $9,657.00. The question has arisen as to whether this staff
    member may be paid by State warrant for the period of time
    covered by the proposed agreement because such staff member
    would not be performing the duties for which he was employed
    by the State.
    A review of the proposed agreement between the Central
    Education Agency and the United States Office of Education re-
    veals that such agreement actually is a grant from the United
    States Office of Education to the Central Education Agency
    to enable a staff member of the Central Education Agency to
    obtain certain training and experience beneficial to the Central
    Education Agency in its cooperative activities with the United
    States Office of Education as the State is being reimbursed the
    salary of the employee during the training period.
    Section 5 of Article 2654-3b, Vernon's Civil Statutes,
    provides that:
    "The State Board of Education shall be re-
    sponsible for maintaining State programs and
    activities designed to bring about improvement
    in the public schools. In discharging this re-
    sponsibility, the Board is,authorized to enter
    into contracts for grants from both public and
    private organizations and to expend such funds
    for the specific purposes and in accordance with
    the terms of the contract with the contracting
    agency." (Emphasis added.)
    Senate Bill 15, Acts of the 60th Legislature, Regular
    Session, 1967, the General Appropriations Bill, provides in the
    departmental appropriation to the Central Education Agency that:
    "The proper officer or officers of the
    Central Education Agency are hereby authorized
    to make application for and accept any other
    gifts, grants or allotments from the United
    States Government or other sources to be used
    on cooperative and other projects and programs
    in Texas. Any such Federal and other funds
    - 1273-
    ,    .
    Hon. J. W. Edgar, page 3 (M-263)
    as may be deposited in the State Treasury are
    hereby appropriated to the specific purposes
    authorized by the Federal Government and
    other contracting organizations, and the
    State Board of Education is author-       ex-
    pend these funds in accordance with the terms
    of the contract with the contracting agency._,
    . . .   (Emphasis added.)
    The answer to the question which you have initially
    posed is governed by the application of Section 51 of Article III
    of the Texas Constitution, which is set forth, in part, as follows:
    "The Legislature shall have no power to
    make any grant or authorize the making of any
    grant of public moneys to any individual, as-
    sociation of individuals, municipal or other
    corporations whatsoever; . . ."
    While it is apparent that the foregoing constitutional
    provision prohibits the Legislature from granting or appropriating
    public moneys to any individual, association of individuals, mu-
    nicipal or other corporations, the Texas courts have interpreted
    Section 51 of Article III of the Constitution of Texas as not pre-
    venting the Legislature from appropriating State funds to an in-
    dividual, association of individuals, municipal or other corpora-
    tions if the use and purpose of the appropriation is for the
    furtherance of the governmental duties of the State. If the ap-
    propriation is for a use not related to State governmental duties
    and functions, such appropriation is a gratuity and invalid.
    Bexar County v. Linden, 
    110 Tex. 339
    , 
    220 S.W. 760
    (1920); Road
    District No. 4, Shelby Co. v. Allred, 
    68 S.W.2d 164
    (Comm.App.
    1934) opinion adopted by the Supreme Court; City of Aransas
    Pass 4. Keeling, 
    112 Tex. 339
    , 
    247 S.W. 818
    (1923); Jones v.
    Alexander, 59 S.W.Zd 1083 (Connn.App.1933), opinion adopted by
    the Supreme Court; Texas Pharmaceutical Association v. Dooley,
    90 S.W.Zd 328 (Tex.Civ.App. 1936); Jefferson Co. v. Board of
    Co. and Dist. Road Indebtedness, 
    182 S.W.2d 908
    (1944).
    The authorization for the expenditure of appropriated
    funds for State employees to attend schools, clinics, conferences
    and other activities for training purposes is directly and sub-
    stantially related to the performance of the State's governmental
    functions and duties. The limitation imposed by the provisions
    of Section 51 of Article III of the Constitution of Texas, is
    that no State employees or officials may attend schools, clinics,
    conferences or other like activities, at State expense, when
    such activities bear no substantial and direct relation to the
    governmental duties and functions of the State.
    -1274-
    .   .
    Hon. J. W. Edgar, page 4 (M-263)
    In reviewing past Attorney General's Opinions on the
    question of training of governmental personnel, it is noted that
    the following rules have been consistently applied to determine
    whether the training was such that the State could pay for it.
    The question asked is whether the training described will be
    directly and substantially used to facilitate the governmental
    duties and functions of the State agency requesting such train-
    ing. Also, whether the facts establish that there is a rea-
    sonable, substantial and direct relationship between the purpose
    of the training and the accomplishment of the governmental
    functions entrusted to the employee. Attorney General's Opinion
    WW-83 (1957) - Insurance Commission employee training at IBM
    school, two weeks course; Attorney General's Opinion WW-223
    (1957) - Department of Public Safety employee pilot training
    in Flight Proficiency Training Program; Attorney General's
    Opinion R-2128 (1950) - Department of Public Safety employee
    training in Police Administration at Northwestern University,
    four and one-half months,course; Attorney General's Opinion
    WW-433 (1958).
    In applying the above rules to the fact situation that
    you have presented, it is our'opinion that the training pro-
    vided your staff member, under the proposed agreement with the
    United States Office of Education, will be directly and sub-
    stantially used to facilitate the administration of the govern-
    mental duties of the Central Education Agency. As the Central
    Education Agency must of necessity work closely with the United
    States Office of Education, it would appear to be most advan-
    tageous to have employees of your agency familiar with the op-
    erations of this Federal agency , as well as the programs which
    are administered by them which would be beneficial to the Central
    Education Agency. Cooperating and dealing with the United
    States Office of Education in programs and activities designed
    to bring about improvement in,the public schools of this State
    is an authorized governmental function and duty of the Central
    Education Agency. The training in question bears a reasonable,
    substantial and direct relationship to such governmental duties
    and functions.
    Consequently, we are of the opinion that the Central
    Education Agency has the authority to enter into an'agreement,
    such as the proposed agreement, with the United States office
    of Education, and that the employee of the Central Education
    Agency assigned to the United States Office of Education at
    Washington, D. C.,for training, may continue to be paid his
    salary as a State employee.
    The next question which you have posed is as follows:
    -1275-
    .    .
    Hon. J. W. Edgar, page 5   (M-263)
    "2. Does Central Education Agency have
    the authority to pay registration, tuition fees,
    travel, per diem and other necessary expenses
    (reimbursable from Title V funds) to staff-
    salaried employees who are selected, authorized
    and directed by the Commissioner of Education to
    attend certain institutes, seminars, workshops
    or other like training programs (sponsored by
    recognized training facilities or institutions
    of higher learning) and designed to improve
    their professional and/or technical knowledge
    toward the performance of their State job?"
    In connection with the foregoing question you have
    stated that:
    "A second separate problem concerns one of
    the plans involving the Central Education Agency
    under Title V, Section 503, P.L. 89-10, the Ele-
    mentary and Secondary Education Act of 1965. This
    State plan and application for Federal funds was
    developed pursuant to that Act to provide for pay-
    ment of registration, tuition, fees, travel, perdiem
    and other necessary expenses for selected staff
    members who have been authorized and/or directed
    by me as Commissioner of Education to attend in-
    stitutes, seminars, workshops, or other training
    courses sponsored by institutions of higher learn-
    ing or other recognized training institutions to
    improve their professional and technical knowledge,
    and thereby be the better prepared and informed
    to perform their Agency jobs.   . . .
    "Staff members are selected to participate
    in training courses that are compatible with their
    field of specialization and all training programs
    must stand to serve the best interests of the
    Central Education Agency and contribute to the
    improvement of public education in the State of
    Texas. Most of the training courses involved are
    sponsored by institutions outside the State and
    are of varying duration. Some involve as little
    as two or three days; whereas others may be as
    much as three or four months in length."
    In connection with the foregoing question and facts,
    you are concerned with whether the salary and travel expenses
    of these employees selected to attend institutes, seminars,
    -   1276-
    Hon. J. W. Edgar, page 6 (M-263)
    workshops or other training courses may be paid. In this
    connection, you have referred to Sections 7, 9, 13, 14, 18 and
    25 of Article V of Senate Bill 15, Acts of the 60th Legis-
    lature, Regular Session, 1967, as well as Article 5165a,
    Vernon's Civil Statutes, and Article 6813b, Vernon's Civil
    Statutes.
    The aforesaid provisions deal with such subjects as
    employee vacation and leaves, absences from the State, general
    travel provisions, transportation allowances, restrictions on
    registration fees, the appropriation of Federal funds received
    by State agencies to the agencies receiving the same for the
    purposes for which the Federal grant or aid was made, weekly
    working hours of State employees and salaries of State employees.
    A review of the plan and appliaation of the Central
    Education Agency to obtain Federal funds under Section 503 of
    Title V, P.L. 89-10, the Elementary and Secondary Education Act
    of 1965, reveals that such application for Federal funds has
    as its purpose the strengthening of State Departments of Edu-
    cation by staff development. Such result is to be accomplished
    by employees of the Central Education Agency attending institutes,
    seminars, workshops or other training courses to improve their
    professional and technical knowledge and thereby be better pre-
    pared and informed to perform their duties with the Central
    Education Agency.
    In view of the foregoing, we are of the opinion that
    the proposed activities of the Central Education Agency in having
    certain employees attend training courses is a valid exercise
    and function of the duties conferred upon the Central Education
    Agency by the Legislature, and upon the same basis and reasoning
    set forth in our answer to your initial question.
    In regard to the reimbursement of travel expenses and
    registration fees of your staff members attending institutes,
    seminars, workshops or other training courses in connection with
    the Federal plan you have submitted, we would like to call your
    attention to Attorney General's Opinion C-761 (1966) which held
    that:
    "In Attorney General's Opinion C-671 (19661,
    it was held that appraisers employed by the
    Veterans' Land Board may attend an appraisal
    school at Texas A&M University and have their
    registration fees paid by the State. In that
    opinion, it was stated Section 18 of Article V
    of the General Appropriation Act of the 59th
    Legislature, pertaining to expenditure of money
    -1277-
    Hon. J. W. Edgar, page 7 (W-263)
    for dues or registration in joining or attending
    any type of organization, has no application so
    long as the State employee aoes not join the
    organization. Likewise, it was held in Attorney
    General's Opinion C-692 (19661, registration
    fees necessary to attend courses of instruction
    deemed necessary to the furtherance of govern-
    mental duties, imposed upon a State agency, may
    be paid by such State agency. . . .'I
    In Attorney General's Opinion C-551 (1965), it was held
    that:
    "Federal 'trust' funds appropriated to the
    Health Department may be expended for transporta-
    tion, meals and lodging for personnel attending
    schools, clinics or conferences when leave from
    regular duties exceed thirty (30) calendar days
    in accordance with the agreement under which
    the funds are received; however, State derived
    funds appropriated to such department for personnel
    training may not be expended for this purpose
    other than in accordance with . . . the General
    Appropriations Act (19651."
    The foregoing opinions clearly set forth that payment
    of registration fees required to enable State employees to attend
    training courses necessary to the furtherance of their govern-
    mental duties is authorized by the Texas Education Agency, and
    that Federal "trust" funds appropriated to the Central Education
    Agency may be expended for transportation expenses of employees
    in accordance with the agreement under which the funds have been
    received by the Central Education Agency from the Federal Govern-
    ment.
    SUMMARY
    The Central Education Agency may assign a
    staff member, under the proposed agreement between
    the Central Education Agency and the United States
    Office of Education, to duties at the United States
    Office of Education in Washington, D. C., for train-
    ing purposes, and such employee may continue to re-
    ceive and be paid his State salary.
    The Central Education Agency has the authority
    to pay registration, tuition fees, travel, per diem
    and other necessary expenses of staff members who
    are selected and directed by the Commissioner of
    -1278-
    Hon. J. W. Edgar, page 8 (M-263)
    Education   to attend certain institutes, seminars,
    workshops   and other like training programs de-
    signed to   improve their professional and technical
    knowledge   in the performance of    ir State job.
    /v
    C. MARTIN
    ey General of Texas
    Prepared by Pat Bailey
    Assistant Attorney General
    APPROVED:
    OPINION COMMITTEE
    Hawthorne Phillips, Chairman
    Kerns Taylor, Co-Chairman
    Alan Minter
    Neil Williams
    Edward Esquivel
    Brock Jones, Jr.
    A. J. CARUBBI, JR.
    Executive Assistant
    - 1279 -