Untitled Texas Attorney General Opinion ( 1966 )

Honorable Robert S. Calvert Opinion No. c-692
Comptroller of Public Accounts
Austin, Texas Re: Payment of Registration
Fees on facts submitted.
Dear Mr. Calvert:
Your request for an opinion on the above subject
matter reads as follows:
"I have been presented with two accounts for the
payment of registration fees, each being incurred under
somewhat different circumstances.
"1 . A registration fee of $5C.O0 was paid in the
name of the State of Texas to attend a conference spon-
sored by the Urban Transportation Committee of the
Greater Chamber of Commerce of Pittsburg. A copy of
the program is attached.
"2. A registration fee of $10.00 was paid to
attend the Uniform Commercial Code Institute, the
meeting being held in San Antonio. Attached to the
account is a receipt for the registration fee which
is signed by an executive secretary for the San Antonio
Bar Association.
"House Bill No. 12, acts of the 59th Legislature,
Article 5, the appropriation bill under which we are
now operating provides in part:
"'The provisions set forth in this and all other
Articles of this Act are limitations on the appropria-
tions made in this -
Act.'
"The limitation as to payment of registration
fees found in Article 5 reads as follows:
"'RESTRICTION ON REGISTRATION FEES. None of the
monies appropriated in this act may be expended for dues,
registration fees or any kind of similar expense incurred
in joining or attending any type of organization, unless
the membership is in the name of the State of Texas.'
-3326-
Hon. Robert S. Calvert, page 2 (c-692)
'In view of restrictions as to registration fees
for attending organized gatherings, would this provision
be violated by paying the registration fees incurred
under the conditions set out above?
'The appropriation against which it is requested
that the fees be paid is found in Article 6 of the
appropriation bill under which we are now operating."
The answer to the questions posed in your request is
governed by the principles of law announced in Attorney General's
Opinions c-671 (1966) and C-571 (1965) and authorities cited
therein.
In Attorney General's Opinion C-571 it was held that
the Texas Water Development Board may pay from appropriated
funds the tuition fees of two employees to attend an eight-day
course in Earth Control and Investigation conducted by the
Bureau of Reclamation, Denver Laboratories, and the registration
need not be made in the name of the State. It was specifically
stated in C-5712
"The above quoted provision of the App,ropriations
Bill would prohibit expenditure of such funds for such
purposes only if the provision, in this situation, did in
fact require registration in the name of the State of
Texas and this were not complied with. It could be
argued that the course of instruction conducted by the
Bureau of Reclamation was a 'type of organization' and
the registrations must be in the name of~the State of
Texas if the tuition is to be paid from such appropriated
funds. However, in this particular instance, inasmuch
as the Bureau of Reclamation is an agency of the United
States the term 'organilation1 would not be applicable.
In holding that the word 'organization' did not apply
to the United States, the New Hampshire Supreme Court
in the case of Farm Mutual Auto Ins. Co. v. Manson, 54
A2d 580, 583; 94 N H 389' t t d 'c t i 1 "organiza-
tion" is not commonly emp!.otet "in'spe%itgno",the United
States.'
"Therefore, it is the opinion of this office that
such Section 18, of Article V, of House Bill 12, Acts of
the 59th Legislature, does not require, as a prerequisite
to expenditure of ap&ropriated funds, that registration
at courses conducted by the Bureau of Reclamation be
made in the name of the State of Texas. However, there
is no reason why the registrations could not be made in
the name of the State of Texas."
-3327-
Hon. Robert S. Calvert, page 3 (C-692)
Likewise, in Attorney General's Opinion c-671, 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.
Attached to your request is the statement by the
head of the agency informing that the training and information
made available to the employees involved was for the furtherance
of the governmental duties imposed upon the agency and was
directly and substantially related to the performance of such
governmental functions. In this connection, it was held in
Attorney General's Opinion c-671, supra.:
"In prior questions of this nature, this office has
consistently employed two basic criteria: (1) Whether the
training described will be directly and substantially used
to,facilitate the governmental duties and functions of the
State agency requesting such training; and (2) Do the facts
establish that there is a reasonable, substantial and direct
relationship between the purpose of the training and the
accomplishment of the governmental functions entrusted to
the employee? Attorney General's Opinions W-83 (1957),
w-233 (1957), W-433 (1958).”
In view of the foregoing, you are advised that the
registration fees to attend the conference sponsored by the
Urban Transportation Committee of the Greater Chamber of Commerce
of Pittsburg, and the registration fee to attend the Uniform
Commercial Code Institute may be paid. ~
SUMMARY
Registration fees necessary to attend courses of
instruction deemed necessary to the furtherance of
governmental duties imposed upon a State agency may be
paid by such State agency. Attorney General's Opinions
C-571 (1965) and c-671 (1966).
Yours very truly,
WAGGONER CARR
Attorney General of Texas
General
JR:sck -332th
Hon. Robert S. Calvert, Page 4 (C-692)
APPROVED:
OPINION COMMITTEE
W. V. Geppert, Chairman
Linward Shivers
Charles Ear-dwell
W. 0. Shultz
Pat Bailey
APPROVED FOR THE ATTOPxNEYGENERAL
BY: T. B. Wright
-3329-