RQ-0698-GA
Requestor:
The Honorable Jeff Wentworth
Chair, Committee on Jurisprudence
Texas State Senate
Post Office Box 12068
Austin, Texas 78711
Re: Whether the media exception to the Public Information Act, section 552.275(j), Government Code, applies to a requestor who holds an amateur radio license issued by the Federal Communications Commission (RQ-0698-GA)
Briefs requested by May 19, 2008
RQ-0699-GA
Requestor:
The Honorable Richard J. Miller
Bell County Attorney
Post Office Box 1127
Belton, Texas 76513
Re: Constitutionality of sections 143.025(k) and 143.1041, Local Government Code, which authorizes a police department in a municipality of 1.5 million or more to administer a civil service examination to a police officer after the officer is admitted to a police officer training academy (RQ-0699-GA)
Briefs requested by May 19, 2008
RQ-0700-GA
Requestor:
The Honorable Sherri K. Tibbe
Hays County Criminal District Attorney
Hays County Justice Center
110 East Martin Luther King
San Marcos, Texas 78666
Re: Authority of a county bail bond board to suspend or revoke an individual surety license for that licensee's activity relating to an out-of-county bond (RQ-0700-GA)
Briefs requested by May 23, 2008
For further information, please access the website at www.oag.state.tx.us or call the Opinion Committee at (512) 463-2110.
TRD-200802127
Stacey Napier
Deputy Attorney General
Office of the Attorney General
Filed: April 22, 2008
Opinion No. GA-0615
The Honorable Phil King
Chair, Committee on Regulated Industries
Texas House of Representatives
Post Office Box 2910
Austin, Texas 78768-2910
Re: Whether a limit on increases to annual earnings used in calculation of retirement benefits of vested employees of the City of Fort Worth contravenes article XVI, section 66 of the Texas Constitution (RQ-0632-GA)
S U M M A R Y
Texas Constitution article XVI, section 66(d) generally prohibits a change in retirement benefits of a non-statewide retirement system that reduces or otherwise impairs "benefits accrued" by persons eligible to receive such benefits, without accumulating additional service, on or after the effective date of the change. Based on a review of the constitutional text and purpose and case law from other jurisdictions construing similar constitutional limits, we construe article XVI, section 66(d) to prohibit a change in the method of determining the compensation base of vested employees if such action reduces or impairs retirement benefits that the employee would have been eligible to receive before the effective date of the change. Accordingly, the City of Fort Worth's recently adopted 12% cap on increases in earnings used to determine the compensation base for calculating retirement benefits contravenes article XVI, section 66(d) to the extent it reduces or impairs retirement benefits that vested employees would have received before the effective date of the change.
Opinion No. GA-0616
The Honorable Homero Ramirez
Webb County Attorney
Post Office Box 420268
Laredo, Texas 78042-0268
Re: Whether a county and school districts in the county may jointly develop or sell rights to the natural resources located on county school lands (RQ-0636-GA)
S U M M A R Y
Article VII, section 6 of the Texas Constitution does not allow a county to cede or share its authority and responsibilities as sole trustee of county school land and the county permanent school fund. Thus, a county and school districts in the county may not "jointly" develop or sell rights to natural resources and minerals in county school land by forming a joint venture, a local government corporation, or other association to exercise the county's constitutional authority. A county or school district may not recoup expenses to develop or sell natural resources and mineral rights in county school land from subsequent proceeds or income from such land. The county and the school districts in the county may not share in the revenue realized from the sale of natural resources and mineral rights in such land.
Opinion No. GA-0617
The Honorable Don McLeroy, D.D.S.
Chair, State Board of Education
William B. Travis Building
1701 North Congress Avenue
Austin, Texas 78701-1494
Re: Constitutionality of section 51.413, Natural Resources Code, which would authorize the School Land Board to transfer proceeds from the sale of land in the permanent school fund to the available school fund (RQ-0638-GA)
S U M M A R Y
The perpetual school fund, the public free school fund, and the permanent school fund referred to in Texas Constitution sections 2, 4, and 5 of article VII constitute the same fund, most commonly known as the permanent school fund. When the State Board of Education invests assets of the permanent school fund, it should consider the School Land Board's investments and their potential impact on the probable income and the probable safety of the permanent school fund. When the School Land Board engages in transactions with interests in the real estate special fund account, it must consider the best interest of the permanent school fund including investments by the State Board of Education. Natural Resources Code section 51.413(1), which attempts to place the proceeds of land sales in the available school fund, appears to be inconsistent with Texas Constitution article VII, sections 4 and 5. A court would probably find section 51.413(1) unconstitutional.
Opinion No. GA-0618
The Honorable Dan W. Heard
Calhoun County Criminal District Attorney
211 South Ann Street
Port Lavaca, Texas 77979
Re: Authority of a county auditor to refuse payment to a former employee of a county hospital on the ground that such payment is unconstitutional (RQ-0640-GA)
S U M M A R Y
The bills and accounts of a county hospital must be certified by the hospital's board of managers and transmitted to the county commissioners court. All bills and accounts, including salaries and wages, of a county hospital are paid in the same manner as charges made against a county, which charges must be approved by the county auditor and paid by order of the commissioners court. The county auditor has authority to determine whether any proposed payment strictly complies with the law. The county auditor, in an exercise of reasonable discretion, may refuse to approve a payment on the grounds that it is unconstitutional. As between the county hospital board of managers and county auditor, a court would be the final arbiter of whether the payment satisfied the constitution
For further information, please access the website at www.oag.state.tx.us or call the Opinion Committee at (512) 463-2110.
TRD-200802126
Stacey Napier
Deputy Attorney General
Office of the Attorney General
Filed: April 22, 2008