Opinion

Untitled Texas Attorney General Opinion

Court
Texas Attorney General Reports
Filed
Jul 2, 1988
Status
Published
On the bench
Jim Mattox
Cited by
0 cases

The opinion

April7, 1988

Mr. S. Dale Ousley Opinion No. JR-888

Chairman

Texas Board of Irrigators Re: Per diem for members

1700 N. Congress Avenue of the Texas Board of

Austin, Texas 78701 Irrigators (RQ-1349)

Dear Mr. Ousley:

You ask whether members of the Texas Board of

Irrigators are entitled to receive payment of actual

travel expenses incurred in the performance of their

official duties. The Texas Board of Irrigators was

established by the passage of Acts 1979, 66th Leg., ch.

197, at 430 (article 8751, V.T.C.S). Section 3(g) of that

act governs the payment of per diem and travel expenses to

members of the board. Upon enactment, that section read

as follows:

(g) Each member shall receive as com-

pensation for his or her services $25 a day

for each day he or she is actively engaged

in official duties in addition to actual

aavel exnenses. (Emphasis added.)

In 1981, two years after the passage of the above-

quoted language, in an effort to standardize per diem

allowances for all Texas boards and commissions, the

legislature adopted an omnibus per diem statute. That

act, found at article 6813f, V.T.C.S., reads in pertinent

part as follows:

Sec. 2. (a) A member of a state board

or commission is entitled to per diem re-

lating to the member's service on the board

or commission. The amount of the per diem

is the amount prescribed by the General

Appropriations Act.

. . . .

Sec. 3. Each law prescribing the amount

of per diem relating to membership on a

p. 4347

,

Mr. S. Dale Ousley - Page .2 m-888)

state board or commission is suspended to

the extent of a conflict with this Act. If

the General Appropriations Act does not

prescribe the amount of per diem to which a

member of a state board or commission is

entitled by law, the law prescribing the

amount of per diem is not suspended by this

Act. If a law imposes a limit on the number

of days for which a member of a state board

or commission is entitled to claim per diem,

the limit is not suspended by this Act.

Shortly after article 6813f took effect, the attorney

general interpreted its provisions as follows.:

the clear intent of article 6813f is to

supersede conflicting provisions regarding

per diem in statutes such as articles

4413(41) and 4515. In light of this, it is

apparent that article 6813f not only should,

but RR& prevail, to the extent of conflict,

over these statutes.

Attorney General Opinion MW-388 (1981). Subsequently, the

legislature amended the per diem provision for members of

the Texas Board of Irrigators as follows:

(g) Each member shall receive as com-

pensation for his or her ssrvices an amount,

provided bv the General Amromxatlons Act,

for each day he or she is actively engaged

in official duties in addition to actual

travel exoenses. (Emphasis added.)

Acts 1985, 69th Deg., ch. 795, 59.002, at 2819.

The current appropriations act prescribes psr diem

allowances as follows:

Sec. 4. PER DIEM OF BOARD OR COMMISSION

MEMBERS. a. As authorized by Section 2 of

Article 6813f, Texas Revised Civil Statutes

Annotated, the per diem of state board and

commission members shall consist of (1)

compensatory per diem at $30 oer dav;

,-

(2) actual exnenses for meals and lodging

not to exceed $75 oer day; ixna (3) trans-

portation.

p. 4348

Mr. S. Dale Ousley - Page 3 (-888)

b. If a law enacted after Article 6813f

authorizes per diem for members of

particular state board'or commission, but

does not specify the amount of the per diem,

then the amount of the per diem shall be as

listed in the preceding paragraph. (Emphasis

added.)

General Appropriations Act, Acts 1987, 70th Leg., 2nd

C.S., ch. 78, art. V, 54 (a), at 1082. This $75 limit on

food and lodging expenses conflicts with the "actual

travel expenses" allowed by the board's enabling act and

gives rise to the current controversy.

In 1985, the attorney general clarified the combined

effect of article 6813f, V.T.C.S., and the appropriations

act on a particular board or commission's per diem pro-

vision.

[T]he basic preemptive effect of article 6813f

must depend primarily upon when it was en-

acted. As a general rule, when two statutes

deal with the same subject, the most recently

enacted statute prevails. Consequently, a

statute which is passed subsequent to article

6813f and which concerns the amount of per

diem a particular board's members are en-

titled to receive would create an exception to

article 6813f with regard to that board or

commission. Because section 4(l) of article V

of the current Appropriations Act provides for

per diem *[aIs authorized by Section 2 of

article 6813f,' it does not apply to per diem

established by other statutes, i.e., those

enacted after article 6813f. The statute for

the particular board and the board's appro-

priation would control.

Attorney General Opinion 3X-382 (1985).

The 1985 amendment to the Board of Irrigators statute

replaced the $25 a day compensatory amount of th8 original

act with the reference to the amount authorized in the

general appropriations act. The amendment retained the

language authorizing "actual travel expenses." This

statutory reference to the appropriations act eliminates

any argument that the legislature was unaware of the

existence of the appropriations act and the conflict

between the "actual travel. expenses" of the board's

p. 4349

Mr. S. Dale Ousley - 'Page4 (JR-888)

statute and the monetary ceiling placed on food and

lodging

. . in

..the language

-. of

_ the appropriations

__ act. In our

opinion, tne amencatory language r8fl8CtS a legislative

intent to rainstate "the actual travel expenses" that had

been authorized by article 8751 before the enactment of

article 6813f. Consistent with the reasoning of Attorney

General Opinion JR-382 quoted above, it is our opinion

that the 1985 amendment to article 8751 supersedes article

6813f to the extent of any conflict. Accordingly, the

members of the Texas Board of Irrigators are entitled to

reimbursement for their actual travel expenses incurred in

connection with their service on the board.

SUMMARY

The members of the Texas Board of

Irrigators are entitled to receive reimburse-

ment for their actual travel expenses

incurred in connection with their service on

the board.

Very truly yo I: ,

.&I & /b-

JIM MATTOX

Attorney General of Texas

MARYEELLER

First Assistant Attorney General

LOU MCCREARY

Executive Assistant Attorney General

JUDGE ZOLLIE STEAELEY

Special Assistant Attorney General

RICK GILPIN

Chairman, Opinion Committee

Prepared by Karen C. Gladney

Assistant Attorney General

-.

p. 4350

This is a copy of a public record, reproduced as it was published. It is not legal advice, and it may not be the version a court would rely on. Check the official source before you cite it.

A word about cookies

We need a few to keep you signed in and the library working. The rest help us see which pages people use and where they get stuck. They stay off unless you say yes.