Texas law on any date › Attorney General opinions
Attorney General Opinion JM-1056
Issued June 12, 1989
Re: Whether a county treasurer may charge a county judge for copies of records maintained by the county treasurer
Cites: GV §311.005, GV §111.005, LG §111.004, LG §118.145, LG §118.141
The Attorney General's page · official PDF
THE
ATTORNEY
GENERAL
OF TEXAS
June 12, 1989
Honorable Tony Hileman
Marion Countv Attornev
105 Austin Street
Jefferson, Texas
75657
Opinion No. JM-1056
Re: Whether a county treasurer
may charge a county judge
for
copies of records maintained by
the county treasurer
(RQ-1614)
Dear Mr. Hileman:
You ask:
Van a County Treasurer charge a County Judge
for copies
of records
on file in the County Treasurer's
Office?"
We understand your inquiry to concern
information
sought by the county judge in connection with preparation of
the county budget.
Subtitle B of title 4 of the Local Government Code con-
cerns county finances.
Local Gov't Code 55 111.001-130.007.
Chapter 111 deals with county
budgets, and subchapter
A
(sections 111.001-111.012)
regulates
the preparation
of
budgets in counties
with a population
of 225,000 or less.
See Local Gov't Code 5 111.001. Marion County, according to
the 1980 census, has a population of 10,360. See Gov't Code
§ 311.005(3) (definition of population).
Section 111.005 of the Local Government Code provides:
In preparing the budget, the county
judge
may require any county officer to furnish in-
formation necessary for the judge to properly
prepare the budget.
Section 111.004 states:
(a) The county
judge shall
itemize the
budget to allow as clear
a comparison
as
practicable between expenditures included
in
the proposed budget
and actual
expenditures
for the same or similar purposes that were
made for the preceding
fiscal year.
The
budget must
show as definitely as possible
each of the projects for which an appropria-
tion is established in the budget
and the
p. 5498
Honorable Tony Hileman - Page'2
(JM-1056)
estimated amount
of money
carried
in the
budget for each project.
(b) The budget
must contain
a complete
financial statement of the county that shows:
(1) the outstanding
obligations
of
the county:
(2) the cash on hand to the
credit
of each fund of the county government:
(3) the
funds received
from
all
sources during the preceding fiscal year;
(4) the funds available
from all
sources during the ensuing fiscal year:
(5) the estimated revenues available
to cover the proposed budget: and
(6) the estimated tax rate required
to cover the proposed budget.
(c) In preparing the budget, the county
judge shall estimate the revenue to be de-
rived from taxes to be levied and collected
in the succeeding
fiscal year
and shall
include that revenue in the estimate of funds
available to cover the proposed budget.
The corresponding
provisions governing
the preparation
of
budgets by county auditors
in counties
with a population
exceeding 225,000 are found in sections 111.036 and
111.034
of the Local Government Code.
you have directed our attention to section 118.141
of
the Local Government
Code, which lists a schedule of
fees
for particular services following a declaration that:
The county treasurer,
or another
officer
who receives revenue in place of the
county
treasurer, may collect the following fees for
e ices rendered to anv nerson.
:d:d.)
(Emphasis
The term
"any person"
is very broad,
but we do
not believe
the
fees specified
by section
118.141
are
p. 5499
Honorable Tony Hileman - Page 3 (JM-1056)
applicable1 to records required
by the county judge.
When
copies of records are furnished in discharge of the duty
of
the treasurer to furnish the information necessary for the
judge to properly prepare the budget, the treasurer does not
r der
rvices to the judge:
d?ichar:zs a
instead, the treasurer
merely
statutory
duty of his own.
m
Attorney
General Opinion
M-170 (1967);
see also Local Gov't
Code
55 111.012 (a county treasurer
who refuses to furnish
such
information or otherwise fails to comply with the reguire-
ments of the subchapter
commits an offense punishable
by
both a fine and confinement in jail), 83.002
(treasurer's
bond required).
In Attorney General Opinion M-170 (1967), the attorney
general considered a statute that authorized and required
county clerks to collect certain fees "for services rendered
by them to all persons, firms, corporations, legal entities,
governmen
1 aaencies and/or aovernmental
(Emphasistidded.)
renresenta tives."
The question
was whether a county
clerk
was entitled to collect a fee from the state treasurer
for
providing the treasurer with certified copies of orders
the
clerk was
required by the Probate
Code to send.
In the
course of advising
the state treasurer
that he was not
required to pay county clerks
for such copies, the opinion
observed, "[T]he mailing of the certified copy to the State
Treasurer
is not a
'service rendered'
to that
state
official, but is an act done by the county clerk or recorder
in furtherance of his own legal duties."
J& at 4.
We are of the opinion that sections 111.004,
111.005,
and 118.141 of the Local Government Code are in harmony when
properly construed,
and that a county
judge may not be
charged by a county treasurer for copies of records on file
1. Section 118.145 states that fees collected pursuant
to section 118.141 are to be deposited in the general
fund
of the county to the credit of the county treasurer's
fees
of office
account.
Marion
County is a l'salary'* county
rather than a sfeeO' county, we are informed;
all county
officers, including the county treasurer, are paid a salary
and are not dependent on collected fees for their
compensa-
tion. &
Tex. Const.
art. XVI,
S 61; Local Gov't
Code
5 154.004 (county prohibited from paying fee for service
rendered by salaried county officer).
p. 5500
Honorable Tony Hileman - Page 4 (JM-1056)
in the county treasurer's
office
required by the county
judge in connection with preparation of the county budget.2
m
Attorney
General
Opinion M-142
(1967); EfL Attorney
General Opinions JM-779
(1987) (recordation of abstracts);
JM-392 (1985)
(filing fee).
See aeneraLly 35 D. Brooks,
Texas Practice !jS 15.1-.15 (1989).
We note that the county judge
should
be permitted
access to the treasurer#s
office during
ordinary
working
hours and in a manner that is convenient to both parties and
not disruptive
of the treasurer's
office
routine,
The
standard
in such
matters
in
one of
reasonableness.
Furthermore, if one county official
suspects
another
of
misconduct in office,
the matter
should be handled
in
consultation with the district
or county attorney.
Absent
such circumstances,
it is not appropriate
for one county
official to use his or her office
to acquire
access
to
records
for
the purpose
of harassing
or
otherwise
intimidating another county official.
SUMMARY
A county
judge may not be charged by a
county treasurer
for copies of records
on
file in
the county
treasurer's
office
required by the judge
in connection
with
preparation of the county budget.
JIM
MATTOX
Attorney General of Texas
2. The Local Government Code, of which section 118.141
is a part,
was enacted
in 1987, as a non-substantive
revision of existing laws. Acts
1987, 70th Leg., ch.
149,
S 51, at 1308. Section
118.141 was derived
from
former
article 3943f, V.T.C.S.,
enacted in 1985, which
specified
that the
indicated
fees could be collected
from
"the
appropriate individuals,
firms, corporations,
governmental
agencies,
governmental
representatives,
or other
legal
entities."
Acts 1985, 69th beg., ch. 145, 5 6, at 671; see
Gov't Code 5 311.005 (definition of Wperson'* except where
a
different definition is required by context).
P. 5501
5
Honorable Tony Hileman - Page 5 (JM-1056)
.
MARYKELLER
First Assistant Attorney General
Lou MCcRFARY
Executive Assistant Attorney General
JUDGE ZOLLIE STEAKLEY
Special Assistant Attorney General
RICK GILPIN
Chairman, Opinion Committee
Prepared by Rick Gilpin
Assistant Attorney General
p. 5502
Attorney General opinions are persuasive, not binding on courts, and answer questions of law, not fact. Text extracted from the official PDF. Not legal advice.