Could a county reimburse a commissioner who personally repaid road-equipment operators for traffic fines they incurred during county road work?
Apply this to your situation
This page answers the general question as of 1984. Ezel answers yours: what it means for your facts, under current Texas law, with citations.
Texas AG Opinion JM-170: County Payment of Traffic Fines
Plain-English summary
JM-170 concluded that Walker County lacked authority to pay traffic or criminal fines for which individuals alone were liable.
"It is our opinion that the county does not have the authority to pay a traffic or criminal fine for which an individual alone is liable."
Source: https://www.texasattorneygeneral.gov/sites/default/files/opinion-files/opinion/1984/jm0170.pdf
The commissioner had personally reimbursed four road-equipment drivers for fines incurred during county road work. The opinion said he made those payments at his own risk and could not shift the cost to the county.
"In short, the county commissioner's reimbursement of traffic fines paid by the four drivers was at his own risk and expense and is not a proper charge on county funds."
Source: https://www.texasattorneygeneral.gov/sites/default/files/opinion-files/opinion/1984/jm0170.pdf
Currency note
This opinion was issued in 1984. Subsequent statutory amendments, court decisions, or later AG opinions may have changed the analysis. Treat this page as historical context, not current legal advice. Verify current law before relying on any specific rule, deadline, or remedy mentioned here.
Common questions
What happened during the county road work?
Four drivers hauling gravel—one county employee and drivers of independently contracted vehicles—received citations for excessive weight and inadequate load covering.
"All four of the drivers were issued citations by the Department of Public Safety for excessive weight and inadequate bed, or covering to prevent spilling of the load."
Source: https://www.texasattorneygeneral.gov/sites/default/files/opinion-files/opinion/1984/jm0170.pdf
How much was paid in fines?
The drivers pleaded no contest to seven citations, and the assessed fines totaled about $630.
"All four drivers pled no contest to the various citations (seven in all) for which fines totaling approximately $630.00 were assessed and paid."
Source: https://www.texasattorneygeneral.gov/sites/default/files/opinion-files/opinion/1984/jm0170.pdf
Why did the commissioner seek reimbursement?
He first repaid the drivers from his own pocket and then asked the county to reimburse him.
"Subsequently, the county commissioner reimbursed out of his own pocket this amount to the drivers. He now in turn seeks reimbursement from the county."
Source: https://www.texasattorneygeneral.gov/sites/default/files/opinion-files/opinion/1984/jm0170.pdf
Could one commissioner bind the county to make the payment?
No. JM-170 said a single commissioner could not bind the county.
"We believe it is clear that a single county commissioner cannot bind a county to make this payment."
Source: https://www.texasattorneygeneral.gov/sites/default/files/opinion-files/opinion/1984/jm0170.pdf
Why were the payments not reimbursable county expenses?
The fines were issued to individuals in their personal capacities, not to the county, so paying them was neither necessary nor legitimate.
"It was neither a necessary nor a legitimate expenditure of county funds to pay an individual's traffic fine incurred in his personal capacity, when it was not issued against the county itself."
Source: https://www.texasattorneygeneral.gov/sites/default/files/opinion-files/opinion/1984/jm0170.pdf
Did describing the claim as reimbursement change the result?
No. The opinion treated the commissioner's reimbursement of others as his personal expense and found no county benefit.
"This action by the commissioner can in no way inure to the benefit of the county and, in our opinion, is an expense incurred by him in his personal capacity."
Source: https://www.texasattorneygeneral.gov/sites/default/files/opinion-files/opinion/1984/jm0170.pdf
Background and legal framework
Article 3899(b) allowed salaried county officials, expressly including county road commissioners, reimbursement for reasonable expenses necessary to the proper and legal conduct of office.
"Pursuant to article 3899(b), V.T.C.S., county officials who receive a salary as compensation for their services are entitled to 'all reasonable expenses necessary in the proper and legal conduct' of their offices."
Source: https://www.texasattorneygeneral.gov/sites/default/files/opinion-files/opinion/1984/jm0170.pdf"The statute explicitly applies to 'county road commissioners.'"
Source: https://www.texasattorneygeneral.gov/sites/default/files/opinion-files/opinion/1984/jm0170.pdf
Actual monthly expenses still required review by the county auditor and commissioners court to determine whether they were necessary or legal.
"After application to the commissioners court for the ensuing month, actual expenses incurred during that month are submitted to the county auditor and commissioners court for approval and payment if the claim is a 'necessary or legal expense.'"
Source: https://www.texasattorneygeneral.gov/sites/default/files/opinion-files/opinion/1984/jm0170.pdf
Holding
"A county may not reimburse a county commissioner who himself reimbursed county road equipment operators who were issued traffic citations."
Source: https://www.texasattorneygeneral.gov/sites/default/files/opinion-files/opinion/1984/jm0170.pdf
Citations and references
- Article 3899(b), V.T.C.S., established the governing expense standard.
"[C]ounty officials who receive a salary as compensation for their services are entitled to 'all reasonable expenses necessary in the proper and legal conduct' of their offices."
Source: https://www.texasattorneygeneral.gov/sites/default/files/opinion-files/opinion/1984/jm0170.pdf
- JM-170 cited Hood v. State as an example of expenses personally incurred by a sheriff that were not proper public expenses.
"Cf. Hood v. State, 73 S.W.2d 611 (Tex. Civ. App.—Dallas 1934, writ ref'd) (neither money loaned by sheriff in a personal capacity, nor any interest money paid therein, nor by sheriff in employing attorney was proper expense)."
Source: https://www.texasattorneygeneral.gov/sites/default/files/opinion-files/opinion/1984/jm0170.pdf
Source
- Landing page: https://www.texasattorneygeneral.gov/opinions/jim-mattox/jm-0170
- Original PDF: https://www.texasattorneygeneral.gov/sites/default/files/opinion-files/opinion/1984/jm0170.pdf
Original opinion text
Best-effort transcription from a scanned PDF. Minor errors may remain. The linked PDF is authoritative.
The Attorney General of Texas
JIM MATTOX
Attorney General
June 18, 1984
Honorable Frank Blazek
Criminal District Attorney
Walker County Courthouse
1100 University Avenue
Huntsville, Texas 77340
Opinion No. JM-170
Re: Whether a county may reimburse a commissioner for payment of a traffic fine made on behalf of a county employee
Dear Mr. Blazek:
You have asked whether a county may reimburse an individual commissioner for his out-of-pocket payment to county road equipment operators for the amounts of traffic citations issued to them. Essentially, you inquire whether the county may pay traffic fines on citations issued to individuals and to which the individuals evidently pled guilty or no contest. It is our opinion that the county does not have the authority to pay a traffic or criminal fine for which an individual alone is liable.
We believe it is clear that a single county commissioner cannot bind a county to make this payment. Information supplied to us reveals the following facts: road repairs and maintenance were being done under the direction of the county commissioner. This work required gravel to be hauled. The commissioner employed two county-owned trucks and two independently-contracted vehicles for this purpose. All four of the drivers were issued citations by the Department of Public Safety for excessive weight and inadequate bed, or covering to prevent spilling of the load. See V.T.C.S. art. 6701d-11, §§13A, 5. The driver of one of the vehicles was a county employee; he was issued two citations. All four drivers pled no contest to the various citations (seven in all) for which fines totaling approximately $630.00 were assessed and paid. Subsequently, the county commissioner reimbursed out of his own pocket this amount to the drivers. He now in turn seeks reimbursement from the county.
Pursuant to article 3899(b), V.T.C.S., county officials who receive a salary as compensation for their services are entitled to "all reasonable expenses necessary in the proper and legal conduct" of their offices. The statute explicitly applies to "county road commissioners." Id. After application to the commissioners court for the ensuing month, actual expenses incurred during that month are submitted to the county auditor and commissioners court for approval and payment if the claim is a "necessary or legal expense." Id. We believe that a county commissioner, acting as ex officio road commissioner, may not claim that he is entitled to reimbursement for his own reimbursement to individuals who were cited with and pled no contest to traffic citations received while engaged in county road work. It was neither a necessary nor a legitimate expenditure of county funds to pay an individual's traffic fine incurred in his personal capacity, when it was not issued against the county itself. See Penal Code §7.21 et seq. (criminal liability of corporations and associations). In short, the county commissioner's reimbursement of traffic fines paid by the four drivers was at his own risk and expense and is not a proper charge on county funds. The expense incurred for which payment is sought is not the payment of the traffic fines themselves but the reimbursement to others who have paid those fines. This action by the commissioner can in no way inure to the benefit of the county and, in our opinion, is an expense incurred by him in his personal capacity. Cf. Hood v. State, 73 S.W.2d 611 (Tex. Civ. App.—Dallas 1934, writ ref'd) (neither money loaned by sheriff in a personal capacity, nor any interest money paid therein, nor by sheriff in employing attorney was proper expense); Attorney General Opinion O-2951 (1940) (medical expenses incurred by constable injured while weighing vehicles not an expense of office).
SUMMARY
A county may not reimburse a county commissioner who himself reimbursed county road equipment operators who were issued traffic citations.
Very truly yours,
JIM MATTOX
Attorney General of Texas
TOM GREEN
First Assistant Attorney General
DAVID R. RICHARDS
Executive Assistant Attorney General
Prepared by David Brooks
Assistant Attorney General
APPROVED:
OPINION COMMITTEE
Rick Gilpin, Chairman
David Brooks
Colin Carl
Susan Garrison
Jim Moellinger
Nancy Sutton
Get today's answer for your situation
You just read a 1984 opinion on this question. Ezel checks the current Texas statutes and case law and answers your specific situation, with citations.
Opens in Ezel Pro. Every answer cites the law it relies on.