«OFFICIAL OPINIONS OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL - 1918 138. State Assayer and InspectorFees. The State Assayer and Inspector cannot charge less than 25 ...»
Stats. 1915, p. 283; Stats. 1917, p. 439) provides that every employer coming within the provision of the Act shall pay into the State Treasury, for the State Insurance Fund, certain specified sums, while section 40 (Stats. 1913, p. 151) provides that the State of Nevada shall not be liable for the payment of any compensation under the Act, save and except from the said insurance fund; and section 41 (Stats. 1913, p. 151) expressly limits all expenses of administration of the Insurance Commission to 10 per cent of the amount of premiums paid into the said State Insurance Fund.
Section 11 of the original Act (Stats. 1913, pp. 137, 142) provides that:
The Commission may employ a secretary, actuary, accountants, inspectors, examiners, clerks, stenographers and other assistants, and fix their compensation.
Such employments and compensation shall be first approved by the Governor, and shall be paid out of the State Treasury.
The purpose of section 11, when read in connection with the other provisions above mentioned, is plain. Undoubtedly, the Legislature deemed it wise to leave it to the Governor, and to charge that officer directly with the approval of the employment of various assistants, and the compensation to be paid them from the State Insurance Fund. The object, naturally, was to provide every conceivable means to insure keeping within the prescribed limit the expenses of administration to be paid from such fund.
The accomplishment of this object is all that the section contemplated and all that it was designed for. It was never intended to reach, and does not reach, the employment of any assistant or the compensation to be paid from any fund other than the State Insurance Fund.
As the last Legislature expressly provided that all accident benefits, which include medical, surgical, hospital, or other treatments, shall be furnished by the Nevada Industrial Commission to those accepting the amendment, and that the State Insurance Fund shall not be liable for any such benefits, but that the fund provided for said benefits shall be a separate and distinct fund, and shall be so kept (Stats. 1917, p. 440), it is at once apparent that the provisions of section 11 have no application to the employment of any one receiving compensation from such separate and distinct fund.
You are, therefore, advised that, in our opinion, the Governor has no power to approve or fix the compensation for any person employed by the Nevada Industrial Commission to be paid from the Accident Benefit Fund.
By WM. McKNIGHT, Deputy.
153. Vocational Educational Fund--Appropriations, Lapsing of--Legislature.
The Legislature by use of appropriate language has power to extend an appropriation beyond December 31 of the year following the session of the Legislature making the appropriation.
The Vocational Educational Fund appropriated by section 4, Stats. 1917, p. 398, is for two years beginning July 1, 1917, and ending June 30, 1919.
HON. JOHN EDWARDS BRAY, Superintendent of Public Instruction, Carson City, Nevada.
Dear Sir: Your letter of recent date duly received. Therein you call our attention to section 4 of chapter 209 of the laws of last session (Stats. 1917, p. 398) and ask whether or not the appropriation therein made extends beyond December 31, 1918.
The section in question reads in part as follows:
That the sum of thirty thousand ($30,000) dollars is hereby appropriated, out of any moneys in the State Treasury not otherwise appropriated, as a vocational educational fund, to be available in the biennial period beginning July 1, 1917.
The law itself was passed for the purpose of accepting the Federal Act providing for the promotion of vocational education, and the appropriation in question was made to cover a similar appropriation by the National Government--the latter appropriation being made to extend from July 1, 1917, up to and including June 30, 1919.
The language of our statute is plain and unambiguous, and the intent of the Legislature is readily apparent therefrom. As the Legislature, by use of appropriate language, has power to extend an appropriation beyond December 31 of the year following the session of the Legislature making the appropriation, and as the language in section 4 can have no other meaning, we are of the opinion that the sum appropriated therein is for the two years beginning July 1, 1917, and ending June 30, 1919.
By WM. McKNIGHT, Deputy.
154. Public Schools--Budget Act--Revenue--Taxation--School Districts--HighSchool Districts.
The “Act regulating the fiscal management of counties, towns, cities, school districts and other governmental agencies” (Stats. 1917, p. 249) does not apply to school districts and highschool districts until February 1, 1919.
It is unnecessary to publish the budgets of the school or high-school districts until that time.
The Act to authorize the issuance of interest-bearing school warrants in emergencies (Rev. Laws, 3473-3477) is unrepealed until said date.
Mr. Dear Mr. Freudenthal: Your favor of the 16th instant, addressed to the Nevada Tax Commission, has been referred to this office for response. In answer thereto let me state as
You are correct in assuming that the “Act regulating the fiscal management of counties, cities, town, school districts and other governmental agencies” (Stats. 1917, p. 249) does not apply to school districts and high-school districts until February 1, 1919.
The “Act to authorize the issuance of interest-bearing school warrants in emergencies,” approved March 23, 1911 (Rev. Laws, 3473-3477), stands unrepealed until the said date.
Therefore it is unnecessary to publish the budget of school or high-school districts until that time, and any school or high-school district in need of money may issue interest-bearing school warrants until such time under the above-quoted Act.
It is immaterial whether the 3-mills levy for the teachers’ pension fund under the Act of 1915, or the 5-mills levy to provide for civic and physical training and instruction under the Act of 1917, be levied by the County Commissioners or included in the state tax rate.
In any event, the moneys thus derived are state funds and must be transmitted to the State Treasurer when collected.
It is possible that the reason that these additional levies have been added to the state tax rate is because the same might be overlooked by the County Commissioners in making up a budget.
155. Revenue--Taxation--Widows’ Exemption.
In order to claim the widow’s exemption provided by section 3621, Rev. Laws, it is necessary that the widow yearly make an affidavit or have one made in her behalf.
HON. G. J. KENNY, District Attorney, Fallon, Nevada.
Dear Mr. Kenny: Your recent letter, asking whether or not it is necessary for a bona-fide and actual resident widow of the county to yearly make affidavit, or have one made in her behalf, in order to entitle her to an exemption from taxation, duly received.
Section 3621 of the Revised Laws reads in part as follows:
Sixth--The property of widows and orphan children, not to exceed the amount of one thousand dollars to any one family; provided, that no such exemption shall be allowed to any but actual bona-fide residents of this State, and shall be allowed in but one county in this State to the same family, and the party or parties claiming such exemption, or some one in their behalf, shall make an affidavit before the County Assessor of such residence, and that such exemption has been claimed in no other county in this State for that year.
It is seen that before an exemption can be allowed, an affidavit for the same must be made before the County Assessor, which affidavit must show the residence of the party and “that such exemption has been claimed in no other county in this State for that year.” Clearly, the affidavit must annually be made as provided, because after the taxes are levied they become a lien, and when the Board of Equalization has acted an obligation immediately arises on the part of the party taxed to pay the amount due; and thereafter County Commissioners can neither release the property from the lien nor discharge the party from such obligation. (State v. C. P. R. R. Co., 9 Nev. 79.)
By WM. McKNIGHT, Deputy.
156. Crimes and Punishments Act--Revised Laws.
The explanation of the method of adoption of the Crimes and Punishments Act and why the same does not appear at large in the Statutes of 1911.
HON. H. H. ATKINSON, District Attorney, Tonopah, Nevada.
Dear Mr. Atkinson: Your favor of the 23d instant, in regard to the Esser case, received.
When the petition for a writ of prohibition in this case was filed I noticed that Esser’s attorneys claimed that the “Crimes and Punishment Act” was never passed by the Legislature and could understand no reason, therefore, except misinformation on their part. Section 375 of the “Crimes and Punishment Act” (Rev. Laws, 6640) in the enrolled bill of this section is word for word as it appears in the Revised Laws.
At the session of 1911 the first application was made of the law permitting a printed copy of a bill to be submitted to the respective officers of the Senate and Assembly for their signatures and to the Governor for his approval (Stats. 1911, p. 61, sec. 5). Under this Act the Crimes and Punishments Act, the Civil Practice Act, the Criminal Practice Act, the Public School Act, and the Act for the incorporation of the town of Las Vegas were enrolled by substituting a printed copy of the Act as passed and the same were duly signed by the proper officers of the Senate and Assembly and approved by the Governor. At the same session a law was passed directing the Secretary of State not to include in the Statutes of 1911 any of these long Acts, for the reason that they would appear shortly in the Revised Laws, which was then under course of preparation (Stats. 1911, p. 100). For these reasons I presume that Esser’s attorneys contend that the “Crimes and Punishments Act” was not printed, published and approved as required by the Constitution. I think there is no merit whatever in this contention.
157. School Teacher--State Board of Education.
Under amended Rev. Laws, 3266, appearing in Stats. 1917, p. 175, any person who has been connected with the public schools for a period of sixty months in any educational capacity is entitled to a life diploma.
In granting such life diploma the State Board of Education has the right to county both the supervising and teaching experience of the teacher.
HON. JOHN EDWARDS BRAY, Superintendent of Public Instruction, Carson City, Nevada.
Dear Sir: I am in receipt of your favor of the 19th instant, asking opinion of this office on
the following matter:
Section 1, chapter 91, page 175, Statutes of Nevada, 1917 (School Code, 1917, sec.
28), provides that any resident of the State of Nevada who has taught in the public schools for a period of six months shall be entitled under this and the other conditions named in the section to be granted a life diploma. (Rev. Laws, 3266, amended.)
On the above statement of facts you ask the following question:
You seem to be in doubt as to whether the word “taught” in the above-mentioned section would include a person who has spent some of the sixty months as a supervisor or principal. I see no reason for any such narrow construction of this word; the general rule is that in construing a statute a word should not be given a limited or specialized meaning unless such meaning is made by legislative enactment. (Venable v. Schafer, 28 Ohio Cir. Ct. Rep. 202; Flanary v.
Barret, 146 Ky. 712.) It is therefore the opinion of this office that any person who has been connected with the public schools for a period of sixty months in any educational capacity is entitled to a life diploma under said section and that the State Board of Education in granting such life diploma has the right to count both the supervising and teaching experience of a teacher.
158. Public Schools--Emergency Loans--Budget Act.
The Act “to authorize the issuance of interest-bearing school warrants in emergencies (Rev. Laws, 3473-3477) as amended by Stats. 1913, p. 54, stands unrepealed until February 1, 1919, and emergency loans until such time may be made by school districts under its provisions.
MR. THOMAS E. POWELL, District Attorney, Winnemucca, Nevada.
Dear Mr. Powell: We are in receipt of your recent letter in which you refer us to the various laws relating to emergency loans for school districts and ask whether it is now possible for such an emergency to be provided for.
In 1911 the Legislature passed an Act entitled “An Act to authorize the issuance of interest-bearing school warrants in emergencies,” etc., which Act is incorporated in the Revised Laws as sections 3473 to 3477. This Act was amended in certain particulars at the following session. (Stats. 1913, p. 54.) In 1917 the Legislature passed an Act regulating the fiscal management of counties, towns, school district, and other governmental agencies, by the terms of which provision is made for making emergency loans. Section 14 ½ of said Act (Stats. 1917, p. 254) provides that the provisions of the Act with reference to school districts and high-school districts shall not be effective until February 1, 1919, while the concluding paragraph expressly repeals the Act passed in 1913, as shown above.
Undoubtedly the intention of the Legislature was to continue the 1911 statute in force until February 1, 1919; otherwise there would be no method of providing for emergency loans in the meantime.