:. ..:...:

.::;I:

.-::; ,::., Hon. Geo. H. Sheppard Opinion No. O-6705 Rea Construction of S.B. 

### 3l7 eud H.B.

Dear .Ikr. Shepparda Bog 

### 173 departmental appropriation bill en& higher. instltutlons of leerning appropriation bill, respectively, 49th Legislature, concerning the pl.oyPlent of husband aud wife. em--
You request au opinion frolp th5.s Department in lowing letter: the fol-

“1 shall thank you to exaadne Subsection 19 of Section 

### 2 OS Senate Bill Ho* 

### 317, Acts of the Begular Session of the 49th Legislature knowa.,as, the Departmental AppxopriatUn Bill en&adviiie this depart~nt wlqther it 1s permissdle ,,SQ~a hnsbmd and wiSe ‘.to ybr+ Sk the State’ oa ‘aid 

### &S&or &i~tember 

### 1 of fhlayears

Tt is Surther 

### prodded that the Sawgoing provisions restrlctlng emploolleent of both %usband and wfie shall not epply to any~persims who.wexe empleyed and recelv%ng .compensatlon i”rou the ‘State at any time durw t&e month of Jatmsry, l&l*,’ YChls ‘exception is not carried forwd in ‘the Departmeutal Qpropriation Mll 

### .$Orthe ensulng bfenn%um.

,. “Wee have a fact sftuation ,as SoZlowsz A men aud MS tife haye been,workbwfor the Gtate. in diSSerent departments for a,long number of yeam. .%!helr..emplgymmt, has been aorttlmouer, They each desire to qontinue work Soti the State after Septexbti 

### desireof the departuer& heads to Isee aadit 3.s. the 

### $bum Sn the* present posItions, WIU it lmpossib e Sor both ,of these WhlCh %

eople to ,contlnus ww9.c for the departments In ey ore now employed on and after September 

### 1 of this pearl

“You -wU.l noblie that Subset&ton 28 OSSeotiOn 2 of the Act fixing the .appropriatlon Sor educational institutlous for higher learning for the enSPing blenaima has to do with emtiloyment of husband aud wiSe 

### for the various ~educatlonal institution&’ W22.l it fmke atly difference whethsr the husband or Wl.Se in either instance iw worklug for a: aepartmsnt or for au fnstitutfon ofHon. George H. Sheppard, page 2. higher. 

### ~1earnUg as far as Me or 

### her employment Is concerned aft&-September 1 of this year? '1 find no restriction against the employment oS husbaud and 

### wife In the Appro port an8 maintenance of the eP

### riation Bill for t@e supfor the ensuing blennlum. eemosynary institutions Would It be penaisslble for on8 spouse to work for a State department and the 

### other to work for the eleemosynary lnstltutlons?4~ .'For convenlapce sake we have nmbersd the **paragraphs** 

### of Litter, sttilng t&e respective qtiestlons propounded by you. Su~s&tloq 19 of_Ssstlon 2 of Senate Bill 110~

### 3l7, insofar as“pertln&t, Is as followsi



### tit,~tbgiijibq:~lth $h&napPeof the depar&uent where'gudh 

### spouse is e@.@yed, ,qnd 

### if such reXationshSp employment does pot exScrt;

‘then sald’,sSSidaVlt shall so &ate and the head of

’$he .&~~m&nt, ,andthi St&& Comptroker shall wt 

### approve POPpa$m@S or issue wanants 

### or checks for salarlw td..6lther. the lzusbnd or wffe nowhere both said ~~bsha”&+~‘i@% atd~empUred in the departments ~f&ps~f3$0 *jeet,~ 

### however, to the f$.l.owI.ug provl-

.

‘khk prov&zloi&q

Jmreln shek’a piy heads ~and’leempbercl

of CelamtssiOnsbut to department and

### laatr@ of W ~001~ Nate Paz%. not to the manager We word 

### *departme& 9
‘as used herein ehr$L;mean theas departw3nts napledin %hIa Act and f&6 S&l Coars&vatIon Board and shall not agpl.y to &her a&w&x.of We State andthe employee0 employ-~ ed ther,eby.* Subseation 18 of the general provisions of House 

### BIU 173, Insof* as pertinent, ii3 as followsr



### - wIdis provided that none of the funds appropriated here-~ sh&lXbe pa&dto a husband andwife both &fwhom are employed by any of the several Institukons named herein. *-2

Hone George H. Sheppard, page 30

Wefind no exceptions ta either of these respective provisions comparable t6 the one quoted by you from the current departmental approprfation act.

The,se prohibitory provisions are plain and unambiguous. It is our opinion that your questions should be answered, respectively, as iollows: - husband and'Gife--to continue to work Sor'the departments ln whi&

It will be impossible for both of these people--, they are employed or any other cf the departments provided for ln S8nat8Bill For 

### 317.

The clear meaning of the respective riders 1s that husband and2;lfe maynet both be employees of any of the State department~s at the sametime, and likewise they maynot both be employees of any ~ofthe higher educational. Institutions at the sums time, There is nothlng, however forbidding their being emploped, respeutlvely, by a department 8nA an educational lustltutlon at the Sam8time.



### 3. It would be permissible for one spouse to workas axi .empi.oyee for a Stat 8 department’ and the other tom work as an 'J@6ry 88 for ti eleemosyi3@ry institutlim, or en educational lm3tltU$L0nj as given ln our answer to question No. 2. ,

_.. ,...~ _..__ c:.,.: .+:‘“

. !m;~:,+&mer f.0 pnasMan ?&ls .&~$*&.~&+J&~~:iip(i@f.&&~ tlon;. Subsection (II> of the general provisions contained @i Xas8 Bl.Il No. 

### 173,fixlug appropriations for educatlonti& instit%ltiOW3 of higher learning, expresdy. provides a

, . “The gene~ral.provisions mad8ln this Act shall not apply to athletic br extremurel d8,pmtUIOX3tSt and as, to these ~exceptlons, the governing board shaU make such necessary rules and adjustments as maybe deemed advisable. * I This exception would apply to the general provision of **subS8CtiOp** 

### (18)ooncernl.zg the employment of husband and wm. 

### APFROVED

JUL. 24, 1945 /s/ Carlos C. AsiAey v8X.ytl’X&.youZ%i A!rToRNEy’GswBRAL



### OF S!BXiS FIR@’ &SSISl!AMT ATTORNEYGEIWUL By /s/ O~le~Speer APPROVED:

OPINIONCOlMCTpEE Ocle Speer, Assistant BYt BWB, CKJURMU? OS-Miawb

..---v--