I

. .

MMAllOX **Attorney General** 

**~~feme cewl**  **BUllOlng P.** **0. Box** **12548**

**‘ .rrtin.** **TX. 7.9711.** 

**2540 W75-2501**  ****1*x****QlolS71-1367 Telecopier** 

**51214754l2S6**

**, A** **Jackson.**

**Sulle 700**  **DalIal. lx.**  **75202-4x4 -4r742-Ss44** 

**4s24 Albem**  **ha.. Suite** **ISO**

**- ’**  **Paso. TX.** **799052793 y53534s4** 

**rexae. sui1a** **700 >usIo** **”**

**. TX.** **77002.3111 7lY223-58m** 

***** **Sroedw*y.****Suit9 312**  **Lubbwk. TX.** **79401-3479 Sw747.5238** 

**009 N.** **Tenth. Suite** **B MeAllen.** 

**TX. 7s5o1-lw5**  **r2t2J32a47**
**IQ) Maln** **flua. Suite** **400 an** **Antonio. TX.** **782052797 ra22Ylsl**  

# The Attome)’ General ofTexas

**December 20,**  **1984 I** 

Ronorable **Mergeret** Moore Travis County Attoruc!)~ P. 0. Box 1740 Austin, Tex*s **7876 ’** **~**
Dear Ms. Moore: You have asked **11s**to construe Opinion No.JH-281 Re: Whena county msy charge the optional $5.00 vehicle reglstration fee

article 6675a-9a. V.T.C.S., with regard to the time 111: which **the** optional county vehicle registration fee maybe imposed **an** license plate renewals. The statutory language about which you IoquLre reads as follow:

(b) A **county** may impose a fee under this section onl:y to take effect beginning January 1of ayear ending In a ‘5 ’ or a ‘0

’

. (Emphasis added). Section 3 of the same act, Rouse Bill No. 965. whose first section added article 6675a-9a. provides that

A fee imposed by s **county** under Section 9a

. . . applies to a registration period that begins on or after the date the fee takes effect. (Emphasis added).
**Acts** 1983, 68th Leg., ch. 022. st 4710. Essentially. you ask vhen it is eppropriate for a county to begin charging the extra $5.00 **fee.** We conclude that e eaunty Vhose **comissloners** court has adopted **the** optional county vehicle registretion fee in compliance **vith** article 6675e-9a maybegin ctlarging **such** fee only on **January** 1. 1985 and only **with** regard to veh:lc:les which. under the established administrative construction, becow! eligible for registration renewal on that date or thereafter. The uncertainty which has led to your Inquiry appears to have been engendered because article 6675a-9a has been imbedded in a statutory scheme of gear-round vehicle registration. which replaced a system that for fility years contained a uniform annual registration running from April :I to March 31. **Art.** 6675a-1 et seq. You have sugge~sted that either. the extra $5.00 fee should be assessed only **on** all registration renewals purchased on or after January 1. 1985. orgonorablr **Nargsret Noore**  - Pagtr2 (rn-281)

**thst the**  **extra** $5.00 fee sh#xJld be assessed on all registrations expiring on or after Dscembc’r 31, 1984, even if the renewal is purchased during the tvu months prior to January 1. 1985. Hovever, the well-•etablfshed rule of **Lw that**  **statutes** vhfch fix fess are to be strictly construed against allowing a fee **by** implication militntes agslnst your suggested couclur~ion. Moorev. Sheppard, 192 S.W.Zd 559 (Tex. 1946); UcLennan County v, BOggsSb. 137 **S.W.** 346 (Tex. 1911). Tour second suggested anrlyels , that the optloual fee is **meant** to apply to all regfstratlons exl,!iring on or after December 31. 1984. Is based on the tvo mouth time period during which you believe a renewal may be purchased **prior** to its expirstion. Section 5 of article 6675a-3e provides that:

license plates may tmepurchased during the month preceding the datl? on which the registration expires. Article 6675a-4(a) provides t’kat:

Each registration ye.ar . . . shall

. . . expire on the last day of ,:he last calendar month in a registration period. As an orfgifd matter. wemight conclude that the **“month ”**  referred to in article 6675a-3s. section !i, was only the calendar month, 55 Tex. Jur. 2d Time 13 (1964). pramding **the** close of **business on**  **the** last day of thzery month ia vhf,ch the registration expired. However. we agree with you **that** chew is sufficient ambiguity **that** it **is** reasouable to **reach** the concl.u.sion that the time period during **vhich a**  renaval maybe purchased is the two months preceding **the** date on vhich - the registration expires. Indeed, that is the **conclusiou** arrived at by the Texas Department of Highvays, es demonstrated.by the testimony of gr. Robert Townsly. Director of Motor Vehicle DQr:Lsion of the Texas Ugbway Department. at a hearing before the Rouse Transportation **Cocmittee** wherein he indicated that renewal notices would be **sent** out **in the**  “month preceding the month in vhict. the registration is due.” Bill Analysis to House Bill No. 1924. **(84 th**  Leg., Legislative Reference Library (1975). Llkavise, **the** curwut manual issued to county tax assessorcollectors by the Texas Department of Highways and Public Transportation refers to

**a tvo-month**  **registration** renewal period - the month in which **t ’** **,w** current **registration** expire5 **and the**  **month** immc:d.lately preceding the expiration **month.**

**p. 121r3** Uonotablo Narpret Moor. - **Pallo** 3 (JW281)

State of Texas Lava and Saguiations Relating to the gcgistration of Vehiclea Sec. 3.(b) II (1982). See also &, 23s et seq. Mile the interpretation* of statutea **ude by**  

### l gcociea charged vith their administration are not con~~ls1~1~0~ they should be given substantiel weight. ?!xParte Roloff. 310 **S.Y.Zd** 913 (tes. 1974). Nevertheleaa. -pi-t d mtqgp&ub -lanw~r:ufira. w. LM -&+ul ~mllbx % vitiatea the plain meaning of ’ the vordr **“ take**  effect” in **section** (b) of article 667Sa-9a. Article 10. **V.T.C.S..** requires that **uorde** routinely be given their “ortllnary signification.” See Jones v. Del **Anderson and**  Aasociateo, 539 **S.U.Zd** 346 (fex. 1976).Webeter’r New ColJegiate Dictionary define11 **the** term “tahe effect” as “to become **operative. ”**  Therefore, the optional fee mey be chrrged only on and after January 1. 1985. your first suggested analyale of **the** timing of the implementation of theoptiooal fee **accept8** this **conclusion.** but results in a strained 

### l ppllcation of your construc:r,ion of the phrase “registration period” in article 6675a-4 to section 1in House Bill No. 965, n Therein

“regirtration period* appears to aean the rpan of tims of not more than twelve **months**for vhich a regintratioa is valid. Its **usage** in that provlsien seemsto **be the**  product of the fact **that** the Texas Department of Highways YE,I authorized to establish different registration years for different claeslfications of vehicles end to prorate annual registration f,css **on** a monthly basia. If the phrase

“registration period” means the same thing in article 6675a-4 **aa** in section 3of **llouse** Bill **No. 965.**  it **produces** the follcuing 

### l nomalous results: (1) for **the** firat web registration “period” to begin **on** or after January 1, 1985. the two month period for the reneuel of registretions expired on Del:emher 31, 1984; end (2) the tvo month period for the reneual of registratloaa for the next **such**registration

“period” extends **from** Decembw 1, 1964. to January 31. 1985. and thus reneuals of registraclonr exl~%ring on January 31 would not be **rubject to**  **the** extra $5.00 **fee** if Dnrchased before January l.but vould be subject to **that** fee if purcha,ccd after December 31. Ye think ic uoreasonablc to attribute an intent to create **such** absurd results to the l~gisleture. especially **when a**  simple, strolghtfonard explanation of the plain meaning of the l nactwnt (sections 1 and 3 of House B,L:Ll No. 965) is readily **apparent.** If **the phrase**  “registration period” **.Ln**section 3 is **taken** to mean **the** period for reneual of registrations, **then** all tegistmtlone **which are**  **to expire**  **on February**  28, 1965, would **be subject**  **to the**  **extra $5.00**  **fee** during the entire period of t:heir eligibility for renewal (January 1 through **February 26).**  **Such an**  **lnterpretatlon causes**  **no** l nomelous results snd **is** soundly **groundSed in**  **the princlplc**  **that** the leginlaturc **kncv** the established administrative construction of rrticle 667Sa-3e. **section** 5.

p. 1244Wmorablo Uaryret lIooro- PawI 4 (Jb281)



## Aeouncy uhich hoe l do ptd

**tha** 

### opt-1 $5.00 vehicle re8iatrathw fea uy be8in cbaqin8 

### it oely on Jau~ry 1, **19885,** end only for the reneud of relistratiooo which expire oo Iebnury 28. 1985.

JIM MATTOX Attorney General of Texas TOI4GRN6N pirrt Aoaiatant Attoraey Genewl DAVID1. RIGHARDS Executive Assistant Attorney General PlQ( GILpIN t3drman. Opinion ColiCtee Preparedby Colin Carl Asaiatant Attonwy General APpPsOvm: OPINIONCGIDIITTEE **Rick**Gilpin, Glmirun Colin Gal Suaan Garrison Tony Guillory JimHoelliqer Jennifot RIGGS Nancy **Sutton**