THEA BRNE

Ron. v. c. Marshall Executive Director Texas State Soil Conservation Board Temple, Texas

Dear Sir: September 12, Opinion 1950

NO. v-1106. Re: Availability of funds granted to a soil conservation district by H.B. 97, Acts 5lst Leg., R.S. 1949, ch. $0, p. 1000, for payment of premiums on surety bonds of the district's employees and officers who are entrusted with funds or property.

Your request for an opinion reads in part as follows: nWedesire the opinion of your office regarding the legality of payment of bond premiums by Soil Conservation District Supervisors out of funds provided in House Bill 97, Acts of the 51st Legislature, Regular Session 1949. "We are advised that some district supervisors have paid bond premiums out of state grants to the district and other supervisors question such authority. Soil Conservation Districts have had no grants of funds other than those received as provided in House Bill 97. "It is the feeling of this board that since House Bill 97 requires that any member of the board or its employees entrusted with property or funds be bonded In an amount fixed by the board, that unless there is some prohibition elsewhere of which we have no knowledge, that to provide proper safeguard for state funds supervisors should use any available funds to pay for the bond protection required. "State Warrants, as such, are not Involved here as House Bill 97 provides that checks drawn **on**. . .

Hon. V. C. Marshall - Page 2 (~-1106)

the depository of the district, signed by the chairman and secretary of the board, are to be used in meeting obligations of the district.

“It seems that House Bill 97 neither authorfzes nor prohibits the payment of required bond premiums from the funds granted to the dfstrict, but does require that such bond be procured.” Soil conservation districts created under the provisions of Article 165a-4, VernonIs civil Statutes, are political subdivisions of the State, bodies politic and COPporate performing governmental functions. Atty. Gen. Op. v-999 11950). Section 6 of this statute provides for the election of five (5) supervisors in each district who shall constitute the governing board of the district; directs the board to elect from its membership a chairman, vice-chairman, and secretary; and empmers the board to employ such officers, agents, and employees, permanent and temporary, as it mayrequire, and shall determine their qualifications, duties, and compensation. This section also provfdes:

“The supervisors shall provide for the execution of surety bonds for all employees and officers who shall be entrusted with funds OPproperty. n House Bill 97, Acts 51st Leg., ROS, 1949, chO 540, p* 1000, grants to the soil conservation districts of this State the sumof $2,5OO,OOO for each year of the current bfennfum, subject to certain restrictions on the expendfture thereof. The money so granted and appropriated to such dfstrfcts was undoubtedly for the purpose of enabling them as polltfeal subdivisions of the State, bodfes polPtic and corporate, and as agencies of the State to perform the governmental functions authorized by Article 165a-4.

Sections 1, 2, 3, 4, and 6 of the approprfatfon bfll under consideration provide, respectfvely, as follows:

Sec. 1. “All grants to soil conservatfon districts shall be made by the State Soil Conservation Board based on the Board’s determination of equity and need of the distrfct applying for grant 0 n -._- Hon. V. C. Marshall - Page 3 (V-1106)

Sec. 2. "Approval of all grants to soil conservation districts as provided for in this Act shall be certified to the State Comptroller of Public Accounts by the State Soil Conservation Board. Such certification of approval by the State Soil Conservation Board presented to the said Comptroller shall be sufficient authority for the Comptroller to issue his warrant against any appropriation made for grants to soil conservation districts, and shall also be sufficient authority for the State Treasurer to honor payment of such warrants." Sec. 3. "An annual audit of the accounts of receipts and disbursements together with an inventory of supplies and equipment of all districts receiving grants, as is provided in this Act, shall be made by the State Auditor and efficiency expert. A maximum fee for the auditing of the accounts of a district shall be set up by the State Auditor and efficiency expert bearing as nearly as possible the actual expense incurred in making such audits. The expense of the audit shall be paid by each soil conservation district involved out of local fw audits shall be made available A report of such to the Governor of the State, to the State Soil Conservation Board, and the Members of the Legislature." Sec. 4. "The supervisors of soil conservation districts shall-provide for the execution of surety bonds for all employees and officers

sec. 6. "Grants to soil conservation districts as provided in this Act, when received by the district, shall be deposited in the name of the district; such deposit shall be with a State or National bank or banks. Any withdrawal of such funds so deposited to the credit of the district maybe withdrawn only on approval of the board of supervisors of the district. All checks or orders for such withdrawal shall be signed by the chairmanand secretary of the board of supervisors of the district."Hon. V. C. Marshall - Page 4 (v-1106)

We have been informed by the State Comptroller of Public Accounts that each soil conservation district whose application for a grant had been approved and certffied to him by the State Soil Conservation Board had been issued a warrant on the State Treasury for the amount so certified. We presume the governing board of each such district has deposited the amount so received in some bank or banks to its credit in compliance with the provisions of Section 6.

Before we can answer your question it must first be determined whether the statute or House Bill 97 makes the payment of premiums on such surety bonds the responsibility of the districts.

It will be observed that both Section 6 of the statute and Section 4 of House Bill 97 provfde:

“The supervisors shall provide for the execution of surety bonds m all employees and officers who shall be entrusted with funds or property.” (Emphasis added.) This language does not provide for the execution of surety bonds & such employees and officers, but does provide : “The supervisors shall provfde for the execution of surety bonds w all employees and officers who shall be entrusted with funds or property.” (Emphasfs added.) The usual and ordinary meaning of the verb “provfde” is “to sup-

:
. tz or,,furnlsh.” 34 Words and Phrasea, (Perm. Ed, 1940-j The power to rovide includes the power to purchase.” Dancv v. Davw ror ref.). 1 3 S.W.2d 195 (Tex. Civ, App. 1944, eris The p;eposition “for” has several meanings) fneluding “on account of;N “in favor of;” ‘in behalf of.” Webster’s NewInternational Dictionary, (2d Ed.) 1938. The Legislature is presumed to have intended that the words

“provide” and “for” be given their usual and ordinary meanlng

. Therefore, it has required the governing board of each soil conservation district to supply or furnish surety bonds for its employees and officers who shall be entrusted with funds or property and to pay the premiums thereon,

Having reached the conclusion that Payment of Premiums on surety bonds provided by a district for a certafn class of Its employees and officers is the responsfbilfty of the district it becomes necessary to determine whether such premiums maybe paid out of the money granted to the district by House Bill 97.

### Hon. V. C. Marshall- Page 5 (v-1106)

Section7 of the statuteand SubsectionF, Section 4 of HouseBill 97 

### each specifically authorizethe governing board of a soilconservation district"toacceptdonations, gifts,and contributions In money . . . from this State or any of its agencies,and to use or expendsuchmonies.

. . or othercontributions in carryingon its operations." Section3 

### ofHouseBill 97 

### specifically provides that eachdistrictshallpay out of its local fa the actual expensesincurredby the StateAuditor in makingan annual audit of the district. This provisionclearlyprohibits a districtfrompayingsuch expensesout of the moneygranted to it by the State. Section4 ofHouseBill 97 

### requiresthe governingboard of eachdistrictto providesuretybonds for all of its employeesand officerswho shallbe entrustedwith funds or property,but doesnot providethat the premiumson suchbonds shallbe paid out of "localfunds"of the district.

Since the Legislaturedid not providein Section4 that premiumson suretybonds shouldbe paidby each district out of its local funds,and sincewe have foundno provision in the statuteor in HouseBill 97 requiringthe paymentof suchpremiumsout of any particularfund,we think it necessarilyfollowsthat the moneygrantedto eachdistrictby HouseBill 97 

### may be used for the paymentof premiumson such suretybonds.
SUMUARY

The governingboardsof soil conservationdistrictsmay pay premiumson suretybondsprovidedby them "forall employeesand officerswho shallbe entrusted

with funds or property"out of funds grantedto the districtsby HouseBill 97. (Acts 5lst 

### Leg.,R.S. 1949, 

### ch. 540, 

### pa 1000).
Yoursvery truly,
APPROVED: PRICE DAMIEL AttorneyGeneral C.K.Richards Trial&Appellate Division
EverettHutchinson B+=-W~--cg BY ExecutiveAssistant CharlesD. Mathews FirstAssistant BruceW. Bryant Assistant

BWB:wb