## TEEA'ITORNEY GENERAL OF TEXAS AUSTIN 1,.

T-EXA~ BVJLL WI&SON **A-RNEYG~NEc-I.** January 29, 

### 1960

Mr. D. C. Greer State Highway Engineer State Highway Building Austin, Texas

Dear Mr. Greer: OpinionNo. WW-790 R.3: Whether the provision in the AppropriationBill (H.B. 4, 

### 56thLeg.,3rdCalled Session, 

### 19591,authorizing serviceand safety awards, and transportation to receive them, is constitutional.
Your request for an opinion from this office concerns the following question: Is the State Highway Commission authorized to award pins and certificates for longevity of serviceand safety award pins and certificates for safe operation of State equipment, and to authorize the transportation of an employeewith twenty-fiveyears or more of service from designated headquarters to Austin to receive such longevity award?

The GeneralAppropriation Bill,to the Texas Highway Department provides in House Bill 4, Acts of the 

### 56thLegislature,Third Called Session, 1959, Chapter 23, page 

### 442at 590, as follows:

"As compensation in addition to that authorized to be paid above, the Highway Department is authorized to purchase and give to its employees at periodic intervals,under such rules and regulations as have been or may be adopted by the State Highway Commission, serviceaward pins and certificatesfor longevity of serviceand safety award pins and certificates for safe operation of state equipment;and the Department is also authorized as furtheradditional compensationto provide, at state expense, for the transportationof employeeswith 25 years or more of service from their designatedheadquartersto Austin and return at intervals of not less than 

### 5 years for the purpose of appearingbefore the State Highway Commission to receive said longevity serviceawards." Section 

### 51 of Article III of the Constitutionof Texas provides, in part, as follows:

"The Legislature shall have no power to make any grant or authorize the making of any grant of public.-- ..

Mr. D. C. Greer, page 2 (Ww-790)

moneys to any individual,association of individuals, municipal or other corporationswhatsoever . . ." The constitutionalprovision ouoted above. orohibits "aratuitnus dispositionof the state'smoney, property, or contractualrights." Rhoads Drilling Company v. Allred, 

### 123Tex. 229, 

### 70 S.W.2d 

### 576 (1934);Friedman v. American Surety Company of New York, 

### 137Tex. 149, 

### 151S.W 2d 

### 570 However, it is clear that the Legislature is not relegated to comuensatina employees only by yearly or monthly sums of mon>y. 1; is permissibleto - includeoth,r items as a portiouof an employee's camp-nsation. Examples are readily foundwhere certain ,mployeesreceiv- housing, laundry,maid service, etc. We are not facedwith the same consid-rations involved in Attorney General Opinion

### WW-153 (1957)because we h,re have a specific legislative appropriation establishingthese awards as part of the eligible employees' compensation. Senate Bill 

### 43,Acts 56th Legislature,Third Called Session, 1959, Chapter 

### 85,page 144, is the general law setting salaries and compensation of state employe?s at the amount established in the General Appropriation Bill. In our opinion, the awards in questionare perquisites of,employment directly related to and in payment of the eligible employees' service to the state. They, therefore. are not prohibited gratuitieswithin the meaning of Section 

### 51 of Article III of the Constitution of Texas.

It remains to determinewhether such awards are prohibitedby Sec. 44 of Article III of the Constitution of Texas. Said section reads as follows:
"Sec. 

### 44. The Legislature shall provideby law

for the compensationof all officers, servants,agents and public contractors,not provided for in this Constitution,but shall not grant extra compensation to any officer, agent, servant, or public contractors, after such public service shallhave been performed or contract entered into, for the performance of the same; nor grant, by appropriation or otherwise, any amount of money out of'theTreasury of the State, to any individual,on a claim, Teal or pr-tended,when the same shall not have been provided for by pre-existing ,law; nor employ any one in the name of the State, unless authorized by pre-existing law. (Emphasisadded.)
In our opinion the awards in question are not prohibitedby the above quoted constitutionalprovision. Just becaus- the awards are based on the length of the employee's service, it does not follow that the awards are "additional compensation" in payment for past serviceafter such service has been performed. It iswithin the discretion of the Legislature to determine that a state employee ismore valuable to the State today because of his experience gained by long and faithful past performance. This is theMr. D. C. Greer, Page 3 (h'W-7'90)

very foundation of longevitypayments authorized for various state employees. Of course, if an award were to be attempted from public funds to a former employeeno longer connectedwith the State, Sections 44 and 51 of Article III would prohibit the same. It is an entirely differentmatter, however, to recognize a current employee's experience record and to increase his present and future compensationaccordingly. The Legislaturehas seen fit to provide a portion of that increased compensation in the form of the awards and presentations in question. We find no constitutionalprohibition to'this most worthy recognition.
SUMMARY The Texas Highway Department has authority to purchase longevity and serviceaward pins and certificates,and to pay the expenses incurred in traveling from differentpoints in Texas for the purpose of receiving such awards, there being a specificappropriation for such purpose. Very truly yours,
WILL WILSON Attorney General of Texas

Tom I. McFarling Assistant TIM:aw APPROVED:
OPINION COMMIlTEE
James H. Rogers, Chairman Houghton Brownlee R. V. Loftin, Jr. Morgan Nesbitt
R~IEWEDFORTHEATIORNEY GENERAL BY: Leonard Passmore