Missouri AG Opinions, 1980

Opinion Letter to The Honorable Russell G. Brockfeld

Parents of school-aged handicapped or severely handicapped children admitted to the Department of Mental Health may not be charged for special education and related services. If the admissions of any such children is necessary for them to receive appropriate special education and related services, then their parents may not be charged for special education, related services, nonmedical care, and room and board. School districts and special school districts are obliged to pay towards the costs of special education and related services rendered by the Department of Mental Health to its full-time patients or residents. Absent a contractual provision, we find no authority for the Department of Mental Health to charge the State Board of Education for special education it chooses to render to patients and residents of its facilities.

Parents of school-aged handicapped or severely handicapped children placed by the Department of Mental Health with community placement providers may not be charged for special education and related services. If the placement of any such children is necessary for them to receive appropriate special education and related service, then their parents may not be charged for special education, related services, nonmedical care, and room and board. School districts and special school districts of domicile are obliged to pay towards the costs of special education and related services rendered by the serving school districts and special school districts. The State Board of Education shall provide special educational services to the severely handicapped children who cannot receive such services from the school districts where the children actually reside.

Opinion Letter to The Honorable Robert H. House

A municipality coming within the provisions of §§ 590.100 to 590.150, RSMo, may impose a $2.00 court fee for peace officer training under § 590.140, RSMo, in addition to the maximum court costs provided under § 479.260, RSMo.

Opinion Letter to Dr. Paul R.

Opinion Letter to The Honorable Allan G. Mueller

The provisions of subsection 15 of § 104.310, RSMo Supp. 1979, relating to the definition of “employee” insofar as the Missouri State Employees’ Retirement System laws are concerned and providing that the word “employee” does not include any employee who is currently accumulating benefits under some other retirement or benefit fund to which the state is a contributor is not retroactive but is applicable beginning January 1, 1979. Such provisions allow certain persons to come within the definition of “employee” and to receive membership credit beginning January 1, 1979, if they are not accumulating benefits in another system to which the state is a contributor.

The $3.00 fee which the county clerk is authorized to receive for his services pursuant to § 51.410, RSMo Supp. 1979, does not apply where a different statute prescribes the fee which is to be charged and, in the absence of an express statutory provision, does not apply to services rendered by the clerk to the county, other political subdivisions or special districts of the state or to public officers of the state and local governments in the performance of their duties.

Opinion Letter to The Honorable Richard M. Webster

Opinion Letter to The Honorable Carl Muckler

A magistrate judge who was elected to a full term in November of 1978 in Jackson County became an associate circuit judge under the nonpartisan court plan on January 2, 1979, and is entitled to serve a full four-year term beginning January 1, 1979, through December 31, 1982, and therefore does not run for retention in 1980. Associate circuit judges in St. Louis County who were appointed by the governor after the general election in 1978 and before January 2, 1979, to fill additional magistrate positions or to fill a vacancy under repealed §§ 482.010.3 or 482.020 complete the terms for which they were appointed December 31, 1980, and shall run for retention at the general election in 1980 for a term of office ending December 31, 1984. Associate circuit judges who were appointed by the governor after the general election in 1978 and before January 2, 1979, as additional magistrates or to fill a vacancy under repealed §§ 482.010.3 or 482.020, in courts not under the nonpartisan court plan will complete the terms for which they were appointed December 31, 1980, and the persons elected to such offices at the November election in 1980 will serve the remainder of the term of the office ending December 31, 1982.

Opinion Letter to The Honorable Gary C. Lentz

A candidate committee formed for a prior election and still in existence is required to make a disclosure report of expenditures and contributions under § 130.041, RSMo, if it has made any expenditures or received any contributions since its last required disclosure report without regard to the amount spent or received unless the treasurer of such committee properly files a notarized statement under oath pursuant to § 130.046, RSMo Supp. 1979, with the appropriate officer stating that neither the aggregate amount of contributions received nor the aggregate amount of expenditures made by the committee during the reporting period exceeded one hundred dollars. A candidate with an existing candidate committee which has made expenditures or received contributions since its last required disclosure report for a previous election is not eligible to file an exemption statement under § 130.016, RSMo Supp. 1979. When neither the candidate nor the candidate committee has received contributions or made expenditures since the last required disclosure report, the candidate is eligible to file an exemption statement under § 130.016, RSMo Supp. 1979. Expenditures made by a candidate committee since its last required disclosure report for a previous election are reportable expenditures for the candidate's next election.

Opinion Letter to The Honorable Richard M. Webster

Opinion Letter to Mr. F. M. Wilson

Opinion Letter to The Honorable John E. Scott

A mental health board of trustees established pursuant to §§ 205.975, RSMo, et seq., cannot hold title to real property or issue tax anticipation notes. However, the county courts, as governing bodies of a third class county, can hold title to real property. Such county court can issue tax anticipation notes for mental health boards based upon the anticipated revenues to be derived from a tax levy under § 205.980, RSMo.

Opinion Letter to The Honorable Don Randall

Opinion Letter to The Honorable Thomas J. Brown,

A school district is a political subdivision within the meaning of the Missouri Supreme Court Rule 33.17 and, under the provisions of such rule, a local school board member cannot be accepted as a surety on a bail bond.

Opinion Letter to The Honorable Joe D. Holt

Assistant prosecuting attorneys in first class counties not having a charter form of government may be employed on a part-time basis and may be allowed to engage concurrently in private civil law practice.

The Director of the Division of Savings and Loan Supervision may not recognize additional sources of revenue to that division for purposes of the director's computation of just and reasonable per diem charges, but these examination charges should approximate in amount the total of the actual per diem charges for all division personnel participating in the examination and other expenses incurred by the division on account of that examination, as specified in subsection 1 of § 369.324.

Opinion Letter to The Honorable Estil V. Fretwell

County collector of Morgan County is entitled to a commission for collecting delinquent and back taxes of two percent on the amount of delinquent or back tax plus interest and penalties, pursuant to § 52.290, RSMo.

Opinion Letter to The Honorable James R. Strong

Opinion Letter to The Honorable Al Nilges

Opinion Letter to Dr. James Frank

Opinion Letter to The Honorable Charles L. Moore

Opinion Letter to Dr. Paul R.

Under the provisions of § 33.095, RSMo, in every county other than a first class charter county, county employees who are paid a mileage allowance or reimbursement will have that allowance or reimbursement computed at the rate of seventeen cents per mile, as set by order of the Commissioner of Administration, unless a higher rate is specifically authorized by statute. The seventeen cent per mile rate will prevail over the ten cent per mile rate provided for county court judges of second class counties under § 49.100, RSMo, although mileage can only be paid for travel authorized by § 49.100. Such a county court does not have authority to pay a mileage allowance to such employees other than the seventeen cents per mile authorized by the Commissioner of Administration or a higher rate, if authorized by a statute. Section 33.095 has no effect on sheriffs' mileage fees which are taxable as court costs.

When an election is held in a political subdivision or a special district which is located within the jurisdiction of more than one election authority in situations where the provisions of § 115.023, subsections 3 and 4, are not applicable that the notice of election is to be given by the election authority of the county with the greatest proportion of the political subdivision's or special district's registered voters, and that if two newspapers of different political faith which are qualified under Chapter 493, RSMo, are published within the bounds of the area holding the election, the notice is to be published in such newspapers. If there is only one such newspaper, then the notice shall be published in such newspaper. If there is no newspaper published within the bounds of the election area, then the notice shall be published in two qualified newspapers of different political faith serving the area. The election authority may provide any additional notice of the election it deems desirable.

With respect to the provisions of subsection 2 of § 137.750, RSMo Supp. 1979, relating to costs of reassessment, that the terms “taxing jurisdiction” and “taxing authority” have essentially the same meaning; in calculating the percentage of reassessment costs, the county collector should include in the formula all ad valorem real and personal property tax collections, including distributable property taxes; if the county collector undercharges a taxing jurisdiction in estimating the costs of reassessment for a particular year, it is proper for him to make a deduction to recover the undercharge in future tax years; and he is to pay the taxing authority what it has due because of overcharges, as provided in such subsection.

A temporary caterer's permit may be issued by the Missouri Division of Liquor Control to a qualified applicant under § 311.485, RSMo, even though the premises involved are already licensed to a different licensee under other provisions of the state liquor laws.

Opinion Letter to The Honorable Stephen Bradford

Provisions of § 115.157, RSMo, authorize an election authority having registration information in computerized form to determine whether or not tapes or printouts will be furnished to candidates upon request without charge. If such tapes or printouts are furnished to any candidates upon request and without charge, they must be furnished to all candidates within the jurisdiction of the election authority upon request and without charge.

Opinion Letter to The Honorable Phil Barry

Opinion Letter to The Honorable James L. Mathewson

Missouri statutes prohibit licensed liquor establishments from dispensing liquor during certain hours on the primary election day, the first Tuesday after the first Monday in August of even-numbered years, and the general election day, the first Tuesday after the first Monday in November of even-numbered years.

Opinion Letter to The Honorable Flavel J. Butts

Opinion Letter to Mr. Stephen R. Sharp

Opinion Letter to The Honorable Gary G. Sprick

Opinion Letter to Dr. Arthur L. Mallory

Opinion Letter to The Honorable Flavel J. Butts

Opinion Letter to The Honorable Dale K. Miller