Missouri AG Opinions — 1973

Opinion letter to Mr. James R. Spradling

Opinion letter to the Honorable DeVerne Calloway

Section 290.060, RSMo, dealing with the employment of pregnant women, has been superseded by 42 U.S.C., § 2000e -2(a) and 29 C.F.R., § 1604.2(b) and employers are no longer required to comply with such statute.

Section 292.170, RSMo, which requires seating for women at work is partially in conflict with Title 42 U.S.C. Sec. 2000e and 29 C.F.R. Sec. 1604.2(b)(4) and in such areas of conflict the state law must give way to the federal requirements. Therefore, an employer must provide seats for all employees or prove that business necessity precludes such seats and not provide them for any employees.

Opinion letter to Mr. Jack Smith

A county of the first class having a charter form of government may not adopt an ordinance which purports to establish a minimum monetary requirement for advertising for bids for supplies, equipment, materials or services greater than that established by Section 50.660, RSMo 1969.

Opinion letter to Mr. Charles O’ Halloran

Opinion letter to Mr. Charles O’ Halloran

House Bill 1114 of the General Assembly, Section 182.620, V.A.M.S., provides two alternative methods for the creation of a consolidated public library district. One calls for action by the respective library boards and the county court or the county chief executive officers and the other for an election after a petition of five percent of the registered voters has been submitted. If the first procedure is followed, a district is created and no election under the second procedure may be held to rescind the action creating the district.

Opinion letter to the Honorable Cloy E. Whitney

Opinion letter to the Honorable Paul L. Bradshaw

Meetings of the “committee of the whole” and subcommittees of the St. Louis County Council are “public meetings” within the meaning of Section 1(1) of Senate Bill No. 1, General Assembly, First Regular Session, and thus are required to be open to the public by Section 2 of said bill.

Article IX, Section 7 of the Constitution of Missouri prohibits the passage of state statutes which would allocate to the training of law enforcement personnel any funds collected as fines for the violation of state laws. However, there is no constitutional prohibition against the passage of state statutes (or county or municipal ordinances, in the absence of such state statutes) which would mandate allocations to the training of law enforcement personnel from funds collected as fines for the violation of county or municipal ordinances.

The payment of an indemnity to a state official for an incurred hurt, loss or damage under any provision of law when the same indemnity is available to all private citizens for identical hurts, losses or damages does not constitute a conflict of interest.

Payments for children who have been adopted and for whom foster care payments have been paid under the homeless, dependent, and neglected foster care program of the state of Missouri cannot be made from the funds appropriated for payment of the state's share of the cost of family foster home care of homeless, dependent or neglected children.

Opinion letter to the Honorable C. E. Hamilton, Jr.

Opinion letter to the Honorable N. William Phillips

Opinion letter to the Honorable Richard E. Martin

When a person is arrested and charged with an offense within thirty days of the arrest but the case is nolle prossed, official records pertaining to the case, including records of the arrest, are to be closed but are not subject to expungement .

Opinion letter to the Honorable Donald E. Lamb

With respect to the issuance of summonses and the acceptance of bail by police officers of the City of St. Louis: 1. Neither the judges nor the prosecutors have the authority to establish systems or standards for the issuance of summonses for city ordinance or state law violations to be used by the St. Louis police department. 2. Police officers have authority under Supreme Court Rule 37.09 to serve a person with a summons instead of arresting such person in any case in which it is lawful for such officers to arrest the person without a warrant for violation of a city ordinance. In traffic cases Supreme Court Rule 37.46, which authorizes the issuance of a summons by police officers in the form of the uniform traffic ticket, is applicable to state misdemeanor traffic violations as well as municipal ordinance traffic violations. 3. Police officers in charge of the station houses in St. Louis, under Section 84.230, RSMo, have the authority, within certain limitations, to accept bail from a person arrested for a municipal violation or a violation of state law. 4. The Board of Police Commissioners has supervisory authority over officers acting pursuant to Supreme Court Rules 37.09 and 37.46 and Section 84.230, RSMo.

With respect to Sections 6, 7 and 8 of Senate Bill No. 1, General Assembly, relating to arrest records, 1. The provisions of the first sentence of Section 6 and the provisions of Section 7, relating to the closing of records of arrested persons, apply throughout the state of Missouri. 2. The second sentence of Section 6, relating to expungement of records of arrested persons, applies to all records, wherever maintained, of arrests which take place within the geographical confines of any city or county having a population of five hundred thousand or more. 3. Section 6 of the Act does not require closing of the records of an arrest if that arrest results in any criminal charge against the arrested person within thirty days. 4. Under Section 7 of the Act, official records need not be closed unless all charges arising out of an arrest are subsequently nolle prossed, dismissed, or result in findings of not guilty. 5. Section 7 of the Act requires that official records be closed where the original indictment or information against the accused is dismissed and an information charging the accused with a different offense is subsequently filed, but does not apply where an amended information is filed charging the same offense as previously charged by indictment or information.

1974 is the final calendar year during which liability can be incurred for the intangible tax of Chapter 146, RSMo 1969, but this liability is based upon the yield of intangible personal property during 1973 rather than 1974; and the yield of intangible personal property during 1974 will not be the basis for the computation for any future intangible tax. The final date for filing intangible tax returns will be April 15, 1974.

Opinion letter to the Honorable Max Bacon and the Honorable George J. Donegan

Opinion letter to the Honorable William S. Brandom

Opinion letter to Colonel Samuel S. Smith

Public defenders, except when operating under certain federal grants, have no authority to provide services to indigent juveniles or indigents charged with misdemeanors and cannot contract with the City of St. Louis for additional assistants to perform such services.

With respect to Act 172, General Assembly that: 1. Section 7 of the Act applies to all records of prosecuting attorneys, law enforcement agencies, and magistrate courts which pertain to the case of a person who has been arrested and charged. 2. Records required to be closed under Section 7 of the Act are not to be expunged, but they are available to courts and law enforcement agencies only for purposes of litigation and otherwise must be inaccessible to the general public.

A national bank may charge interest at the rate permitted by state law, or at a rate of one percent in excess of the discount rate prescribed by the federal reserve bank for the district in which the national bank is situated, whichever is higher.

The provisions of House Bill No. 156, General Assembly, providing for benefit payments to aid to the blind and House Bill No. 514, General Assembly, providing for benefits to aid to dependent children are in effect only until January 1, 1974, and thereafter the provisions of Senate Bill No. 325, General Assembly, govern.

Opinion letter to the Honorable Ralph L. Martin

The Environmental Improvement Authority (), created by House Bill No. 1041, General Assembly, is not a “state agency” within the meaning and operation of Sections 13, 23, 24, and 27 of Article IV of the Constitution of the state of Missouri and that the revenues of the Authority are not within the meaning of “state funds” as used in Article IV, Section 15.

A member of the General Assembly is not prohibited by the Constitution or state law from renting real estate which he owns to a state agency.

Opinion letter to Mr. Charles L. Arnold, .

A board of education may not require a teacher to have been employed two years or more by another school district within ten years immediately prior to employment by the board of education as a condition for a waiver of one year toward tenure of a probationary period for a probationary teacher.

Opinion letter to Mr. Peter W. Salsich , Jr.

Opinion letter to Dr. Arthur L. Mallory

The provisions of Section 51.310 (House Bill No. 667, General Assembly), which provide for additional compensation to certain county clerks for performance of duties under Section 51.121 (House Bill No. 667, General Assembly), constitute an increase in compensation to county clerks of counties in which the county clerk was required to perform the duties under Section 51.121, RSMo 1969, before September 28, 1971, and is not effective during such clerks’ present terms of office but is effective as to clerks coming under the provisions of Section 51.121 after September 28, 1971. Such payments may be made for 1974 and thereafter to clerks in counties in which registration is first required under House Bill No. 20, General Assembly.

Opinion letter to the Harold P. , M.D.

Opinion letter to Mr. John A. Hailey

Opinion letter to the Honorable L. Edward Stone, Jr.

A state representative may not be employed to produce an annual report for the Land Clearance for Redevelopment Authority of the City of Springfield, because such employment violates Article , Section 12 of the Constitution of Missouri.

The state may, under Chapter 34, RSMo, negotiate directly for all leases of real estate, and such leases do not have to be bid.

During the interval until January 1, 1975, the two elected members' terms on the board of trustees of the Missouri State Employees' Retirement System shall be served by the Superintendent of Insurance and one appointment to be made by the Governor.

Where the clerk of the magistrate court and not the sheriff collects certain sums of money under amended Section 57.130, (Senate Bill No. 100, General Assembly, effective September 28, 1973), the clerk has no authority to collect the ten percent commission under subsection 6 of Section 57.290, (Senate Bill No. 516, General Assembly).

A public school district may accept voluntary donations or contributions from individuals to help defray the costs of educational programs offered by the district. The contributor may specify the program to be aided by his donation, and the school district may bind itself to use the money for that purpose provided that in so doing it does not discriminate between students on the basis of whether they or their parents have made a donation.

Opinion letter to Mr. Clifford L. Summers

Opinion letter to the Honorable William E.

Section 38(a) and Section 39(3), Article , Missouri Constitution, prohibit a school board and the district superintendent from terminating a partially performed three-year contract and executing a new contract providing for the performance of the same duties at a greater compensation when the only reason for doing so is an increase in the number of students attending the school district.

(1) A probationary and a permanent teacher may be sued by a six-director school district as defined in Section 160.011(12), RSMo 1969, for damages which the school district can prove resulted from the teacher’s unjustified refusal to perform the agreed upon services provided for in the teacher’s contract. (2) Pursuant to Sections 168.114 through 168.120, a permanent teacher’s indefinite contract could be terminated by a school district if a teacher unjustifiably refuses to perform the services called for by the teacher’s employment contract with the school district. (3) A teacher’s teaching certificate could be revoked by the authority which issued the certificate upon satisfactory proof that the teacher has unjustifiably failed to perform the services called for by his employment agreement and that, therefore, the teacher has neglected his duty and/or has annulled his contract with the local school board without the consent of the majority of the members of the board which is a party to the contract as provided in Section 168.071, RSMo 1969.