Expense of Judges

• Court: Montana Supreme Court
• Decided: October 17, 1975
• Docket: 13121
• Status: Published

Opinion

No. 13121

I N THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA

I N THE MATTER OF ACTUAL NECESSARY EXPENSE O JUDGES F

OPINION AND ORDER

Oral argument was p r e s e n t e d by t h e f o l l o w i n g :

D i s t r i c t Judges:

Honorable Robert K e l l e r , K a l i s p e l l , Montana Honorable Robert Sykes , K a l i s p e l l , Montana Honorable LeRoy McKinnon, Lewistown, Montana Honorable Gordon B e n n e t t , Helena, Montana \,&JZ I&&#SFB Bar Association:

Alan F. Cain, Helena, Montana & T hr i a 1 Lawyers Association:

James T. H a r r i s o n Jr., Helena, Montana

Submitted: September 26, 1975 PER CURIAM:

O August 11, 1975, t h i s Court i s s u e d a Notice of Hearing n r e "In t h e of A c t u a l Necessary T r a v e l Expense of ~ u d g e s " . The n o t i c e r e a d s : 11 The Court h a s r e c e i v e d o r a l and w r i t t e n com- p l a i n t s , a s well a s a p e t i t i o n , with respect t o the q u e s t i o n o f expenses of Judges i n c u r r e d i n performance of t h e i r d u t i e s . "The language of A r t . V I I , Sec. 9 ( 2 ) of t h e 1972 Montana C o n s t i t u t i o n provides judges s h a l l r e c e i v e 1 s a l a r y and a c t u a l n e c e s s a r y t r a v e l expense.' This language a p p l i e s t o Judges a l o n e and t o no o t h e r p u b l i c o f f i c i a l . It a l s o must b e r e a d i n c o n j u n c t i o n w i t h t h e o t h e r s i n g u l a r and p e c u l i a r l i m i t a t i o n s on Judges appearing i n A r t . V I I . "Sec. l ( b ) , Chapter 439, 1975 Session Laws (H.B. 621), amends s e c t i o n 59-538, R.C.M. 1947, and provides e l e c t e d o f f i c i a l s t r a v e l i n g w i t h i n t h e s t a t e s h a l l be a u t h o r i z e d a c t u a l c o s t of lodging n o t exceeding $16.00 p e r day, p l u s $2.00 f o r t h e morning meal, $3.00 f o r midday meal and $5.00 f o r evening meal, a l l lodging c l a i m s must be documented by r e c e i p t . II Sec. 3 ( c ) amends s e c t i o n 59-801, R.C.M. 1947, and p r o v i d e s t h a t when a p r i v a t e l y owned v e h i c l e i s used a r a t e e q u a l t o t h e mileage a l l o t m e n t allowed by t h e United S t a t e s I n t e r n a l Revenue S e r v i c e s h a l l be paid f o r t h e f i r s t 1,000 m i l e s and 36 l e s s per m i l e f o r a l l miles t h e r e a f t e r traveled within a calendar month. "1t has been r e p r e s e n t e d t h a t t h e a l l o w a b l e mileage reimbursement does n o t i n f a c t meet t h e a c t u a l expense of automobile t r a v e l and t h e r e b y d i m i n i s h e s t h e judge's s a l a r y c o n t r a r y t o A r t . V I I , Sec. 7 , 1972 Montana C o n s t i t u t i o n . The same complaint h a s been made r e g a r d i n g l i m i t a t i o n of t h e lodging reimbursement due t o laclc of s u i t a b l e f a c i l i t i e s w i t h i n t h a t p r i c e range i n many a r e a s of t h e s t a t e . II The j u d i c i a . r y i s p r e s e n t l y c a r r y i n g a heavy c a s e l o a d , e v i d e n t t o us by o u r c a l e n d a r , and i f circum- s t a n c e s e x i s t a s have been r e p r e s e n t e d which h i n d e r per- formance of our jud e s by r e q u i r i n g them t o absorb a p o r t i o n of t h e i r 'actual n e c e s s a r y t r a v e l expense' i t i s contended t h a t weshould adopt r u l e s which w i l l alleviate t h i s situation. fI W deem t h i s m a t t e r of prime importance because e t r a v e l i s n e c e s s a r y between c o u n t i e s i n a j u d i c i a l d i s - t r i c t and between d i s t r i c t s . It i s always d i f f i c u l t t o s e c u r e out of d i s t r i c t judges t o h e l p because of t h e i r commitments a l r e a d y e x i s t i n g and on t o p of t h i s i f sky- r o c k e t i n g c o s t s a r e c a u s i n g judges t o s a y I no I t o r e - q u e s t s f o r h e l p we have a s i t u a t i o n t h a t cannot be t o l e r - ated. fI W want t h e f a c t s ! . Since we have no e f a c i l i t i e s f o r p r e p a r i n g a r e c o r d we w i l l a c c e p t signed s t a t e m e n t s of f a c t s , s t u d i e s , a r t i c l e s , b r i e f s o r any o t h e r t y p e of documents which have f a c t u a l backgrounds on t h e m a t t e r s w i t h which we a r e h e r e concerned. W s t a r t w i t h t h e l i m i t i n g e words r r a c t u a l n e c e s s a r y t r a v e l expense". W e a n t i c i p a t e f a c t s t o be p r e s e n t e d which w i l l e s t a b - l i s h " a c t u a l n e c e s s a r y " expenses t o be a r e a s o n a b l e formula t o apply uniformly a c r o s s t h e s t a t e , b o t h a s t o t r a v e l and s u s t e n a n c e . " e d i r e c t t h e Clerk of t h i s Court t o forward W copy of t h i s n o t i c e t o each D i s t r i c t Judge, and t o t h e Attorney General, t h e L e g i s l a t i v e Finance Committee, t h e Department of Revenue, t h e Department of A d m i n i s t r a t i o n , t h e L e g i s l a t i v e Council, t h e P r e s i d e n t of t h e S t a t e Bar of Montana, and P r e s i d e n t of t h e Montana T r i a l Lawyers A s s o c i a t i o n , and on r e q u e s t t o any o t h e r p a r t y evidencing an i n t e r e s t i n these matters. " e w i l l hold a f a c t - f i n d i n g h e a r i n g on September W 26, 1975, a t t h e hour of 1:30 p.m., and w i l l a p p r e c i a t e r e c e i v i n g such documentary evidence a s i s a v a i l a b l e a t t h a t time and, on p r i o r r e q u e s t , w i l l permit o r a l p r e s e n t a t i o n by c o u n s e l s . I f A h e a r i n g was h e l d on September 26, 1975. The Court has a c c e p t e d l e t t e r s , s t a t e m e n t s , newspaper a r t i c l e s , and p e r i o d i c a l s i n an a t t e m p t t o a r r i v e a t a s a t i s f a c t o r y s o l u t i o n f o r an o r d e r e s t a b l i s h i n g a r u l e which w i l l permit c l a i m s t o be f i l e d , p r o c e s s e d , a u d i t e d and p a i d , s o t h a t judges may be reimbursed t h e i r c o n s t i t u t i o n a l a c t u a l n e c e s s a r y t r a v e l expenses i n a r e a s o n a b l e way t o a p p l y uniformly a c r o s s t h e state. The Court r e c e i v e d under d a t e of August 1 8 , 1975, a l e t t e r from FJ. A . G r o f f , D i r e c t o r of t h e Department of Revenue, t o t h e e f f e c t t h a t i n s o f a r a s l e g i s l a t i v e budget problems w i t h f i s c a l n o t e s a r e concerned, none e x i s t . 14r. G r o f f ' s l e t t e r r e a d s :

h he Department of Revenue t a k e s t h e p o s i t i o n t h a t A r t i c l e V I I , S e c t i o n s 7 ( 1 ) and 9 ( 2 ) of t h e Plontana C o n s t i t u t i o n have primacy over S e c t i o n s 59-801 and 59-538, R.C.14. 1947, a s amended. To r e q u i r e Judges t o comply w i t h t h e p r o v i s i o n s of t h e above-cited s e c t i o n s of t h e Revised Codes of Montana would v i o l a t e t h o s e c i t e d p r o v i s i o n s of t h e C o n s t i t u - t i o n s t a t i n g t h a t t h e i r s a l a r i e s s h a l l n o t be diminished and t h a t t h e y a r e t o r e c e i v e a c t u a l n e c e s s a r y t r a v e l expense. The Department's e x p e r i e n c e w i t h t h e t r a v e l and per diem allowances provided by the 1975 Session Laws is still inadequate to defray the costs of actual necessary travel expenses. II The Department of Revenue is routinely called upon by the legislature to write 'fiscal notes1 on all matters affecting the state budget. Our research division informs me that the monetary impact of an increase in travel expenses for Judges contemplated under Cause No. 13121 would be minimal and of no consequence as it affects the state budget. I I Additionally, the Court has received an informative letter from Jack Crosser, Director of the Department of A.dminis- tration. This letter includes an attachment showing a compilation of actual meals and lodging charged by 25 of the 28 individual judges. Mr. Crosser's letter makes this conclusion: fl In conclusion, the Department of Administration takes no position as to whether or not statutory travel expenses authorized the District Judges meets the I actual and necessary travel expense' requirement of Article VII, Section 9, Constitution of Montana 1972. It has always been this ~epartment's position in auditing expense claims that we must enforce enacted legislation until changed by the Legis- lature or declared unconstitutional by a court of competent jurisdiction. Whatever the Court decrees in this matter will be immediately implemented by this Department.I I As reflected by Mr. Crosser's conclusion, Mr. ~roff's letter, and our own Notice of Hearing heretofore quoted, the problem is the legislature's language "elected state officials" in sections 59-538 and 59-801, R.C.M. 1947, in authorizing scheduled, fixed charges for lodging per day, meals individually, and mileage. The language of Article VII, sections 7 1 () and 9 (2) ( ) 3, 1972 Montana Constitution is: Section 7 1 : () "All justices and judges shall be paid as provided by law, but salaries shall not be diminished during terms of office. I I Section 9 (2) : "No supreme court justice or district court judge shall solicit or receive compensat?on in any form whatever on account of his office, except salary and actual necessary travel expense. I I Section 9(3): "Except a s o t h e r w i s e provided i n t h i s c o n s t i t u t i o n , no supreme c o u r t j u s t i c e o r d i s t r i c t c o u r t judge s h a l l p r a c t i c e law d u r i n g h i s term of o f f i c e , engage i n any o t h e r employment f o r which s a l a r y o r f e e i s p a i d , o r hold o f f i c e i n a p o l i t i c a l party. lI This language makes i t c l e a r t h a t l e g i s l a t i v e a t t e m p t s t o 11 restrict a c t u a l and n e c e s s a r y t r a v e l expense" of d i s t r i c t judges and j u s t i c e s a r e u n c o n s t i t u t i o n a l . As a p p l i e d t o d i s t r i c t judges and supreme c o u r t j u s t i c e s o n l y , s e c t i o n s 59-538 and 59-801 a r e u n c o n s t i t u i o n a l , and ~ 7 es o hold. Judges a r e e n t i t l e d t o t h e i r a c t u a l and n e c e s s a r y expenses f o r s u b s i s t e n c e and l o d g i n g . This Court w i l l a u d i t and approve such expenses f o r t h e i r a c t u a l i t y , n e c e s s i t y and r e a s o n a b l e n e s s . The problem a s t o " a c t u a l and n e c e s s a r y " expenses f o r t r a n s p o r t a t i o n i s somewhat more complex because t h e s t a t e does n o t , a s y e t , f u r n i s h s t a t e owned automobiles. Thus, judges must f u r n i s h t h e i r own automobiles w i t h a l l t h e a t t e n d a n t c o s t s , i n - c l u d i n g g a s o l i n e , i n s u r a n c e , t i r e s , d e p r e c i a t i o n and g e n e r a l upkeep. T h e i r t r a v e l v a r i e s w i d e l y , from almost none t o 30,000 m i l e s p e r year. The t r a v e l i s complicated by m u l t i p l e county, m u l t i p l e d i s t r i c t s c h e d u l i n g i n a l l t y p e s of weather and c o n d i t i o n s . It i s a l s o complicated by i n d i v i d u a l c h o i c e of automobiles, from compact t o f u l l s i z e d . Our problem i s t3 adopt a f a i r r u l e t h a t may b e uniformly a p p l i e d w i t h a minimum of r e c o r d keeping b u t c o n s i s t e n t w i t h f i s c a l responsibility. Out of a myriad of m a t e r i a l s , we have s e l e c t e d t h e a n a l y s i s of t h e United S t a t e s Department of T r a n s p o r t a t i o n of t h e F e d e r a l Highway A d m i n i s t r a t i o n d a t e d A p r i l 1972, and u s i n g our own i n t e r p o l a t i o n s and u p d a t i n g have a r r i v e d a t a f i g u r e of 19d p e r m i l e a s a f a i r and n e c e s s a r y f i g u r e , s u b j e c t t o p e r i o d i c adjustment t o meet changing c o n d i t i o n s . W r e c o g n i z e t h a t i t may n o t i n a l l e c a s e s meet t h e c o n s t i t u t i o n a l c r i t e r i a b u t i n t h o s e c a s e s t h i s Court w i l l r e q u i r e f u l l r e c o r d keeping and p r o o f . The c h o i c e w i l l b e l e f t t o t h e i n d i v i d u a l judge. Additionally, a s an o b s e r v a t i o n , t h e l e g i s l a t u r e may, i n t h e f u t u r e , choose t o provide o t h e r means, e i t h e r by s t a t e owned a u t o - mobiles, l e a s e d automobiles, o r any o t h e r c o n s t i t u t i o n a l method. As t o t h e c h o i c e of i n d i v i d u a l j u d g e s , where o t h e r forms of t r a n s p o r t a t i o n o t h e r than p u b l i c t r a n s p o r t a t i o n a r e s e l e c t e d which w i l l c o s t more than 19d per m i l e o r t h e then c u r r e n t a d j u s ~ d i g u r e , t h i s Court w i l l r e q u i r e e i t h e r p r i o r f a p p r o v a l o r a u t h e n t i c a t e d documentary proof of t h e a c t u a l and n e c e s s a r y expense. T h i s Court w i l l h e r e a f t e r h a n d l e t h e p r o c e s s i n g and a p p r o v a l of t h e s e c l a i m s on a monthly b a s i s . Copies of t h i s o p i n i o n and o r d e r s h a l l be mailed by t h e Clerk of t h i s Court t o a l l D i s t r i c t Judges, ~ o r k e r s 'Compensation Judge, t h e Department of A d m i n i s t r a t i o n and t h e Department of Revenue.