Opinion No. 76-287 (1976) Ag

CourtOklahoma Attorney General Reports
DecidedAugust 31, 1976
StatusPublished

This text of Opinion No. 76-287 (1976) Ag (Opinion No. 76-287 (1976) Ag) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Oklahoma Attorney General Reports primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Opinion No. 76-287 (1976) Ag, (Okla. Super. Ct. 1976).

Opinion

DEPARTMENT OF WILDLIFE CONSERVATION — INTEREST ACCRUING TO WILDLIFE CONSERVATION FUND The Department of Wildlife Conservation is entitled to the interest accruing from the revolving fund created in the State Treasury by 29 O.S. 3-302 [29-3-302] (1975). The Attorney General has considered your request for an opinion wherein you ask, in effect, the following question: Is the Department of Wildlife Conservation entitled to the interest accruing from the revolving fund created in the State Treasury by 29 O.S. 3-302 [29-3-302] (1975)? Pursuant to 62 O.S. 74 [62-74] (1971), the State Treasurer is designated to act as the official depository for all state monies. Each state agency is required by statute (62 O.S. 7.1 [62-7.1] (1975)) to deposit daily all monies received by that agency in either an agency clearing account created by 62 O.S. 7.1 [62-7.1] (1975), or an agency special account established pursuant to the provisions of 62 O.S. 7.2 [62-7.2] (1975). With only a few exceptions, the monies deposited with the State Treasurer are not segregated by particular fund or source, but are commingled in the account of the State Treasurer. Subject to certain guidelines and restrictions not material to the question being considered, the State Treasurer is required by 62 O.S. 89.2 [62-89.2] (1975) to invest the maximum amount of funds under his control consistent with what in his judgment constitutes good business practice. The interest received from the Treasurer's investments is credited to the general revenue fund pursuant to 62 O.S. 203 [62-203] (1971). A revolving fund known as the Wildlife Conservation Fund is created in the State Treasury by 29 O.S. 3-302 [29-3-302](A) (1975), and provides that said fund shall consist of all monies of the State Game and Fish Fund, all license fees, penalties, fines or forfeitures and bond forfeitures, all donations, as well as all monies received by the Department of Wildlife Conservation and all interest accruing therefrom. Paragraph C of said Section limits the use of the fees, monies, or funds to purposes of the Department only. Paragraphs A and C of 29 O.S. 3-302 [29-3-302] (1975) state, respectively, as follows: "A. There is hereby created in the State Treasury a revolving fund to be known as the Wildlife Conservation Fund, which shall consist of all monies heretofore or hereafter appropriated to, on deposit in, or credited to the State Game and Fish Fund created by 29 O.S. 115 [29-115] and, in addition thereto, all license fees, penalties, fines or forfeitures and bond forfeitures collected by the state, any subdivision thereof, any public official or any other person for the violation of the wildlife conservation laws of this state, and all donations for such purposes as well as all monies received by the Department and all interest accruing therefrom. "C. All fees, monies or funds arising from the operation and transactions of the Commission and from the application and administration of the laws and regulations pertaining to the wildlife resources of the State and from the sale of property used for said purposes shall be expended and used by said Commission for the control, management, restoration, conservation and regulation of the wildlife resources of the State, including the purchase or other acquisition of property for said purposes, and for the administration of the laws pertaining thereto and for no other purposes." Paragraph C is materially the same as Article XXVI, Section 4 of the Oklahoma Constitution, which states as follows: "The fees, monies, or funds arising from the operation and transactions of said Commission and from the application and the administration of the laws and regulations pertaining to the bird, fish, game and wildlife resources of the State and from the sale of property used for said purposes shall be expended and used by said Commission for the control, management, restoration, conservation and regulation of the bird, fish, game and wildlife resources of the State, including the purchase or other acquisition of property for said purposes, and for the administration of the laws pertaining thereto and for no other purpose." The Wildlife Conservation Fund consists of monies arising from the operation and transactions of the Department of Wildlife Conservation. Prior to 1956 the use of the funds of the Department was governed by statute. On July 3, 1956, Article XXVI, Section 4 of which restricts the use of the Department's monies was adopted. It is apparent that the intent of the people when they adopted said Section was to guarantee that none of the fees, monies, or funds arising from the operation and transactions of the Wildlife Conservation Commission would be used for any other purpose. Your question requires a determination of whether the use of any interest which may accrue from such fees, monies, or funds, is likewise restricted. The Supreme Court of Oregon, in State v. Straub, 400 P.2d 229 (Or. 1965) (opinion clarified at 401 P.2d 29), held that interest attributable to a special highway fund, the use of which was restricted by the Oregon Constitution with the provision that the "proceeds" of the monies must be spent for highway purposes only, could not be paid into the general fund. In concluding that "proceeds" included the interest the monies earned while in the custody of the State Treasurer, and that by implication the interest was to be credited to the fund from which it accrued, the Court stated as follows: "It is recognized that the people's approval of the amendment to the Article IX, Section 3 provides no actual expression of a will and intent that interest that may be earned by the accumulated revenues controlled by the amendment should accrue to the highway fund. There is a strong inference, however, that the clear intent of the people to compel the specific revenues to be used for one purpose implied that it would include all of the interest that would accrue during the State Treasurer's holding of the revenues for their eventual use. We so hold." (Pg. 233) The Court, in State v. Straub, supra., cited as authority for its holding the Court of Civil Appeals of Texas case, Lawson v. Baker,220 S.W. 260 (Tex. 1920) which involved the constitutionality of an act which provided that all interest accruing from the deposit of special funds in banks was to become a part of the general revenue. In considering whether interest earned by a special fund created or defined in the Constitution could lawfully be diverted to any other fund, or to any other than the constitutionally declared purpose, the Court stated as follows: "The act provides that the interest upon all funds shall become part of the general revenue. Interest, according to all of the authorities, is an accretion to the principal fund earning it, and, unless lawfully separated therefrom, becomes a part thereof. We think it is clear that the interest earned by deposit of special funds is an increment that accrues to such special fund, and any attempt of the Legislature to make such interest a part of the general revenue is futile, in the face of the constitutional provisions creating or dedicating these funds to special purposes.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

State Highway Commission of Missouri v. Spainhower
504 S.W.2d 121 (Supreme Court of Missouri, 1973)
State Ex Rel Sprague v. Straub
401 P.2d 29 (Oregon Supreme Court, 1965)
Lawson v. Baker
220 S.W. 260 (Court of Appeals of Texas, 1920)
State ex rel. Attorney-General v. Covington
29 Ohio St. 102 (Ohio Supreme Court, 1876)
Cincinnati, Hamilton & Dayton Railroad v. Cole
29 Ohio St. 126 (Ohio Supreme Court, 1876)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
Opinion No. 76-287 (1976) Ag, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/opinion-no-76-287-1976-ag-oklaag-1976.