Opinion No. 79-012 (1979) Ag

CourtOklahoma Attorney General Reports
DecidedMarch 7, 1979
StatusPublished

This text of Opinion No. 79-012 (1979) Ag (Opinion No. 79-012 (1979) 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. 79-012 (1979) Ag, (Okla. Super. Ct. 1979).

Opinion

In your opinion request letter of January 11, 1979, you asked, in effect, the following question: "Are the Oklahoma State Regents for Higher Education legally authorized to allot allocated funds to state institutions of higher education under an accounting classification by object rather than an accounting classification by function? In the course of your letter you also inquired, in effect, whether individual institutions are required to conform their allotment requests to the accounting classification adopted by the Regents. The answer to this latter inquiry should be apparent from the answer to the principal question. If the Regents are performing in conformance with their constitutional and statutory duties, member institutions of the State System of Higher Education must comply. The Board of Regents for Higher Education (Regents) is a constitutional agency charged with responsibility to act as the "coordinating board of control for all state institutions of higher education." Article XIIIA, Section 2, Okl. Const. The Regents have been given by the People of the State of Oklahoma the specific power to "recommend to the State Legislature the budget allocation to each institution". Article XIII-A, Section 2, Okl. Const. Furthermore, with respect to the fiscal affairs of the State System of Higher Education, Article XIII-A, Section 3, Okl. Const. provides: "The appropriations made by the Legislature for all such institutions shall be made in consolidated form without reference to any particular institution and the Board of Regents herein created shall allocate to each institution according to its needs and functions." It has been specifically held by prior opinion of the Attorney General that when the People of the State of Oklahoma delegated to the Board of Regents the power to allocate funds for member institutions, the delegation included the power to distribute, assign, and allot the funds so allocated. A.G. Opinion No. 67-442. The methodology employed by the Regents in the implementation of their powers to allocate and allot is subject to reasonable regulation on the part of the Legislature. In the vitalizing legislation enacted by the Legislature, certain standards were established by which the Regents were to be guided in the process of allocating and allotting funds to member institutions. 62 O.S. 41.14 [62-41.14] (1971). Once having received the Legislature's lump sum appropriation for higher education, Section 62 O.S. 41.14 [62-41.14] sets forth the following language as to method of proceeding: "The Board of Regents shall allocate to each institution under its control from the consolidated, or lump sum appropriation made by the legislature, an amount sufficient to meet the needs and functions of each institution for the entire year as is now provided by law, or may hereafter be provided by law. The amount allocated to each institution for each fiscal year in accordance with Article XIII-A., Okl. Const., shall be made in a lump sum without regard to uniform budget or accounting classifications, but shall not be available for expenditure until subsequently allotted by the Regents in accordance with uniform budget and accounting classifications recommended by the National Committee on Standard Reports." Thus, the Regents allocate without regard to uniform budget or accounting classification a lump sum of the general appropriation to each member institution for the satisfaction of each institution's "needs and functions" for the upcoming fiscal year. However, the funds allocated may not be expended or encumbered until they are allotted by the Regents in conformance with a certain specified uniform budget and system of accounting classification. Section 41.14, thereafter, continues with language even more specifically referenced to the allotment process. "At least thirty (30) days prior to the beginning of each fiscal year, each of the constituent institutions shall file with the Regents its request for appropriation allotments for each of the purposes for which expenditures are to be made. Such requests shall be broken down to conform to the uniform budget or accounting classifications recommended by the National Committee on Standard Reports. Each institution's request for appropriation allotment shall show the amount required to finance each item of the request for the entire year and for each quarter or each six month period within the fiscal year, as required by the budget director. The Regents, or their designated official or employee who has authority to approve itemized allotment requests, shall consider the allotment request for the purpose of making a determination of: (1) the current financial requirements of the institution concerned justified the allotment to be made; (2) that the accounting classification is sufficient to reflect the purpose for which expenditures are to be made and that such classification is in accordance with the budget classifications adopted by the Budget Director and the Regents, which shall conform as nearly as possible to the account classification recommended by the National Committee on Standard Reports for Institutions of Higher Education; (3) that the realization of estimated revenues determined by the Budget Director is sufficient to allow the commitment to be made. In allotting appropriations and other funds, and approving subsequent allotments which may be required by each institution, the Regents shall follow the same general procedure set forth in this Act for other agencies of file State not under the control of said Regents, except as otherwise provided in this section. All forms and account classifications shall be mutually agreed upon by the Budget Director and the State Regents." Therefore, the process of allotting the lump sum allocation to each institution is implemented, pursuant to Section 62 O.S. 41.14 [62-41.14], in three steps. First is the reporting phase. The recipient institution submits an allocation request broken down into account classifications. The account classifications to be used are incorporated in Section 41.14 by reference to a publication entitled National Committee on Standard Reports for Institutions of Higher Education. Second, the allotment requests are reviewed by the Regents to determine whether (1) the allotments are justified by the current financial needs of the institution, (2) the account classification employed conforms to the standards required by Section 52 O.S. 41.14 [52-41.14] and National Committee on Standard Reports, and (3) revenues are sufficient to cover the proposed expenditures. Finally, a portion of the funds held for the requesting institution under its allocation in the State Treasury is transferred from a restricted general institutional ac count to accounts with the State Treasurer conforming to an approved accounting classification. The funds are thereafter available for expenditure by the requesting institution. Your opinion request seeks to determine whether it is permissible for the Regents in the course of complying with the provisions of Section 41.14 relating to "allotment requests" and the making of the actual allotment, to do so on the basis of an object accounting classification as opposed to a function accounting classification. For a number of years the Regents have required allotment requests to delineate the proposed expenditure of funds to be allotted on a form reflective of both functional and object account classification. In the past, actual allotment of funds was made to the institution's account with the State Treasurer quarterly, the accounts with the State Treasurer being designated and operated on the basis of functional accounting classifications contained in the approved allotment request.

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

Related

Potter v. State
1973 OK CR 228 (Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma, 1973)
Gibson Products Co. v. Murphy
1940 OK 100 (Supreme Court of Oklahoma, 1940)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
Opinion No. 79-012 (1979) Ag, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/opinion-no-79-012-1979-ag-oklaag-1979.