Opinion No. 79-241 (1979) Ag

CourtOklahoma Attorney General Reports
DecidedNovember 9, 1979
StatusPublished

This text of Opinion No. 79-241 (1979) Ag (Opinion No. 79-241 (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. 79-241 (1979) Ag, (Okla. Super. Ct. 1979).

Opinion

The Attorney General is in receipt of your request for an opinion in which you ask, in effect, the following questions: 1. What legal obligations are imposed on motor license agents ? 2. When, if ever, may motor license agents lease or sell their own property for use in the tag agency? If such transactions are permissible, may a motor license agent "earn money" in addition to the $22,000 maximum allowed by 47 O.S. 22.30 [47-22.30](1) (1978)? 3. Do the nepotism statutes prohibit the appointment of third degree relatives of members of the Tax Commission as motor license agents? The key to defining the legal obligations of motor license agents lies in the public nature of that position. Motor license agents are basically tax collectors, operating under the direct control of the Oklahoma Tax Commission. See Riggs v. Leininger,137 Okl. 138, 278 P. 344 (1929). The position is statutorily created and both its duties and compensation are fixed by statute, 47 O.S. 22.21 [47-22.21], 47 O.S. 22.22 [47-22.22], and 47 O.S. 22.30 [47-22.30](1) (1978). The records and financial statements of these agents are open to public inspection, 47 O.S. 22.30 [47-22.30](h) and 47 O.S. 22.30 [47-22.30](n) (1978). Furthermore, they are required to remain open at certain hours convenient to the public, 47 O.S. 22.30 [47-22.30](1-2) (1978). In addition, the agent must post an official faithful performance bond, 47 O.S. 22.22 [47-22.22] (1978) and 47 O.S. 22.30 [47-22.30](1) (1978), and while they do not take an oath of office, they are required to sign the loyalty oath taken by State employees. Finally, these agents are liable for misfeasance or nonfeasance in performing their official duties, 47 O.S. 22.30 [47-22.30](c) (1978) and 47 O.S. 22.30 [47-22.30](h) (1978). As official arms of the Tax Commission, then, motor license agents may be said to exercise a public trust. Because they are authorized to collect money from the public, such agents stand in a relationship of trust and confidence to the public they serve. In other words, the obligations imposed on such agents are fiduciary in nature. This high standard derives, not from a formal trust arrangement, but rather, from the public nature of the motor license agent's position. In order to answer your second question — when, if ever, may motor license agents lease or sell their own property for use in the tag agency — one must first understand the system provided by the Legislature for handling the fiscal matters of tag agencies, found primarily in 47 O.S. 22.30 [47-22.30](n) (1978). Each motor license agent submits a proposed annual budget of expenses to the Tax Commission for approval or disapproval. The Commission has "the power to require any changes it deems necessary in the operation of those motor license agents." Next, the Commission prints "a detailed list of all allowable operating expenses and disbursements to be allowed such motor license agents." In addition to these operating expenses, the list also includes the compensation of the motor license agent. The agents do not pay for the operation of the tag agency out of their own pockets. Rather, their compensation is a personal salary, the other operating expenses being separate, budgeted items which the Commission either allows or disallows. This personal compensation is retained by the agents out of the fees they collect, and "the percentage of funds to be retained . . . shall be determined by the Commission each year," 47 O.S. 22.30 [47-22.30](h) (1978). In no event may the agent's retained compensation exceed $22,000, 47 O.S. 22.30 [47-22.30](1) (1978). Any excess funds must be remitted twice a month to the Tax Commission along with the required report, 47 O.S. 22.30 [47-22.30](h) (1978). Turning to the first part of your question, the Attorney General cannot conclude that the Legislature intended to completely prohibit motor license agents from selling or leasing their property for use in the tag agency. Although the statute contains no express authority permitting such transactions, neither does it contain any express prohibition against them. In fact, certain statutory language indicates that motor license agents may hold an interest in the property used in the tag agency, implying that the Legislature contemplated such transactions. Title 47 O.S. 22.30 [47-22.30](n) (1978) provides: "The Commission shall establish a beginning inventory and maintain records of all real and personal property leased or owned by each motor license agent and shall annually update its records as to any interest, whether partial or whole, held by the motor license agent in such real and personal property. Upon the appointment of a successor agent, the Commission shall have the power to provide for the equitable settlement of any issue arising from any partial interests involved in such real and personal property." Furthermore, the Legislature designated motor license agents as "self-employed independent contractors," 47 O.S. 22.30 [47-22.30](n) (1978). However, motor license agents are by no means given a free reign in acquiring property for use in the tag agency, either from themselves or from third parties. On the contrary, every such transaction is submitted to the close scrutiny of the Tax Commission as discussed above, 47 O.S. 22.30 [47-22.30](n) (1978). The agent's proposed annual budget, which includes the expenses of real or personal property needed for operation, is subject to the Commission's approval or disapproval. In addition to the power to disallow expenses, the Commission has the "power to require any changes it deems necessary in the operation of those motor license agents," 47 O.S. 22.30 [47-22.30](n) (1978). Also, the Oklahoma Tax Commission is authorized to promulgate rules and regulations pursuant to 47 O.S. 22.21 [47-22.21] (1978). Moreover, motor license agents are audited at least annually by the Commission, as well as by the State Auditor and Inspector, 47 O.S. 22.30 [47-22.30](n) (1978). The Commission may remove motor license agents at will, 47 O.S. 22.22 [47-22.22] (1978). Also in 47 O.S. 22.30 [47-22.30](n) (1978), the Legislature imposed yet another restriction on those agents whose compensation is the maximum amount by requiring that these agents: "shall utilize the facilities of the Central Purchasing Office to make any purchase or lease that is available in the quantities desired and all such purchases or leases shall be made through that office unless the motor license agent can make such purchase or lease at a less cost from some other source." Not only are such transactions subject to the Commission's scrutiny, they are also subject to the scrutiny of the public. The final paragraph of 47 O.S. 22.30 [47-22.30](n) (1978) provides: "Any and all records, files, books or otherwise of a motor license agent relating to the operation of the motor license agency shall be public record which shall be open to public inspection at reasonable times, regardless of their location." Thus, restrictions on motor license agents who sell or lease their property for use in the agency are built into the system of handling their fiscal matters. While the statute does not preclude motor license agents from selling or leasing their own property for use in the tag agency, they are prevented from doing so at an unfair price. Any abuse could be detected by either the Oklahoma Tax Commission or the State Auditor and Inspector during the budgeting and auditing processes as well as by public inspection.

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

Related

Riggs v. Leininger
1929 OK 245 (Supreme Court of Oklahoma, 1929)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
Opinion No. 79-241 (1979) Ag, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/opinion-no-79-241-1979-ag-oklaag-1979.