|
Most Recent Opinions (April 2004 - September 2005)
Opinion # 2004-108
Discussion providing that certain records fall under the open records law unless there is a recognized exception, and that a reasonable fee may be charged for the actual cost of providing copies or for retrieving information.
Opinion # 2004-115
Discussion providing that a governmental agency may enter into an agreement with a University to give the University exclusive use of governmentally owned and operated property in exchange for the government’s use of other University facilities.
Opinion # 2004-131
Discussion providing that a state employee may be a candidate for county commissioner, but must be off duty or on approved leave to engage in political activities.
Opinion # 2004-132
Discussion providing that there is no law that would prohibit a water board from installing a water line across a county road that contains a water line of an adjoining municipality.
Opinion # 2004-135
Discussion providing that the probate judge, the circuit clerk, and sheriff may perform all the election duties set forth in the Code unless the official is a candidate in the election.
Opinion # 2004-137
Discussion providing that the position of county commissioner is vacated at the time of a commissioner’s conviction, i.e., when the jury returns a verdict of guilty.
Opinion # 2004-139
Discussion providing that a county hospital board may sell real property to an individual for valuable consideration/fair market value without advertising the sale.
Opinion # 2004-143
Discussion providing that a city may pave a roadway adjacent to a public street when it acquires the roadway for a public purpose by dedication, transfer of deed, or prescription.
Opinion # 2004-144
Discussion providing that notices of tax sales must be published in a newspaper published in the county, and discussing how that determination is made.
Opinion # 2004-145
Discussion providing that a county commission may make contracts through the revenue commissioner regarding reappraisal of county property, and can ratify such contracts and payments, where the county commission was not initially made a party to the contract.
Opinion # 2004-146
Discussion providing that a city may not require of a performance bond in addition to the bond required in the Alabama Heating and Air Conditioning Act.
Opinion # 2004-148
Discussion providing that a state executive security officer who has not complied with the Minimum Standards and Training Act is not a “state law enforcement officer” for purposes of overtime compensation. (A similar ruling would likely apply to a county law enforcement officer who had not complied with the minimum standards act.)
Opinion # 2004-150
Discussion providing that, subject to certain limitations, the Alabama Rules of Criminal Procedure allow a court to order a criminal defendant to serve time for failure to pay fines, costs, and/or restitution after the defendant has served his or her sentence.
Opinion # 2004-151
Discussion providing that the names of members present at a closed meeting held to discuss the character of an individual should be disclosed.
Opinion # 2004-152
Discussion providing that the county commission must follow the competitive bid law in selecting an ambulance service.
Opinion # 2004-153
Discussion providing that, upon dissolution of a county hospital board, any unused funds must be used in a manner consistent with the purposes for hospital board was established.
Opinion # 2004-155
Discussion providing that, absent a specific exemption, state and local governments are not exempt from state and local lodging taxes, but are exempt from fees and charges assessed, collected, and enforced as are other ad valorem taxes.
Opinion # 2004-159
Discussion providing that the county commission may maintain a private road for school buses to transport special education students entitled to transportation under the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act if the board of education pays for it.
Opinion # 2004-160
Discussion providing the circumstances under which a county commissioner can legally serve on a public board.
Opinion # 2004-162
Discussion providing that, under proper circumstances, a city may declare a mobile home or manufactured building an unsafe structure, and have it demolished as a public nuisance.
Opinion # 2004-165
Discussion providing that a county board of education is only required to comply with the state’s building codes and not local building codes, that Board projects are only subject to state review and inspection, and that the Board is not required to pay for local permits.
Opinion # 2004-168
Discussion providing that in an election for a constitutional amendment that applies only to one political subdivision within a county, the total votes cast in the county should include the votes cast in the political subdivision located within the county.
Opinion # 2004-170
Discussion regarding the repeal of the contractor’s exemption by Act # 2004-638.
Opinion # 2004-173
Discussion providing circumstances under which a city is exempt from the payment of the CMRS service charge for “lines” used in its core governmental functions.
Opinion # 2004-177
Discussion providing that ACT 2004-384, which allows the county commission to establish and alter meeting dates, subsumed (or repealed) local laws with contrary provisions.
Opinion # 2004-182
Discussion providing that a county can maintain a municipal road with agreement of the city, that a city cannot maintain a road in the county, but that the county and city may enter into an agreement regarding maintenance of roads.
Opinion # 2004-184
Discussion providing that a supernumerary license commissioner must be an Alabama resident and must keep his or her office in the county in which he or she is commissioned if he or she assumes the duties of the license commissioner.
Opinion # 2004-185
Discussion providing notice and quorum requirements under the Open Meetings Law.
Opinion # 2004-188
Discussion providing that a city may allow employees to use its facilities at a discounted rate if the benefit is made part of the employees’ annual compensation.
Opinion # 2004-189
Discussion providing that the Omnibus Pay Act applies only to elected county officials named in the act.
Opinion # 2004-190
Discussion providing that the county commission may not provide a moral obligation pledge to repay bonds issued by an Improvement District.
Opinion # 2004-191
Discussion providing that a municipality cannot purchase property and provide infrastructure for future development and sale to a developer for resale to the public, but may undertake redevelopment and urban renewal projects to clean up and prevent blighted areas or slums.
Opinion # 2004-192
Discussion providing that a county park board is a “person” under the tax law definition and must collect and remit lodgings tax under state law.
Opinion # 2004-193
Discussion providing that county water authority board members do not hold an office of profit.
Opinion # 2004-196
Discussion providing that a municipality is not responsible for the medical expenses of indigent municipal prisoners housed in the county jail unless it has contracted to provide such costs, and that a county is not responsible for the medical costs of an indigent municipal prisoner housed in the county jail.
Opinion # 2004-198
Discussion providing that unopposed candidates for nomination to local offices become the party’s nominee and are entitled to have their names placed on the general election ballot if the party chair certifies the nomination before the statutory deadline.
Opinion # 2004-200
Discussion regarding serving warrants on parole and probation violators and the circumstances under which such violators may be housed in the county jail.
Opinion # 2004-201
Discussion providing that the Revenue Department may enter into settlements without the consent or knowledge of the counties, and may order the counties to comply with the provisions of settlement agreements.
Opinion # 2004-206
Discussion regarding primary candidate reporting requirements and the consequences of failing to timely file.
Opinion # 2004-207
Discussion regarding the authority and duties of the chairman of the county commission in relation to expenditure of county funds.
Opinion # 2004-211
Discussion providing that coroners do not have the authority to contract with private laboratories for toxicology reports.
Opinion # 2004-216
Discussion providing that although new county commission district lines were not precleared in time to be used in the primary, the new lines may be used at the general election if the county received preclearance in time to be implemented for that election.
Opinion # 2004-218
Discussion providing that a jailer or corrections officer is a “peace officer” if he or she has arrest powers and gives full time to the preservation of public order, protection of life or property, or the detection of crime.
Opinion # 2004-221
Discussion providing that counties and municipalities may require the use of monthly reports to account for the monthly sales of cigarettes and to remit the tobacco tax instead of requiring use of tobacco stamps.
Opinion # 2004-223
Discussion providing that a city council may appropriate funds to a nonprofit organization for the renovation of a building for a community center if it determines that a public purpose is served.
Opinion # 2004-223
Discussion providing that if a project will be paid for entirely with private funds, it is not subject to the competitive bidding requirements of the public works law.
Opinion # 2005-001
Discussion providing that separately-owned water or utility boards are not exempt from a business license fee.
Opinion # 2005-006
Discussion providing that, for the purpose of determining supernumerary salary, the expense allowance of the tax assessor provided pursuant to local acts should not be counted as salary.
Opinion # 2005-008
Discussion providing that, absent additional legislative authority, an awarding authority cannot limit the number of vendors to whom requests for proposals will be sent.
Opinion # 2005-014
Discussion providing that the term of office of county commissioners commences at 12:01 A.M. on the first Tuesday following their election, and that the newly elected commissioners may take the oath of office and assume the office before the county election canvassing board certifies the election results.
Opinion # 2005-017
Discussion providing that a governmental entity may enter into a contract with benefits to each party, but that if it grants a private party an exclusive franchise, it must be competitively bid.
Opinion # 2005-021
Discussion providing that a city council may expend funds for the acquisition of a monument if it determines that it serves a public purpose.
Opinion # 2005-025
Discussion providing that the absentee election manager is to be paid for the 45-day period before an election and for the day of the election, making a total of 46 days.
Opinion # 2005-026
Discussion regarding oaths of office, qualifications for taking office, and when a new term of office begins.
Opinion # 2005-029
Discussion providing that a municipality may expend public funds for debris and tree removal following Hurricane Ivan, even on private property, if the town council determines that the work served a legitimate public purpose, or absent such a finding, the town may assess property owners for cleanup on private lands where the debris constituted a health hazard and where the owners of the private property were unable to secure a private source to perform the service.
Opinion # 2005-031
Discussion providing that a person is prohibited from serving as both a supernumerary tax official and a member of the board of registrars because both positions are offices of profit.
Opinion # 2005-032
Discussion providing that the Secretary of State is required to consult with and obtain advice from the Voter Registration Advisory Board when making decisions concerning the computerized statewide voter registration system.
Opinion # 2005-034
Discussion providing that a municipality is not entitled to reimbursement from a county hospital board for law enforcement training expenses paid for a former employee who leaves within 24 months of the training.
Opinion # 2005-041
Discussion providing that a county commission can provide materials and in-kind services to a municipality to assist with a roadway on private property to promote industry by preventing the loss of industry and jobs, if it determines that a public purpose will be served and that a public benefit is provided by furnishing the services and materials, but that a public purpose is not served if the sole reason for the expenditure is a potential increase in tax revenues.
Opinion # 2005-045
Discussion providing that a public corporation is subject to the provisions of the competitive bid law and to the public works law if a project is funded in whole or in part by public funds.
Opinion # 2005-046
Discussion providing that a municipality may contract with a volunteer fire department to provide services to the community, and discussion of several aspects of such contracts.
Opinion # 2005-048
Discussion providing that Code § 28-3A-21 does not authorize a dry county to fix and levy privileges or license taxes on businesses that hold state licenses to sell alcoholic beverages and that are within the municipal limits of a wet city located within the dry county.
Opinion # 2005-055
Discussion providing that there is no income limitation for claiming a homestead exemption for a permanent/total disability or blindness and that one who qualifies is not required to claim the exemption annually, but may verify the conditions still apply by affidavit.
Opinion # 2005-057
Discussion providing that a county or municipality can produce a history of the entity and distribute it to public, school, and university libraries, but cannot sell it directly or indirectly through a nonprofit organization.
Opinion # 2005-062
Discussion providing that a principal campaign committee, upon dissolution, may give the funds to a church of which the committee’s candidate/chairman is a member if the church is a charitable organization as defined in section 17-22A-7 of the Code of Alabama.
Opinion # 2005-065
Discussion providing that when a community development district is located in a dry county or in a dry municipality, the county or municipality is included in the distribution of taxes levied on the sale of alcoholic beverages in the same manner as those taxes would be distributed in a wet county or municipality.
Opinion # 2005-067
Discussion regarding several aspects of the county’s purchase of voting equipment under the federal HAVA and the Alabama statute passed in 2003 to bring the state into compliance with federal requirements.
Opinion # 2005-069
Discussion providing that a supernumerary sheriff is not entitled to any increase in his or her supernumerary pay if the current sheriff’s increased pay is a result of the Omnibus Pay Raise Bill, and that where there is no legislation specifically entitling a person to make contributions to a supernumerary fund based on an expense allowance, a person is not entitled to contribute to the supernumerary fund based on the expense allowance.
Opinion # 2005-070
Discussion providing that a director of a county water and sewer authority, whose term has expired, continues to serve until replaced or reappointed by the county commission, and that the term of office begins to run retroactively to the date the prior term expired.
Opinion # 2005-073
Discussion providing that the determination of whether a governmental body may expend funds to improve drainage on private property must be made by the governing body based on whether the improvement will serve a public purpose, and that it must have an easement on the land.
Opinion # 2005-073
Discussion providing that a public purpose is served if the expenditure confers a direct public benefit of a reasonably general character, which must be determined by the governing body on a case-by-case basis.
Opinion # 2005- 075
Discussion providing that the local E-911 board has the authority to increase the service charge of the district once a majority of the persons within the district has authorized a service charge.
Opinion # 2005-077
Discussion providing that, unless a drainage easement has been dedicated to the county, it cannot perform work on the drainage easement or on private property damaged by the easement, unless it is to correct damage or health problems caused by county property, work, or equipment.
Opinion # 2005-077
Discussion providing that the approval of a subdivision plat by the county engineer evidences that the plat meets the county’s regulations for the development of a subdivision, and that the plat is due to be approved by the county commission.
Opinion # 2005-078
Discussion providing that state-owned property is exempt from the storm-water fees and assessments levied pursuant to section 11-89C-9.
Opinion # 2005-079
Discussion providing that the manager of a park controlled by the Jackson County Park Board is not prohibited from serving on the Jackson County Commission, unless prohibited from doing so by the rules and regulations or terms of his or her employment.
Opinion # 2005-080
Discussion providing that a three mill district tax levied and collected on property located in that portion of a county now within the corporate limits of the city should be paid over to the city school system as the children residing in that newly incorporated area now attend city schools.
Opinion # 2005-084
Discussion providing that an improvement district formed by a municipality may annex property across a bay from the city if the property is directly across from the city, has a minimum of 200 feet of water frontage, and all property owners consent.
Opinion # 2005-085
Discussion providing that a Sheriff may use pistol permit funds under his or her discretionary control to purchase coffee supplies and to provide meals for training sessions if incidental to the training and served while the sessions are in progress. (See also Opinion # 2005-129.)
Opinion # 2005-087
Discussion providing that the county commission may use surplus Amendment 72 tax proceeds for the construction and operation of an animal shelter.
Opinion # 2005-088
Discussion providing that where the county E-911 board has designated a county-funded ambulance service for dispatch in the county, it has no duty or obligation to dispatch a for-profit ambulance service when requested to do so.
Opinion # 2005-091
Discussion providing that under the Omnibus Pay Act, the local elected officials are entitled to the same uniform merit raises granted by the county commission to eligible county employees at the time of approval of the county budget.
Opinion # 2005-091
Discussion providing that a local official who receives an increase by local legislation is not entitled to a cost-of-living increase under the Act until the total compensation the official would have received under the Act is equal to or exceeds the increase provided by the local law.
Opinion # 2005-094
Discussion providing that for claims that are subject to the statutory caps for governmental entities, the entity must pay or settle claims within the maximum amounts, but that for claims not covered by the statute, the entity may pay or settle amounts in excess of the statutory caps.
Opinion # 2005-097
Discussion providing that a person convicted of a felony may be ineligible or disqualified from serving as a utility board member.
Opinion # 2005-099
Discussion providing that if a director of a water and fire protection authority moves outside the service area, the director is ineligible to serve on the Authority’s board, and should immediately resign from his or her position
Opinion # 2005-103
Discussion providing that the taxable event for sales tax is when the sales transaction is completed, that there is no discretion as to when to pay sales/use taxes, and that for the state severance tax, severance occurs when coal is parted from the earth.
Opinion # 2005-111
Discussion providing that the county commission may exercise jurisdiction over subdivisions only in areas in which the municipal government has agreed with the county to reduce the extraterritorial jurisdiction of the municipal planning commission.
Opinion # 2005-112
Discussion providing that neither a municipality nor its industrial development board can enter into an agreement to abate noneducational county ad valorem taxes or county construction-related transaction taxes if there is no corresponding municipal ad valorem tax or construction-related transaction tax to be abated.
Opinion # 2005-114
Discussion providing that a municipality (or county) may pass provisions stronger than the Alabama Clean Indoor Air Act, as long as they are not inconsistent with state law.
Opinion # 2005-119
Discussion providing that even if a public corporation is exempt from the competitive bid law, it must comply with the bid specifications to be considered a responsive bidder when it submits a bid in response to an invitation for bids.
Opinion # 2005-120
Discussion regarding the factors to take into consideration in making the determination of whether a road is a public road subject to county maintenance.
Opinion # 2005-121
Discussion regarding the proper uses for forfeiture proceeds received by a law enforcement agency in connection with violations of controlled substances statutes.
Opinion # 2005-122
Discussion providing that the county commission, not the county board of education, has the duty to maintain a public road, but may contribute to the costs of traffic studies, etc. if the board determines that the expenditure is beneficial to its interests or serves a public purpose related to education.
Opinion # 2005-123
Discussion providing that the county commission may, within its discretion, supply the county coroner with a county automobile to use in the performance of his or her duties.
Opinion # 2005-124
Discussion regarding what information related to voter registration is considered public record and under what circumstances such information can be released.
Opinion # 2005-129
Discussion providing that pistol permit funds under the discretionary control of the sheriff may be expended for coffee supplies for law enforcement personnel during work time when they work for extended periods of time without a break for mealtime, are in the field, or in long meetings where they cannot break away for meals. (See also Opinion # 2005-085.)
Opinion # 2005-136
Discussion providing that the Department of Transportation had substantially complied with the public works law and could proceed with an executed contract where the Department had requested advertising of the project in a newspaper but learned after the contract was awarded that the ad had not run.
Opinion # 2005-139
Discussion providing that the county commission is not required to pay the probate judge’s attorney’s fees in a legal matter between the probate judge and the county commission, but may do so pursuant to settlement or court order.
Opinion # 2005-145
Discussion providing that a separately incorporated utility board has no power to require customers to annex into the authorizing municipality, and no authority to discontinue utility service to those customers who do not agree to annex.
Opinion # 2005-153
Discussion providing that the county commission cannot levy a fee to the sheriff to be paid from the Sheriff’s Jail Fund for the use of county facilities for the jail store, the telephone system, and housing of federal inmates.
Opinion # 2005-157
Discussion providing that a city or county cannot grant a cost-of-living raise to its retired employees in the Retirement Systems of Alabama without legislative authorization.
Opinion # 2005-158
Discussion providing that the “sole source” exemption in Section 41-16-51(a)(13) of the competitive bid law is not satisfied simply because only one provider approaches the governmental entity.
Opinion # 2005-158
Discussion providing that the contractual term limitations found in section 41-16-57(e) of the competitive bid law only apply where the contract must be competitively bid under the statute.
Opinion # 2005-158
Discussion providing that a governmental entity can only award an exclusive franchise when the service has been competitively bid, even if bidding under the competitive bid law is not required.
Opinion # 2005-160
Discussion providing that a written proposal on the outside of the envelope of a sealed bid may be considered as part of the bid proposal.
Opinion # 2005-166
Discussion providing that a county commission may participate in, and provide assistance to, programs for senior citizens pursuant to § 38-1-6, and as such, may enter into a long-term lease with a city to establish a senior citizens center.
Opinion # 2005-167
Discussion providing that a county or municipality may enter into a contract with a public housing entity to provide affordable dwelling accommodations for persons of moderate and low income residing within their jurisdictional limits.
Opinion # 2005-168
Discussion providing that a governmental entity in Alabama may engage a private firm on a contingency-fee basis to collect delinquent property taxes, provided that any determination concerning the proper amount of taxes due must be made by the tax assessor.
Opinion # 2005-169
Discussion providing that county law library funds can be used to establish and maintain an Internet web site for the courts and clerks of the county.
Opinion # 2005-170
Discussion providing that the county commission and the county board of health can enact regulations relating to inside plumbing for unincorporated areas of the county, but that the regulations of the health department control in case of any conflict.
Opinion # 2005-171
Discussion providing that a county commission may lease real property to a private for-profit business for less than fair market value to promote economic and industrial development under Section 94.01 of the Recompiled Constitution of Alabama (Amendment 772).
Opinion # 2005-172
Discussion providing that a municipality with a population of less than 5000 is not required to maintain an animal control service, but that a municipality with a population greater than 5000 is required to contribute a pro rata share for the maintenance of the county pound or establish and maintain its own pound.
Opinion # 2005-172
Discussion providing that a municipality may, by ordinance, establish regulations regarding animal control services and contract with an independent contractor to perform animal control services, but that there is no statutory duty for a municipality to control animals.
|
