AG OPINIONS


What are the options for nonpartisan elections for county officials?


ATTORNEY GENERAL SUMMARIES


Attorney General Opinion No. 2010-074


Option for nonpartisan elections Te General Assembly may


authorize


counties to have the option for nonpartisan elections for county officials. Cities under ACA § 14-42-206 currently may provide for elections of their officials without party affiliation. Te Legislature is limited by the first amendment and Amendment 29 of the Arkansas Constitution and the details of legislation would have bearing on legality. However, the Attorney General says: generally speaking the state law may authorize the quorum court by ordinance to provide for nonpartisan election of county officials.


Attorney General Opinion No. 2010-069


Posting Private Lakes/Streams Tis opinion differentiates the differences


between navigable streams or lakes and private streams or lakes.


Landowners with a private


lake on their properties may post them against trespassers and the posting may subject those that go unto and remain on the “premises” to prosecution for criminal trespass. Tis includes the private lake surface. Failure to post a private lake or stream for trespassing may defeat an action for criminal trespass.


In contrast,


navigable streams and waters are owned collectively and trespass actions may not rest.


Attorney General Opinion No. 2010-096


Pay-for-Stay Jails


ACA § 12-41-505 provides that every person who may be committed to the “common jail” of the county by lawful authority for any criminal offense or misdemeanor, if convicted, shall pay the expenses of carrying him or her to jail and also for his or her support from the initial day of incarceration for the whole time the prisoner remains there. Te term “common jail” includes not just county jails but also a facility which holds


COUNTY LINES, WINTER 2011


the prisoners for law enforcement in the county which is operated by a city. Te county may support fees by ordinance (commonly referred to as “pay for stay”) even if the city operates the detention center including a daily housing fee and medical expenses, such as inmate medical co-pay. Tese expenses should be included in the judgment of conviction and subject to court approval.


Attorney General Opinion No. 2010-101


Waiving Extradition


Does ACA § 16-94-103 mandate that a person being held in custody in Arkansas is not required to be brought before a court of record to formally execute a voluntary waiver of extradition to another state holding the arrest warrant? No. Te Attorney General determined under the majority view law affords alleged fugitives the ability to waive their extradition rights either formally or informally.


Attorney General Opinion No. 2010-093


Property Tax Exemptions


ACA § 26-3-306 provides a homestead and personal property tax exemption for disabled veterans, surviving spouses and dependant children. To be eligible the disabled veteran shall be in receipt of special monthly compensation for the loss of use of one or more limbs, total blindness in one or more eyes or for service- connected 100 percent total and permanent disability.


Te code requires the person claiming the


exemption to furnish the county collector a letter from the department verifying eligibility. Te law is silent as to whether a single letter is required to be supplied annually. Te Attorney General advised that the law is unclear and judicial or legislative clarification may be warranted. He also indicated that the practice of many collectors may be justified in requiring an annual letter; however, the status of the eligible disabilities as permanent may result in an adverse court ruling.


MARK WHITMORE AAC Chief Counsel


Attorney General Opinion No. 2010-093


School Funding Formula Tis opinion examines in great detail the


interpretation of the school funding formula, Amendment 74 and ACA § 6-20-2305. Te uniform rate of tax (“URT”) is the 25-mill minimum property tax mandated under Amendment 74 and the absolute minimum rate of taxation that must be dedicated for school maintenance and operations (“M & O”). “Foundation


funding” aid is to assure


each district receives adequate funding. Te foundation aid is calculated as: Te difference between the foundation funding amount and the sum of 98 percent of the URT multiplied by the property tax assessment of the district plus miscellaneous funds. Te Attorney General noted that built into the calculation is the unrealistic assumption that a school district will in fact collect 98 percent of the amount imposed by the URT. If the actual collections fall short of the presumed collection rate, the state will be obligated to make up the shortfall in the constitutionally mandated funding amount. Te Attorney General opined that the state is entitled to recoup the excess; and the excess shall not be retained by the state but shall be distributed to the school districts. He says that while the Department of Education is obligated to distribute the excess to one or more schools, the Department is not necessarily obligated to return the excess to the district that generated the funds. Te state is entitled to redistribute only that portion of net revenues in a given district that exceeds the foundation funding amount the state owes that district.


11


Page 1  |  Page 2  |  Page 3  |  Page 4  |  Page 5  |  Page 6  |  Page 7  |  Page 8  |  Page 9  |  Page 10  |  Page 11  |  Page 12  |  Page 13  |  Page 14  |  Page 15  |  Page 16  |  Page 17  |  Page 18  |  Page 19  |  Page 20  |  Page 21  |  Page 22  |  Page 23  |  Page 24  |  Page 25  |  Page 26  |  Page 27  |  Page 28  |  Page 29  |  Page 30  |  Page 31  |  Page 32  |  Page 33  |  Page 34  |  Page 35  |  Page 36  |  Page 37  |  Page 38  |  Page 39  |  Page 40  |  Page 41  |  Page 42  |  Page 43  |  Page 44  |  Page 45  |  Page 46  |  Page 47  |  Page 48  |  Page 49  |  Page 50  |  Page 51  |  Page 52  |  Page 53  |  Page 54  |  Page 55  |  Page 56  |  Page 57  |  Page 58  |  Page 59  |  Page 60