A credit union in possession is not required to pay for the operating expense and compensation of a regular employee of the Division of Credit Unions who, as a part of his official duties, is operating the credit union in possession on behalf of the Director of the Division of Credit Unions.

CREDIT UNIONS: A credit union in CONSUMER AFFAIRS, REGULATION, AND LICENSING: possession is not required to pay for the operating e xpense and compensation of a regular employee of the Division of Credit Unions who, as a part of his official du- ties, is operating the credit union in possession on behalf of the Director of the Division of Credit Unions. OPINION NO. 14 April 27, 1977 Mr. James Sullivan, Director Department of Consumer Affairs, Regulation, and Licensing 505 Missouri Boulevard Jefferson City, Missouri 65101 Dear Mr. Sullivan: Fl LED 1¥ This answers the op1n1on request of former department direc- tor Alfred C. Sikes reading as follows: "Is a credit union, which the State Division of Credit Unions has taken charge, required to pay a State employee's expense and com- pensation for the time the State employee is serving as agent of the credit union?" Section 370.150.3, RSMo 1969, provides: "During the time the commissioner is in pos- session, or acting as receiver as hereinafter set forth in section 370.152, he shall have the power to operate the credit union through the agency of a qualified person, natural or corporate, who shall act under his supervision, and all expenses of the operation, including compensation of the agent and the employees of the agent, shall be paid from the credit union's funds." (Emphasis added) Under Section 4.7(1), Omnibus Reorganization Act of 1974, Appendix B, RSMo Supp. 1975, the Office of the Supervisor of Credit Unions is abolished and all of his powers, duties, and functions in Chapter 370, RSMo, and the powers and duties relat- ing to credit unions vested in the Commissioner of Finance in Chapter 370, RSMo, are transferred to the Division of Credit Unions under a director who has been nominated by the department Mr. James Sullivan director of Consumer Affairs, Regulations, and Licensing and ap- pointed by the Governor with the advice and consent of the Senate. In response to Mr. Sikes' question, we feel it is necessary to first consider whether the legislature contemplated the ap- pointment of a full-time employee of the Division of Credit Unions to act as an agent in possession under Section 370.150.3. In seeking legislative inte nt, the basic rule of statutory construc- tion is to ascertain the intent from the words used in the stat- ute . In so doing, t he words should be given their plain and or- dinary meaning in order to promote the object and manifest pur- pose of the statute. State ex rel. State Highway Commission v. Wiggins, 454 S.W.2d 899 (Mo.Banc 1970). Significantly, the Director of the Division of Credit Unions may appoint a deputy supervisor, examiners, assistant examiners , .and other employees under Section 370.100.5, RSMo Supp. 1975. All persons appointed by the division director as authorized by Chapter 370 shall perform the duties required of them by the director and "shall devote all of their time to their official duties." Section 370.100.8, RSMo Supp. 1975. Under appropriate circumstances, one of the official duties of the division director is to take possession of the credit union. Section 370.150. 1, RSMo 1969 . His office obviously can operate the credit union without the appointment of the agent un- der Section 370.150 . 3. By virtue of Section 370.100 . 8, employees under him shall perform the duties he requires with regard to the possession. The plain language of Section 370.150 . 3 is that the di- ·rector of the division shall have the power to operate the credit union through the agency of a qualified person, natural or cor- porate, who shall act under his supervision. The legislature is not presumed to have attended to use superfluous or meaningless words in its enactments . Dodd v . Inde endence Stove & Furnace Co., 51 S.W.2d 114 (Mo. 1932 . Regular d1v1s1on employees are already acting under the supervision of the director; therefore, to say that Section 370.150.3 contemplates that a regular em- ployee of the division is an agent referred to in this section is to ignore the language "who shall act under his supervision." Further, this section speaks in terms of "compensation of the agent and the employees of the agent." Such language must be read in light of Section 370 .100.8 requiring employees of the division. to perform the duties assigned to them by the director and to devote all of their time to such duties. It is not con- templated th~t the regular employees of the division have their - 2- Mr. James Sullivan own "employees'' for performing their official duties . To hold otherwise would appear to be unreasonable. It is important to note that there are specific instances where the legislature has indicated that a director may use a regular employee in a liquidating capac1ty . Section 361.390 , RSMo 1969, permits the Commissioner of Finance to: " . appoint one or more special deputy commissioners as agent or agents to assist him in liquidating the business and affairs of any corporation in his possession." Section 361.400, RSMo 1969 , clearly indicates that a deputy com- missioner or examiner may be appointed as a special deputy under Section 361.390. Moreover, in the instances where the legislature apparently intended that the compensation and expenses of a statutorily ap- pointed agent be paid from the assets of a business institution which is suffering financial difficulty , such intent has been ex- pressly manifested. For example, Section 369 . 349.8, RSMo Supp . 1975, provides: "The director of the division of savings and loan supervision may appoint one or more spe- cial deputies to assist in the duties of li- quidation and distribution and may also em- ploy such special legal counsel, accountants and assistants as may be needed and required and fix their salaries and compensation sub- ject to the approval of the court . All such salaries and compensation and such reasonable and necessary expenses as may be incurred in the l iquidation shall be paid by the director of the division of savings and loan supervi- sion from the funds of the association in his hands . Such expenses shall include that part of the salary of the director of the division of savings and loan supervision and of his deputies , examiners , accountants and other assistants and that part of the general ex- penses of the director o f t he division of savings and loan supervision ' s office as fairly represent, in the opinion of the di- rector of the division of savings and l oan su ervision , the ro ortion ro erl attrib- utable to such l1qu1dat1on . Emphas1s added) -3- Mr. James Sullivan See a lso Section 361. 410, RSMo 1969 , wi th regard to the payment of compensation of the deputy commissioners who are special de p- uties of the Commissioner of Finance for the purpose of liquidation. Of equal significance is t hat under Section 4 . 7(2) , Omnibus Reorganization Act of 1974, Append~x D, RSMo Supp . 1975 , is the following language : " . In addition the director of the divi- sion of credit unions shall assess the sev- eral credit unions in the state the same per- centage of estimated e xpenses to pay the costs of rent and other supporting services fur- nished by the state , as banks and trust com- panies are assessed by the commissioner of finance pursuant to section 361 .170(1) , RSMo ." I t is noted that in enacting this provision of the reorganization bill the legislature did not adopt Section 361 . 170 . 2, RSMo 1969, as a part of the credit union law . Section 361 . 170 .2 provides for the charging to a corporation under the Commissione r of Finance any unusual expenses incurred outside the normal expenses of annual or special examinations . When all t he statutes in the area of financial ins ti t utions are considered together in par i materia in an effort to ascertain the legislative intent , it appears to this office that the legisla- ture did not intend that the word agent in Section 370 . 150 . 3 en- compass a regular e mployee of the Division of Credit Unions . CONCLUSION It is the opinion of this office that a credit union in pos- session is not required to pay for the operating expense and com- pensation of a r egular employee of the Division of Credit Unions who , as a part of his offici al duties, is operating the credit union in posssession on behalf of the Director of the Division of Credit Unions . The foregoing opinion , which I hereby approve, was prepared by my assistant , Terry C. Allen . Yours very truly , - Attorney General -4-