02-024
Establishing a Volunteer Enforcement Committee
Cite as Neb. Op. Att'y Gen. No. 02-024
STATE OF NEBRASKA
<!&ffire of tbe ~ttornep @eneral
2115 STATE CAPITOL BUILDING
LINCOLN, NE 68509-8920
(402) 471-2682
TOO (402) 471-2682
CAPITOL FAX (402) 471-3297
K STREET FAX (402) 471-4725
DON STENBERG
ATIORNEY GENERAL
JAMES D. SMITH
CHIEF DEPUTY ATTORNEY GENERAL
NO.
STATE OF NEBRASKA
OFFICIAL
AUG 20 2002
DEPT. OF JUSTICE
SUBJECT:
Establishing a Volunteer Enforcement Committee
REQUESTED BY: Annette L. Harmon, Executive Director,
Board of Public Accountancy
WRITTEN BY:
Don Stenberg, Attorney General
Lynn A. Melson, Assistant Attorney General
You have asked several questions regarding the establishment of a volunteer
enforcement committee. You have informed us that the Board of Public Accountancy
currently has an enforcement committee made up only of Board members. The Board is
considering creation of an enforcement committee consisting of one or two Board
members and up to ten members of the CPA profession. You ask the following questions:
Jennifer M. Amen
David K. Arterburn
William R. Barger
L. Jay Bartel
Samuel J. Bethune
Vicki L. Boone-Lawson
J. Kirk Brown
Marie C. Clarke
1 .
Does the Board have the authority to create an Enforcement Committee that
includes members of the CPA profession whose participation on the
committee is completely voluntary?
2.
If so, does the Board have the authority to pay a per diem and expenses for
the volunteer members' participation, either to the volunteer or to his/her
firm?
3.
If the Enforcement Committee utilized outside members of the profession,
what would be the Board's liability for these individuals' actions?
Delores N. Coe-Barbee
Dale A. Comer
David D. Cookson
Douglas D. Dexter
Jodi M. Fenner
Lynne R. Fritz
Susan J. Gustafson
Royce N. Harper
Jason W. Hayes
Amber F. Herrick
William L. Howland
Marilyn B. Hutchinson
Kimberly A. Klein
Charlotte R. Koranda
Amy L. Kuzila
George R. Love
Printed with soy ink on recyCled paper
Charles E. Lowe
lin D. Martin· Price
Lynn A. Melson
Eric S. Miller
Ronald D. Moravec
Fredrick F. Neid
Teresa J. Nutzman-Buller
Mark D. Raffety
Hobert B. Rupe
Kevin J. Slimp
James H. Spears
Mark D. Starr
Martin Swanson
John R. Thompson
Bradley D. Thornton
Melanie J. Whittamore-Mantzios
linda L. Willard
Annette L. Harmon
Page 2
4.
Would payment to the firm, rather than the individual, make a difference in
liability?
1.
Authority to Create A Volunteer Enforcement Committee.
The Public Accountancy Act includes no express statutory authority for an
enforcement committee. Neb. Rev. Stat. § 1-105 to 1-171 (1997 and Supp. 2000). Neb.
Rev. Stat.§ 1-1 09(2) provides authority for the Board to employ an executive director and
other personnel. However, we assume from your opinion request letter that you do not
intend to hire outside members of the CPA profession as employees or enter into a
contract with them as independent contractors. Neb. Rev. Stat.§ 1-113 provides specific
authority for an advisory committee to advise the Board regarding educational
requirements. § 1-113(2) further provides that "the board may also consult the advisory
committee on any other issues which it deems appropriate." We note the Board could
consult this existing advisory committee on enforcement issues.
The authority to create a separate enforcement committee consisting primarily of
non-Board members is less clear. It is a general principle of statutory interpretation that
mention of one thing implies exclusion of another. Stated another way, the fact that the
Legislature expressly gave the Board authority to create an advisory committee regarding
educational requirements at Neb. Rev. Stat. § 1-113 may well imply that the Legislature
did not intend that the Board have the authority to establish other committees of non-board
members. State Board of Agriculture v. State Racing Comm., 239 Neb. 762,478 N.W.2d
270 (1992).
We also note that as a general rule, administrative bodies have only that authority
specifically conferred upon them by statute or by construction necessary to achieve the
purpose of the relevant act. In ReApplication A-16642, 236 Neb. 671, 463 N.W.2d 591
(1 990). The Nebraska Supreme Court stated therein that the term "'necessary', . .. may
mean anything from 'indispensable' to 'convenient'." /d. at 699, 463 N.W.2d at 609.
Looking at the purpose of the Board as stated in Neb. Rev. Stat. § 1-105.01 with regard
to "assuring the competency of persons regulated" and disciplining those who do not meet
professional standards it seems reasonable that the Board may find it necessary to call on
volunteers to assist and advise it in carrying out its duties. See Op. Att'y Gen. No. 86004,
in which this office concurred that the Board had the authority to establish a quality review
program in which volunteers would assist. See a/so Op. Att'y Gen. No. 93069, in which this
office concluded that constitutional agencies such as the Department of Education could
create committees.
I
I.
Annette L. Harmon
Page 3
However, the answer to· your question also depends in part upon the functions or
duties to be performed by the volunteer members of the proposed enforcement committee.
In general, administrative officers and bodies cannot alienate, surrender, or
abridge their powers and duties, and they cannot legally confer on their employees
or others authorities and functions which under the law may be exercised only by
them or by other officers or tribunals. Accordingly, in the absence of permissive .
constitutional or statutory provisions, administrative officers and agencies cannot
delegate to a subordinate or another powers and functions which are discretionary
or quasi-judicial in character, or which require the exercise of judgment; and
subordinate officials have no power with respect to such duties. On the other hand,
the general rule is that mere ministerial functions may be delegated.
73 C.J.S. Public Administrative Law and Procedure, §56 at 513-514 (1983). Therefore,
the Board would be unable to delegate any decision making or discretionary duties to the
volunteers on an enforcement committee and could only delegate ministerial functions or
use the volunteers in an advisory capacity. For example, the Nebraska Supreme Court
has held that the Board's authority to execute an order of revocation cannot be delegated
to its executive director. Bohling v. State Board of Public Accountancy, 243 Neb. 666, 501
N.W.2d 714 (1993).
In summary, the use of volunteers to advise the Board in its enforcement duties or
assist with purely ministerial tasks is probably a defensible exercise of the Board's
authority. To the extent the use of volunteers is formalized through the adoption of
regulations or extends beyond an advisory role to become part of your formal disciplinary
process, such use could raise questions about the Board's statutory authority. Legislative
action such as an amendment of Neb. Rev. Stat. § 1-113 would ensure the Board's
authority to create a committee of volunteers for enforcement purposes.
2.
Payments to Volunteers
Assuming in answering your second question that the Board does have the authority
to create an enforcement committee that includes volunteers that are members of the CPA
profession, the next question that you have raised is whether the Board has the authority
to pay a per diem and expenses for the volunteer members' participation. While we have
found no statutory authority for the payment of a per diem to volunteers on a committee,
it appears that if the volunteers are actually members of a state committee, the Board may
be able to reimburse the actual and necessary expenses of the volunteers pursuant to
Neb. Rev. Stat.§ 81-1180 (1999), which provides as follows:
Any member of any state commission, council, committee, or board who is
not entitled to reimbursement under the provisions of section 81-1178 or 81-1179
shall be entitled to be reimbursed for his or her necessary and actual expenses as
Annette L. Harmon
Page 4
provided in sections 81-117 4 to 81-1177 if an appropriation is made for such
purpose and if the reimbursement is approved by the Governor or, in cases in which
the commission, council, committee, or board has been created to assist the
Legislature in the performance of its duties, by the Executive Board of the
Legislative Council.
See also Op. Att'y Gen. No. 93069, in which we concluded that certain committee
members would be entitled to reimbursement of expenses with the approval of the
Governor and if the appropriation of funds was made. Reimbursement of such expenses
as meals and travel would be made pursuant to Neb. Rev. Stat. §§ 81-1174 through
81-1177 and would be requested by and paid to the individual volunteer.
3.
Board's Liability for Actions of Volunteers
Your third question concerns the Board's potential liability for these individuals'
actions. As stated previously, your opinion request letter does not explain the role of the
volunteer members of the proposed enforcement committee and so we are not sure what
actions of the volunteer members you believe may expose the Board to liability or what
type of liability you have in mind.
We assume you are asking whether the State will defend a lawsuit brought against
a volunteer in connection with his or her assistance to the Board or whether the State will
pay any judgment against a volunteer arising out of that lawsuit. It is difficult to provide a
comprehensive answer to your question because the answer will depend largely on the
facts and circumstances of each particular case that might arise. To the extent that a
potential lawsuit would fall within the parameters of the State Tort Claims Act, Neb. Rev.
Stat. §§ 81-8,209 to 81-8,235 (1996), (Cum. Supp. 2000 and Supp. 2001) or the
indemnification and legal representation statutes, Neb. Rev. Stat. §§ 81-8,239.05 and
81 -8,239.06 (1 996), we would need to examine whether the volunteers are state officers
or employees. We have previously addressed the question of who is a state officer or
employee under those statutes in Op. Att'y Gen. No. 92058 and Op. Att'y Gen. No. 93069
and we enclose copies of those opinions for your review. Based on the analysis provided
in those opinions it is our view that the volunteers could possibly be characterized as state
officers or officials within the meaning of the statutes cited above, which would qualify them
for state indemnification and legal representation for certain actions. Again, this will
depend on the facts of each situation. We point out, also, that a court could certainly take
a different view.
Annette L. Harmon
Page 5
4.
Payment To A Firm Rather Than An Individual
As stated in answer to your second question, to the extent reimbursement of actual
expenses may be authorized under Neb. Rev. Stat. § 81-1180, such payment would be
made to the individual volunteer.
Approved:
09-450-11
Sincerely,
DON STENBERG
Attorney General
LrwM. If · /)1Qfk,'-------
O!y~~ A. Melson
Assistant Attorney General