Untitled Texas Attorney General Opinion ( 1951 )

December 11, 1951 non; Dam.13 L. wilder Opinion Ro. V&66 county Attorney Denton coulity Re$ Maximum compensation Denton, Texas of the chairman ana _.- the secretary of the ..~ county Executive com- mlttee under the new Dear Mr. Wilder: election code. Your request for an opinion relating to the maximum compensation’.ofthe chafrman and the secretary of.8 ‘County’Executive Committee under the new Texas Election Code oontalns the following ques- tion: *May the secretary receive five per oent of the primary budget, and the chair- man also receive five per cent of the pri- mary budget?” Article 196 6f the Texas Ele6tion Code (R.B. 6, Acts 52nd Leg., R.S. 1951, oh. 492, p. 1097, at p. 1172) provides In part: ‘The County Executive Committee may name a secretary who 1s hereby authorized to receive applications for a plaee on the primary ballot and when so received the application shall be officlally~filed. The l.::mpensation allowed’the secretary ana the ::..::airman for their services shall in no c&me exceed.five per cent 55s) of the prl- mary budget for that year. Prior to the passage of the Texas Elec- tion Code, the chalrman of a county exeOutlve ._ com- mittee was not entitled to a salary or other compen- sation for his services, except as proviaea by Artl- cle 5022a, V.C.S., which allowed’the county chairman the same compensation per hour as allowed the pre- cinct election jutlgesfor hls servioes in receiving and tabulating unofficial returns. Kauffman v. Parker, - . Eon. Darwin L. Wilder, page 2 (V-1366) ;zr!Ji;.2a1074 (Tex. CIv. App. 1936); ~11811v. 119 S.W.2a ,609(Tex. Clv. App. N&n.); Att*y Gen. Op. o-4890 (1942'. v. Parker also held that an expendlture'for7 hire of a stenographer for the county &airman was unauthorized. Before the enactment of Article 196 of the Election Code, there was no statutory provi-, slon for the appointment of a searetary. The chalr- man was charged with the reapona$PIlity of recelvlng applications of candidates for places on the ballot for a prlm&zy election and of performing the necea- sarg duties in connectl6n with the filing of the applications. See Arts. 3112, 31X3; V.C.S.. Under the provlbions of the Election Cod&, the chairman iS~m8tillCharged with-these dUtIi38. See~Art. 190, Election code:. However, under the pro~lslons of Article 196, the executive commIttee may,designate a secretary~who Is authorleed to receive appllca- tions. It Is seen that this lattez!statute au- thorizes the secretary, when appointed, to pep- form aoma of the duties which would othervisa be performed by the chairman. The appointment of a secretary I8 not mandatory, ana $@I secretary doe8 not perform any duties which wo~$clnot be in@xnbent upon the chairman or th8 committee If a 8eorQtary were not named. The purpose of the I;egi.slatureIn asa- In& the quotea provision of Artlble 196 of tL Election code was to provide c ensation foe the chairman and the secretary but7,a the 8ame t$8!#3to limit the compensation to a perc+tntageof tha total budget. The question for determ+atlon is whether the combined compensation of the66 two offlcrrs shall not exceed five per cent o$ the budget or whether the compensation of each-offloec separately shall not exceed five per cent. If Article 196 were construed as author- izing canpensation not to exceed five per cent of the budget to be paid to each of those offIc8r8, it would amount to saying that the appolntmsnt of a secretary to relieve the chalrmal)of 8OIpc) OS his dutiea could aubjeot the aandIda$ss in the pClmary election to an additional SIve ppr cent filing See for the performance of the 8ame duties which would otherwEse be perSormea.by the ch+rman. In tpe Hon. Earwin L. Wllaer, page 3 (V-1366) ab8enOe Of Cl8aP ~ESqpIaget0 that effect, W8 are of the opldion that the Leglslaturtidid not In- tend such a result. Had the Iaglalature intended to give the secretary and the chairman each five per cent of the total budget, it could have so specified, but the statute considers both of them together. It is our opinion that the atatute limits the combined compensation of the secretary and the chairman to five per cent of the primary budget for the year. SLIMMARY -~The total of the compensation al- lowed the secretary ana the chairman of the county exticutivecommittee under the new Texas glect,ion Code may not ex- ceed five per cent of the priinarybudget for.that year. Art. 196, Texas Eledtion Code (H;B.~6, ACt8~52nd Lag. R.S. 1951, ch. 492, p. 1097, at p. 11721. Yours very truly, APPROVED: PRICE.DAIVIEL Attorney General J. C. DaviS, Jr. County Affairs Division Charles D. Mkthews First AsSi8tant ?$iz& . Assistant