Untitled Texas Attorney General Opinion ( 2002 )


Menu:
  •    OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL . STATE OF TEXAS
    JOHN     CORNYN
    March 7,2002
    The Honorable Bill Carter                             Opinion No. JC-0474
    Chair, House Corm&tee on Urban Affairs
    Texas House of Representatives                        Re: Whether a member of the City Council of the
    P.O. Box 2910                                         City of Watauga may appoint himself to the Board
    Austin, Texas 78768-2910                              of Directors of the Watauga Crime Control and
    Prevention District (RQ-0452-JC)
    Dear Representative    Carter:
    You have requested our opinion as to whether a member of the City Council of the City of
    Watauga may appoint himself to the Board of Directors of the Watauga Crime Control and
    Prevention District. For the reasons set forth below, we conclude that he may not do so.
    Crime control and prevention districts are authorized by chapter 363 of the Local
    Government Code. A crime control and prevention district “may be proposed,” inter alia, in a
    municipality “that is partially or wholly located in a county with a population of more than 5,000.”
    TEX. Lot. GOV’TCODEANN. 0 363.05 1(a) (Vernon Supp. 2002). The City of Watauga is located in
    Tarrant County, which has a population of more than 5,000. See U. S. CENSUSBUREAU,U.S. DEP’T
    OF COMMERCE,2000 CENSUSOFPOPULATION,available at http://www.census.gov/             (Tarrant County
    population is 1,446,2 19). We have been informed that the Watauga Crime Control and Prevention
    District (the “WCCD”) was created by the City Council of the City of Watauga in 1996.’ Section
    363.1015 provides:
    (a) The governing body of a municipality or county by resolution
    may appoint the governing body’s membership as the board of
    directors of the district.
    (b) In a district for which the board is not appointed under
    Subsection (a), the governing body of the municipality or county may
    create a board by having each member of the governing body appoint
    one director to the board, subject to confirmation by the governing
    body.
    ‘Letter from Mark G. Daniel, City Attorney, City of Watauga, to Honorable John Comyn, Texas Attorney
    General (Oct. 25,200l) (on file with Opinion Committee) [hereinafter Daniel BriefJ.
    The Honorable Bill Carter - Page 2              (JC-0474)
    (c) A director appointed under Subsection (b) serves:
    (1) at the pleasure of the governing body of the municipality
    or county; and
    (2) for a term concurrent    with the term of the appointing
    member.
    TEX.   Lot. GOV’T CODE ANN. 8 363.1015 (Vernon Supp. 2002).
    A letter from the City Attorney for the City of Watauga indicates that, “[t]he Watauga City
    Council explored the idea of invoking the provision of L.G.C. 9 363.1015(a) which allows the
    governing body to serve as the Board for the WCCD but instead opted under L.G.C. 8 363.1015(b)
    to allow members of the City Council to appoint individuals to serve.” Daniel Brief, supra note 1,
    at 1. Furthermore, since 1996, the WCCD board “has consisted of members of the City Council who
    have appointed themselves to the board. Two City Councilmen were defeated in the general election
    this past May and declined to relinquish their positions on the Board following a request to do so by
    members of the incumbent City Council.” 
    Id. Recently, an
    incumbent city council member “sought
    to appoint himself (as was done for more than five (5) years) which resulted in a complaint that such
    action is violative of the ‘doctrine of incompatibility.“’ 
    Id. Subsection (a)
    of section 363.10 15 per-i-nits the governing body of a municipality to appoint
    its membership as a group “as the board of directors of the district.” The City Council of Watauga,
    however, opted to avail itself of subsection (b). You indicate that a resolution of the City Council
    dated July 23’2001 “adopted the procedures under Section 363.1015(b) of appointing members to
    the Crime Control and Prevention District.“2 Subsection (b) does not specifically permit a member
    of a local governing body to appoint himself to the board of directors of a crime control and
    prevention district. In the absence of such specific authorization, common-law incompatibility
    prevails.
    In Ehlinger v. Clark, 
    8 S.W.2d 666
    (Tex. 1928)’ the Texas Supreme Court declared:
    It is because of the obvious incompatibility of being both a member
    of a body making the appointment and an appointee of that body that
    the courts have with great unanimity throughout the country declared
    that all officers who have the appointing power are disqualified for
    appointment to the offices to which they may appoint.
    
    Id. at 674.
    Many subsequent attorney general opinions have applied this principle. See, e.g., Tex.
    Att’y Gen. Op. Nos. JM-934 (1988) (members of school district board of trustees may not appoint
    *Letterfrom Honorable Bill Carter, Chair, House Committee on Urban Affairs, to Honorable John Comyn,
    Texas Attorney General (Oct. 12,200l) (on file with Opinion Committee).
    The Honorable Bill Carter - Page 3            (JC-0474)
    themselves to governing board of a community college district); JM-3 86 (1985) (city council may
    not appoint one of its members to the city’s police reserve); Tex. Att’y Gen. LO-93-070 (governing
    body of entity authorized to make appointments to board of directors of Edwards Aquifer Authority
    may not appoint one of its own members to that position); LO-92-008 (board of trustees of
    community college district may not appoint one of its own members to the position of interim
    chancellor). More recently, we said that the City of San Antonio lacked the authority to adopt an
    ordinance providing that a member of the city council could be appointed to the Board of Directors
    of the Greater Kelly Development Authority. Tex. Att’y Gen. Op. No. JC-0225 (2000).
    We believe it is clear that the principle of EhZinger v. Clark controls the situation you pose
    and that, as a result, a member of the Watauga City Council that appoints directors to the Watauga
    Crime Control and Prevention District may not appoint himself as a director of that district.
    The Honorable Bill Carter - Page 4           (JC-0474)
    SUMMARY
    Unless the City Council of the City of Watauga appoints itself
    as a body to the Watauga Crime Control and Prevention District,
    members of the City Council are prohibited by the common-law
    doctrine of incompatibility from appointing themselves as directors
    of the Watauga Crime Control and Prevention District.
    Attorney General of Texas
    HOWARD G. BALDWIN, JR.
    First Assistant Attorney General
    NANCY FULLER
    Deputy Attorney General - General Counsel
    SUSAN DENMON GUSKY
    Chair, Opinion Committee
    Rick Gilpin
    Assistant Attorney General, Opinion Committee
    

Document Info

Docket Number: JC-474

Judges: John Cornyn

Filed Date: 7/2/2002

Precedential Status: Precedential

Modified Date: 2/18/2017