Untitled Texas Attorney General Opinion ( 1957 )

r .._ l . TEE ATIYORNEY GENERAL OF TEXAS AUEWXN 11. TEXAn WILL BVILSON Honorable Joe Resweber Oplnlon Ro. WW-130 County Attorney Harris County Re:Can a former elected Houston 2. Texas. official. now an apoolnt- ive county employee; add his prlor service as an elected official to his service as a county employee for the purpose of receiving a county Dear Mr. Resweber ‘. pensIon? This Oplnlon Is in reply to your request of May 2, 1957, In which you ask the following question: “Can a former elected official, now an appolntlve County Employee, add his prfor service as an elected official to his sop- vice as a County Bnplogee ftr the purpose of recefvlng a County pension? Section 62 (b), Article XVI of the Constitution of Texas provides in part: ‘Each county shall have the right to provide for and administer a Retfrement, Dlsabllltg and Death Compensatfon Fund for the appolntlve ofclcers and employees of the county. . . a Section 62 (a) of Article XVI of the Constitution of Texas provides in part: “The Legislature shall have the right to levy taxes to provide a Retirement, Dis- ability and Death Compensation Fund for the appointlve of;ficersand employees of the State; . . . Pursuant to this constitutional authorlzatl,on,the Legislature provided for a retirement system for state em- ployees in Acts of the 50th Legislature, Regular Session, ch. 352, p..697, which, as amended, appears as Article Honorable Joe Resweber, page 2 ww-130 6228a, Vernon's Civil Statutes. In Farrar, et al v. Board of Trustee Retirement System of Texas, et al, 150'Tex. 5 8 (1951) th C t in dealing with the pr Article 6228a, ipe% of Section 62 (a), Article XVI of the Constitution of Texas and says: "Construing that amendment In the light of fts purpose, we have no doubt that, just as they had already done for the teachers, the people meant to limit the beneffts of that fund to appointed officers and employees of the state; . 0 a The provfsions of subsectfons (a) and (b) of Section 62, Artfcle XVI of the Constitution of Texas are Identical Insofar as they both provide that the Legislature shall have the right to levy taxes to provide for the retire- ment plan for the appointive officers and employees of the respective political divfslons. Therefore, when the Supreme Court of Texas holds that the beneffts of the retirement plan, as to state employees, are to be limited to appointed officers and employees, it is our opinion that the statement may be cited as authority In regard to county employees as well. In addftfon to the opinion fn the Farrar case, the clear ommlsion of any reference to electlveoff"icials In the constitutfonal amendment, coupled with the express reference to appointfve offfcials fn the same amendment, requires us to hold that in our opfnlon a former elected official, who is now an appolntive county employee, may not add his prior service as an elected offielal to his service as a county employee for the purpose of receiving a county pensfon, FOP this reason your question must be answered in the negative. SUMMARY A former elected offioial, now an appolnt- ive county employee, may not add his prior service as an elected official to his serv- ice as a county employee for the purpose of receiving a county pension, Honorable Joe Resweber, page 3 ww-130 Your8 very truly, WILL WIIsOFl Attorney General BY Ansfstant WCR:jlsrh APPROVED: OPINION COMMITTEE: H. Grady Chandler, Chairman James W. Wilson Ralph R. Rash Fred Werkenthfn REVIEWEDFORTREATTOR??EYGENERAL Byr Gee. P. Blackburn