DocketNumber： JM-442
Judges： Jim Mattox
Filed Date： 7/2/1986
Status： Precedential
Modified Date： 2/18/2017
The Attorney General of Texas JIM MATTOX F&cuary 21. 1986 Attorney General Supreme Court Buffdin Emotablt Daniel W. Shindlar opinionNo. a-442 P. 0. BOX 12949 DistrictAttorney Aw,tih. TX. 7971% 2549 P. 0. Drawer 2280 Et: Whether an electedmayor may 51214752501 Bay City, Texas ,7'1414 receive a salary increaseat any Telex 8101874-1397 Telecoplar 51214750266 time duringhis term Dear Mr. Shindler: 714 Jackwn, Suite 700 Dallas. TX. 752024S99 You ask whet&r an elected mayor of a general law city may 214l742-9944 receivea salary increaseat any time during his term or whether any such increasemust take effect in the two-yearterm subsequentto that 4824 Alberta Ave.. SuitS 180 during which the salary increase was adopted. We conclude that El Paso. TX. 799052793 article 1010, V.T.C..S., acts as an absolute impedimentto the mayor 91- receiving an incraastin salaryduringhis tern. 1001 Texas, Suite MO Article1010. V.T.C.S.,providesthe follouiug: Houston, lx 77w2a111 71312236999 The city couucilshall,on or before the first day of January next precedingeach election,fix the salary aa'd fees of office of the mayor to be 806Broadway.Sulte 312 elected Ictthe next regular election,and fix the Lubb%k. TX. 79401-3479 9ow747-5239 comptnsaM.onto be paid to the officerselectedor appointedby the city council. The compensation so fixed shall not be changedduring the term for 4309 N. Tenth, Suite 6 McAllen, TX. 79501-1885 whfch sa:3 officersshall be electedor appointed. 512m&?*S47 (Emphasir~added). It has been suggestedthat courts have construedthe date provisions 290 Main Plaza. Suite 400 of the statutorypztrdtcessors of article1010 to be permissiveand not sari Antonio. TX. 792U52797 mandatory; therefore,it is suggested,a salary increaseadopted at 512l225419l any time during izhemayor's term is effective for that term not withstandingthe plain terms of the statute. We disagreewith this An Equal OppWtunitYl constructionof the cases construingarticle 1010 and conclude that Afflrmatiw Action EfIlPlOYer the plain terms of article1010 prohibitsuch an increase. There is a :L:Lnaof casts which hold that the provisions of article 1010 whic:h.require city council action on or before the January 1 next preceding each election are directory and not man- datory;none hold, however,that a salary increasemay be approvedand made effectiveduring the term of office of the officerwhose salary is to be increased. As the court in City of Uvalde v. Burney.145 S.W. 311
. 312 (Tex.Civ. App. - San Antonio 1912,no writ) declared: p. 2013 EonorableDanielW. Shindlel, - Page 2 (JM-442) The law in question is affirmativein requiring that the salarlelrof the city officers shall be fixed at a certain time, and we think [it] is merely directory. It will be presumed that the [llegislature intrudedwhat was reasouable,and it would not cripple, or completelybreak down, a municipalcorpora:ionby a failureto name salaries at a certain tiacz. The time is not essentialto the perfect operetion of the law, and there is reallybut one maidatoryprovisionin it, and that is that when theysalary has been once fixed or establishedit shztl uot be changedduring the term for which the o&cer was elected or appointed. That provision 1; negativelyexpressed,and mst necessarilybe ma&atory. The -directions as to the time at which t1.eappropriationfor the salaries shouldbe made is :notof the essenceof the duty to be performed;the main object of the law being to preventan iucreas,e in salaryduringthe incumbeacy la office. (Emphasisadded). (Tex.Civ. App.137 S.W. 417
(Tax. Civ. App. - Austin 1911, no writ). Neitherarticle 1010 (nor Its prtdectsso~s)uor the casts construing the statute permit the aalaryof a mayor to be increasedand made effectiveduring that officer'sterm. We must interpretthe statutein a way which expressesonly the will of the makers of the law, not forced aor cjtraintd,but simply such as the words of the law in their plain sense fairly sanctionand will.clearlysustain. Railroad Commissionof Tenas v. Miller.434 S.W.2d 670
, 672 (Tex. 1968). The plain terms ofythe statuteclearlyforbid any increasela compensationduring the tam for which the mayor is elected. SUMMARY The salaryof a mayor of a ganerallaw city may aot be incrsasedduring the term for which the mayor is elected. JIM HATTOX AttorneyCeaeralof Texas p. 2014 BonorableDaniel W. Shindltr- Page 3 (JM-442) JACKHIGETOWER First AssistantAttorneyGentera MARY KELLER ExecutiveAssistantAttorneyGeneral ROBERT GRA-f SpecialAssistantAttorney Zzneral RICK GILPIN Chairman.OpinionCommittee Preparedby Jim Moellinger AssistantAttorneyGeneral p. 2015