Untitled Texas Attorney General Opinion

. . 5 _
The Attorney General of Texas
Wbruary 21. 1986
JIM MAlTOX
Attorney General
Suprema Court Building EonorablcJames W. Smith, Jr. oplnlonNo. JM-430
P. 0. Box 92548 Prio countyAttorney
*ustIn. TX. 7B7tl-2s48 P. 0. Box V Re: Whether a county departmental
512l4752501 Pearsall,Texas 78061 head may authorizea salary increase
TOISX 91048741387
l&icopfer 51211750286
not approved by the commissioners
court
714 Jackson. Suit4 7M) Dear Mr. Smith:
tlaw& TX. 752v24sm
214l742-8044
You ask the followingthree questlonsabout salary increasesfor
county employees:
4S24 Alberta Ave., Sulte ISO
El Paso. TX. 799052793 1. (Iana departmentalhead in a county govern-
OlYS33.3464 ment vhich has no civil service system authorize a
salary increase for an employee once the salary
1001 Texas. Sult0 700 has beun set by the adoption of the county’s
Hou4ton. TX. 7700%3111 budget ‘,:I
the Commissioner’s Court?
71312255888
2. t:Ethe answer to the first auestion is in
the negative then would It make any-differenceif
808 Broadway. Suite 312
Lubbock. TX. 7WOl-3479
the 9Qoyee Policy Book (adopted by the Frio
8061747-5238 County Cmissionera Court) gives the authorityto
a de&meat head to p&&e employees in-his
departmentas long as the promotion is within the
4302 N. Tenth, Suite B
McAllen. TX. 7s%ll-1885
staffingpattern and budget limits approvedby the
5126B2.4547 Coamtiaaioners Court and in conjunctionwith this
promotionthere is an automaticsalary increase?
200 Main Plaza. Suite 400 3. Finally* neither the statutes nor any of
San Antonio, TX. 782Q52797
the caws that I could find squarely addresses
512n254191
when tlatcotmissioners court is to set and fix
compen~a~tloufor the amployeesof county govern-
An Equal OppWtunityl ment. 1:sthis done during the budgetary hearing
Affirmative Action Employer procew or at any time of the year?
BecausePrio Count:yIs not under a civil servfce system, sac generally
V.T.C.S.art. 23;‘2h-6;AttorneyGeneralOpinionE-1113 (1978).article
3912k. V.T.C.S..controlsthe settingof salariesfor county employees
paid from county funds.
Article 391:!1:
provides,in section1, as follows:
p. 1971
d- .
gonorablaJames g. Slftb,Jr. - Pago 2 (m-430)
Except as otherwise provided by this Act and
subject to the limitations of this Act, the
comsieeionerscourt of each county shall fix G
amount of cua+stioo, office expense, travel
such salaries 1::set love: than they exist at the
effectivedate of this Act. (Emphasisadded).
You ask about regulw:employeesof the county rather than about
elected county and preciwt officials. Elected county officialsare
subject to certain provil;llons
of article 3912k which do not apply to
county employees. V.T.C.S. art. 3912k, §§2, 6; Attorney
General OpinionsMU-%%&; (1981);S-314 (1974). Further,
M!J~-366
ve note that article3912k exceptsentirelycertainpositionsfrom its
operation, See V.T.C.S. art. 3912k, $7; Attorney General Opinion
m-49 (1983)Tuthority of district judge to increase salaries of
assistantsto the county auditor'soffice); see also Tex. Govt. Code
141.101,et. seq.; Attorney GeneralOpinion JM-313 (1985). Subject to
these qualifications,article 3912k directs that the amount of com-
nensation naid to eountv amnlovces shall be annrovedbv the commls-
sioner'r court. V.T.C.S. art.-3912k, $1; see-kenfro;. Shropshire,
566 S.W.2d 688 (Tu. Civ. App. - Sastland x8, vrit ref'd n.r.e.);
Attorney General OpinlonsJM-192 (1984);B-11 (1973).
The court in Renfro v. Shropshire,however, stated that article
3912k must be considered%ogetber with article 3902. Article 3902,
V.T.C.S., authorizesdistrf.ct, county , and precinct officersto apply
co the cummisrloncrs court for authority to appoint necessary
deputies, assistants,or clerks. Although 8rticle 3902 statas that
the commissionerscourt shall determine the number of nev employees
and the amount of their compensation,it prohibits the commissioners
court from influencingthe appointmentof particularpersons. Renfro
v. Shropshire.566 S.W.2d wt 691-92; see also TarrantCountyv. Smith,
ill S.W.2d 537 (Tex. Civ. Lpp. - Fort Worth 1935, writ ref'd). Thus,
with regard to countyampl>:yees coveredby article 3902, a dfstinction
must be dravn betveen .authorizinggeneral salary increases and
determining which individualsshall receive those increases. - See
Attorney GeneralOpinionIl.-!:113
(1978).
Your second question is whether a salary increase for a county
employee is valid vhen it :isan automaticpart of a promotionvhich is
within staffing and budget limits already approved by the commis-
sioners court. If the staffingand budget limits which are approved
by the commissioners court envisiona promotionwith a salary increase
for county employeesand wthorlze the particulardepartmenthead to
award that promotion,ve believe that the salary fncrease may be
p. 1972
‘,
Eonorablc Jaacr E. Smith, - Page 3 (JM-430)
J:r,,
dccmcd approvedby the commlsalonar~court. No ldditioualapproval la
required.
Tour final qucatiou iavolvca the procedure ucccrsary t!o fix
compensation for county cmploycea. Attorney Gcncral Oplalou H-11
(1973) addressedvhcthcr salariesmust be fixed at the regular budget
hearing of the commiasioncrscourt. The opinion noted that article
3912k. section 2. which applies only to elected county and precinct
officers, requires that their salarlca be act during the regular
budget hearing. The absence of a similar restrictionregarding the
fixing of compensationfor non-electedcounty employeeswas deemed to
Indicate that such compensationcould be set at times other than
during the regular budget ‘hearing. Although the opinion concluded
that a commissloncrecourt say amcnd its budget to authorfzca salary
Increase for non-electedcounty employees,It emphasizedthat such an
increase may not operate retroactively. See Tu. Coast. art. III,
153; Pausett v. King, 470 S.W.2d770 (Tex.?&. App. - El Paso 1971,
no writ); PiersonV. GalvcaronCounty, 131 S.U.2d27 (Tcx. Clv. App. -
Austin 1939, no writ).
SUHl4AF.Y
Subject to cxceptlous for certain positions,
article3912k, V.T.C.S..indicatesthat tbc amount
of compensationpaid to county employeesmust be
approvedby the ,:ounty counalesionerscourt. With
regard to non-tclectedcounty employees, this
requircmcnt Includes salary increases. If the
staffing and bt:d.gct limits which are already
approved by the coxm&salonarscourt envision a
promotion vith a salary Increase for certain
county positlonsand authorizethe departmenthead
to award the prowtion. the salaryincrease may be
dccued approved by the commissioners court.
Although the comnlssionerscourt may amend its
budget at a time other than its regular budget
hcarlng in order to authorizesalaryincreasesfor
non-electedcounty employees.such increasesmay
not operateretroactively.
JIM MATTOX
AttorneyGeneralof Texas
JACK EIGRTOWER
First AssistantAttorneyG?ueral
p. 1973
EonorableJemce R. Smith. Jx. - Page 4 (JK-430)
MARY KELLER
ExecutiveAssistant Attorrwy General
ROBERT GRAY
SpecialAaelatantAttorneyGeneral
RICK GILPIN
chairman,opluion Committal?
Preparedby JenniferRlgga
AssistantAttorneyGeneral
p. 1974