The Attorney General of Texas
July 19, 1978
JOHN L. HILL
Attorney General
Honorable Charles D. Houston Opinion No. Ii- 1210
County Attorney
P. 0. Box 83 Re: Nepotism: Whether com-
Bellville, Texas 77418 missioners court may amend
salary provision of city-county
contract where commissioner’s
daughter is employed by city
pursuant to contract.
Dear Mr. Houston:
You inform us that Austin County has entered into a contract with the
City of Wallis, whereby the’ city agreed to operate the county-owned
ambulance, and the county agreed to reimburse the city for all costs of
operation. Under the contract, the city is to provide an ambulance supervisor
at a stated salary. The city hired the daughter of an Austin County
commissioner as ambulance supervisor without any vote or other action by
the commissioners court. Due to the fact that another employee of the
ambulance service has received a raise, the ambulance supervisor has also
requested a raise. The Austin County Commissioners Court has refused to
pass an order modifying the contract as to salary, believing that to do so
would violate the nepotism statute, article 5996a,..y.T.C.S. You ask whether,
01) the-facts you have provided, the action of the commissioners court to
amend the agreement and reimburse the city for additional salary would
violate the nepotism law.
Article 5996a, V.T.C.S., provides in part:
No officer of this State nor any officer of any
district, county . . . nor any officer or member of any
State district, county, city, school district or other
municipal board . . . shall appoint, or vote for, or
confirm the appointment to any office, position,
clerkship, employment or duty, of any person related
within the second degree by affinity or within the third
degree by consanguinity to the person so appointing or
so voting, or to any other member of any such board,
P. 4852
Honorable Charles D. Houston - Page 2 JH-1210)
the Legislature, or court of which such person so appointing
or voting may be a member, when the salary, fees, or
compensation of marchappointee is to be paid for, directly or
indirectly, out of or from public funds. . . .
In cases where the commissioners court authorizes a position but has no control
over the person to be selected, we have said that article S998a, V.T.C.S., is not
violated by the appointment of a commissioner’s relative to that position. See
Attorney General Opinion H-697 (1975); Letter Advisory No. 79 (1974). Under=
contract with the city, Austin County has no right to control the employment of
the ambulance supervisor. Although the commissioners court sets the salary by
approving the contract provision, it cannot require that the salary be paid to a
particular person. Therefore, we do not believe the court’s action in amending the
salary provision will constitute the appointment of the commissioner’s daughter or
a confirmation of her appointment. Thus, their action will not violate the nepotism
law, barring trading or other subterfuge designed to avoid its operation. See
V.T.C.S. art. 5996c; Attorney General Opinions O-3718 (1941), O-2010 (1940), 0-m
(1939).
SUMMARY
The commissioners court of Austin County may amend the
salary provision of its contract with the City of Wallis, even
though the amendment will raise the salary of a commis-
sioner’s daughter employed by the city. Since the county
cannot control the selection of employees by the city under
the contract, the court’s action does not violate the
nepotism statute, article 5996a, V.T.C.S.
Attorney General of Texas
C. ROBERT HEATH, Chairman
Opinion Committee
P. 4853