Untitled Texas Attorney General Opinion

THEA'ITORNEYGENERAL OFTEX.~~ July 22, 1949. Ron. John A. !4enefor opbiion 80. V-859. . County Attorney opton county Rer The presentmaxlmumao8- Rankin, Texar pernation of the COW&J Auditor of Uptan Gount~. Dear Sirn Ref8renae is made to your recent request ~Ueh road8 in part PI f0110v8¶ "At the request of the District Judge of the 83rd Mstrlct Court, I am requesting an opinion concerningthe maximum 8alary that tbo County Auditor of Upton Cou&y, T8xa8, may be paid. Upton County ha8 a population of 1088 than 20,000 kid a taxable valuation of more than fifteen million.* Article 1646, B.C.S., provide8 In put aa fol- lOn! *en the Corrirsionerr~Court of a Couu- ty not nationed ti 0nmvat.d in the proowl- ing Artlclr shall la&mlaa U&t m Auditor ia a publia necressitjin @ho Urnpatch of the oounty bustiess, ud shall enter 8n order upon the mlnutrr of 88l(lCeurt fully setti out the ro88en fer and necessity of an AwlY tor, UQ rhall am8o suah sdor to be certified to the Dirtriot Judge or District Judgss hav- si8Uetlon in the oounty, maid Judge or Judgo8 rhall, if 8aid ma8on be oonsidered good md rufflalont,appoint a County Auditor 88 povid8d 3.~the pxwaeding titlale, who rha 1 qualify and perfor all the duti88 ro- quirod of Oounty Auditor8 by the law8 of thi8 State gnd vho ahall recrlro as oompensatioa for him rervices am County Audltor an annual of sot more *aU th8 amma total eom- penra 8a1T ion and/or salary alloved or paid the As- 808804;and Oo~laator of Taxes In hi8 county, . . . Hon. Jehn A. Rouofeo, page 2 (v-859) sunder the provisions of 1646 supra, the Couuty Auditor was entitled in 1948 to an annual salary of not more than the annual total compensationalloved or paid the Amsessor~ollector of Taror. Under the provisions of 3912e-12, V~.C.S.,the ABBeBsor-Collectorin Upton Couuty could have boa paid the sum of $5400.00 per an- num. And according to the facts presentedhe was alloved the m8xLmum salary. Therefore, in 1948 the maximum sala- ry allowed the Oounty Auditor under the law was $5400. Section 1 of Senate Bill 92, Acts of the 51st hgi818tUr4, provides a8 fOllOW8: "Sootion 1. The ComPrissioners Court l.n each oouutg of this State Is hereby author- ized, whelhin their judgment the financial condition of the county and the needs of the officer justify the increase, to enter en or- dor increasing the coqensation of the pre- cinct, county and district officers, or ei- ther of them, In 8.nadditionalamount not to exceed twenty-five (25s) per cent of the 811111 allowed under the law for the fiscal year of 1948, whether paid on fee or salary basis; provided,however, the members of the COrniD- sloners Court may not raise the salaries of any of much CommissionersCourt under the terms of this Act without raising the salary of the remaining county official8 in like pro- portion.R Under the plain provisions of Senate Bill g2, the Connissloners~Court Is authorized to grant an ln- crease of $1350 (25s of $5400) to the county officers. In the cam0 of American Idamity Go. v. Red River Bat. mauk, 132 S.W.2d 473 T ci A 1939 it di med), it was held ~~:*the'~o~~y Aul.l~o~%y t& statute is lade an officer of the County." Therefore, If the County Auditor warnreceiving $5400 prior to th8 effective date of Senate Bill 92, the maximum salary vhlch he may nov recolve is $6,750 per annum. We call your attention to Section 4 of Senate Rlll 92 which must be complied with before any Increase may be granted. Furthermore,the provisions of Article 689a-11, V.C.S., must be folloved. Any Increase in compensationfor the year 1949 must be in the same proportionas the balance of the year relates to the total annual increase that may be made under Souate Bill 92. (A. 0; Opinion IO. V-231). eon. John A. Menefee, pago 3 (V-859) The maximum salary which may be paid the County Auditor of Upton County la 46750 per Article 1646 V,C.S * Senate Bill 92, %rmk the 51st Legislaturi:1949. Yours very truly, ATTORNEYGENRRALOFTEXAS BA:et:bh IRST ASSISTANT ATTORREY f3BiRRU