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