Untitled Texas Attorney General Opinion

OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF TEXAS AUSTIN Iionorabla C, J. Wilda County Auditor nuaoaa countr Corpus Christi, Texas Dear sir: tar o? raoant data raquastlng the o t on the above stated matter. rt, aa follows: ounty after tha ifloial. In that Nuaoan alarlea of the ounty on the baa18 to 100,000 fnhabl- ala 3912-g s8ataa a”8the bra&at just pra- mentioned, namely, 37,501 II uhloh braokat Muaoaa ting aould not raoaiwa mora amount allowed auoh ofiloara the OXi8bing 18W8 Oi August 24, 1935. wit August 24, 1935 Muaoaa-County, baln in the populatia braokat ot 37,501 to 60800 b! the ire oifloara mmximun salary was $3.750.00. However, Art lo18 3883 allows thle amount to be lnoraaaad by $500.00, whloh rapr888nta Ma third of 8xOaaa 1808, thereby making tha mall- -~’ 250.00. In addition to the above 8QoDnt Ia a protialon ln Saotloa 13-of Arti Honorable C. J. :iilda, Page 2 3912-E whloh atataar “‘Frovldad ths t in aountiaa hsv$ng a population of 37,500 and lass than 60,000 aooording to the last preceding Federal Canslus, and having an aaaasaed valuation ln 8x089s ot $20,000,000,.00 aooordlng ts the last praoadlna, approv- : ad tax roll ot such oounty, th:: aaxlaum anount sllowad such ottloara as aalar-, lea may ba increased 1s tor aaoh ~l,~OO,OOO.OC valuation or traotl,onal- art thereof, in 8xoasa ot said fi 20,000 000.00 valuation over and above the maxhm anount allowed such ottloar under law8 aria tlng on Augna t 24, 1935. ( “The valuation in Muecaa County on August 24, 1935 waa 333,492,736.00. Tharatora, it in aooordsnoa with your opinion, we use the 1930 canaua aa a ~asamlng stick lnaotar as the maxi- .nuix amount tOr to8 Officers is ooncarnad, why then would not tha tea offioara of moo88 County be allowed an additional 145 added to the $4,250.00 whloh waa the maximum ha oould raoaiva at that tiaa. The additional l&S rapraasnta the valuation in axcaea o? 320,000,000.00 aa mentlonad in the sbovs quotation. It is pos- sible that we might go turthar, it we are to sssuma that the 37,501 to 60,000 la ths messuring atiak, and lnoreasa the peroantoga over snd above the maximum OS the basis of the 1944 valustlon whleh was $89,480,000.00, aa thla value 1s shown on the last praoadlng tax roll at Nuaeaa County, If wa are oorraot in this matter than there Is a possibility of lncraaalng the salarlas ot the t8a ottloara in ~uaoaa County by 70$. It la quita evident that the b~aia under which tha aslariar of the fee oftleara are to be pald remain at the flgura ahown for the populstfon of the 1930 oensus and I reapaottully r*?*? YOU to Cpin- ion O-2582 randarad to the- County AttOrnaY and County Auditor ot Travis County, Texsa. This opinion, on pace seven, the titth para- graph resds : -- Honorable C. J. Wilde, Page 3 ** Your fifth quaatlan baoonaa moot in view of our holding that )4,75O,QO~ia the maxinu~ salary to be allowed dirtriot and oounty oftleera of Travla County ~undar the Otfioara* Salary Law.’ *Theabove quotation shows that lv,an though the 1941 oanma would move Tratia Countj lath, the braekat of 101,000 and not nor8 than 150,000,’ the . ottioara are adrlabd that the maximum would. be 4,750.00, whloh aomaa wIthIn the brrokat of 8 0,001 to 100,000. We also oall to your attention the taot that under Art1018 3912-X.’ Saotloa 6, Nuacaa County, in aooordanoa with the artfoipatlon on tha basis of par oaplta population PII the above nantlone4 Sa8tio~ 6, lr being reimbursed on the baaia of the population in Ruaaaa County aoeord- in6 to the 1930 oanatm. Tharafora, we teal that the par oaplta tax la paid on the baala of the 1930 population and other eountlaa are advlaad thab the& used the 1930 population aa a maaaur- lng atiok, than why should not the rpaeial proviaiona allowa in Saotlon 13 o? Artlola 3912-S apply to Ruaoaa County and alla the ?a8 otiloerr to be pald on the bash of the emxlmtua plua the paroantaga in valuation over and above the ~20,000,000.00 valuation man- tlonad in Saetlon 13 applying to oountlaa having a population of not more than 60,000. “In view of the taota we raapaotfully ask that your Opinion o-2546 be raaonaldarad.a Ae a general provlslon dth rataranca to the mini- plum and maximum lalariar of county offioiala in oountlaa having a population of not 1088 than 20,000, nor more than 190,000, aooordln(l to the last praoadlng Federal eanaua, A?tlola 39128, Saotlon 13, provldaal *Art, 39128, 880. 13. The Co0mlaalonara~ Court la oountlaa having a population of twanty thousand (20,000) inhabltaatr or more and leer than one hundred and nlaaty thousaud l190,000)~ inhabitamta aooordlng to the lart praoadlng Faderal Canaua, la hereby aothorlraa and It nhall be its duty to fix tha lalarlaa of all the following naaad ottloara, W-wit: lh a r lff, a a a a a a oand r oollaotor of taxer oounty judge, oountt attorney, lnoluding oilafnal die trfot gttornaya and county attornay# who partorr 670 . Honorable C. J. iYildr, Page 4 the duties of district attorneys, district olerk, oounty clerk, treasurer, hide and &i- ma1 lnap~otor. Eaoh or said oifiOera ahsll br paid in money an annual salary in twelva (12) equal lnatallatanta of not loss than the.total sum aarned aa oompenaatlon by hln ln hli of- . rfolal oapaaity ror the tiaoal year 1933, and not more than the maximum amount allowed auoh offiosr under law8 lx la ting on August 24, 1935; . . ..* The forr olng provision fired ha lalarlra of county. oftioera, In oount f la within tha dmatad populatian braokrt, at not mora then the maximum oompanaation allovrad auoh otfioera under lawa axlating Au uat 24, 1935, Aaoogdoohaa County v. Jlnklna, 140 9. il. (26 pl 901. Undar said Article, the maxlnum art forth aervsa as a aoellingn on the salaries of oounty or- fiosra ln oountlss wlthln that population braokrt (20,000 to 190,000), and said maxima% or *orlUng” la fixed on the basis of an unohangeabla past aituationg this la, the maximum ouu- psnsatlon allowed aald orilaera under laws axlatlng August 24, 1935. Also, we oall to your attention that under laws axiat- lng August 24, 1935, there wore no roviaiona authorizing an lnoreaar in offloar’s aalarlsa in a i dition to the maxl~~um fess whloh said offlorrs wars allowed to rstaln under Artio- lea 3883 and 3896. The provlaiona oi fitlola 39128, Seotlon 13, authorlrlng the peroentegea to be added to the foregoing 4mxlmua oompensatlon for oounty oftloara in oountira within orrtaln population braokata and having oartaln aaaaaasd val- uation wora not stteotlve until Jsnuary 1, 1936. Therriorr said peroentagsa o? lnoraaar , authorized by ths aproviaoa* or Artlola 39128, Seotlon 13, oould oonatitutr no part oi the maximum oomprnaation fixed under lawa axlating August 2.4, 1935. Ylth rrferenoe to l ald aprovlaoa*, the languaga of Artlolo 3912a. Saotlon 13, Is as followr: . provldad that ia oountira having a popu&l& to twenty bhouaand (20 000) and baa than thirty-aovrn thousand fita h&d*ad (37,500) aooordlng to the last preceding Federal Cansus, and having an aaaaaaed valuation in SXOaaa Of Fytam Idllllon ($15,000,000.00~ Dollars, lo- oordlng to the last ap rovad prroading tsX roll or auoh oounty the max % um amount allowad auoh offioepa aa aalarlaa may bs lnorramd ana (1%) Honorable C. J. !iilda, Page 5 per oent for aaoh Oar Ulllon ($1,000,000.00) Dollars valuation OP fraotional art tharaoY in axoaaa oi aald Fifteen Yilllon (~15,000,00~.~0) Dollars valuation oval and above the maxlnwa amount allowed such oitiaara under laws rxiat- lng on August 24, 1935 1 and porldad that lo oountlaa having a population of thirty-seven thousand five hundred (37,500) snd less than alxty thousand (60,000) aooordlng to thr lrat prsordlng Federal Cewua, and havlng an aaaaaaad-valuation ln lx o ea a of Twenty Mlllloa ($20,000,000.00) Dollars, aooording ~to the - last prsoedlng approved tax roll o?. auoh oounty, the maxiPlum amount allowad auoh offlosra as salarlea, amy ba inareas6d one (1%) par oant r0r aaoh One Million (#1,000,000.00) Dollars valuation or fraotional~part thereof, in 8xoaaa of said Twanty Mllllon (p20,000,000.00) Dollars valuation over and above the aaxlmm amount allcwed auoh offloar under laws rxiatlng on August 24, 1935.” As to population, the applloabllity of eaid wprovlaoa* la dependent upon the population of a oountg aooordlng to the last preoadlng Federal Census. It would bo possible for a oouaty to be within a partioulap population bracket, aooording to on6 pradrdlng Federal Csnaua, and, after the next Federal Census, a county might ba outslda that braokaf, thereby randsr- lng the * roviaoaW lna plloabla to that putioula, county. AS to valuat i on, the appl Poablllty of the foregoing *provIsosa is dependent upon the. assassed valuation of a oounty aocordlng to tha last approved tax roil, It would be possible for a oounty to have the rsqulrad valuation one year and, the naXt year, it might not have the rsaoribed valuation, and auoh oondltlon would randar the nprov P so8 * lnapplloablr to tha,t partloular oounty. As we conatrua the language of Artlola 39128, SOO- tlon 13, when a oounty la within the general population braokrt (20,000 - 190,000), thr naxinum aalarlaa for oounty offloara is ilxad at thr maximum oompenaatlon whloh OOUntY orrloara wormowed in said bount under lawa axlat~gaaad August 24, 1935, unlaaa the pop\tlat I 011 of *aid OoMty on the last prooadlng Fadaral‘oanaua) and the aaaaaard Valu- ation (baaed on the last approved tax roll) la’auoh that Ona or the *provlaoa~ la applioablr to said oounty, thereby 672 Honorable C. J. 11168, Pago 6 luthalalng tha psroantaga of lnoraasa to ba ad&d to the foregoing msxlmum oompanaatlon. In vlaw of the fo r e g o ing, we are oonatralnad to adhere to tha previous holdings of this department in Oplnlon Boa. O-2546 an4 0-2582. Trusting that the toragolng fully snswara your inquiry, we are Yours vexy truly AlTW (3lmmuL OFTXAS BY JAB:ddt