i I - a. _.x I ~ 

# THE ATNBRNEY GENERAL OF%?lEXAS AUSTIN, TEXAS 78711 February 15, 1973

Honorable Joe Max Shelton Grayson County Attorney 104 S. Crockett Sherman, Texas 75090

Dear Mr. Shelton: Opinion No. H-11 Re: Under present law, can the Grayson County Commis s- ioners Court legally amend the 1973 County Budget and allow ablanket increase in salaries ofcounty employees, effective January 1, 1973? Mr. W. 0. Williams, County Auditor ofGrayson County, has asked you to secure our written opinion tothe following question: “Under the present law, can the Grayson County Commissioners Court legally amend the 1973 County Budget and allow ablanket increase in salaries of county employees, effective January 1, 1973?” Mr. Williams advises that the 1973 budget was filed July 31, 1972, and adopted by the Commissioners Court on August 17, 1972, atwhich time the Commissioners Court could not foresee enough revenue toinclude an employee salary increase. Since that time Grayson County has been the recipient offunds under the Federal Revenue Sharing Law and there are funds available for salary raises. Mr. Williams was concerned about the apparent conflict between Article 3912k, Section 2(a), Vernon’s Texas Civil Statutes, andArticle 689a-11, Vernon’s Texas Civil Statutes. Article 689a-11, V. T. C.S. , provides that the commissioners court shall hold abudget hearing subsequent toAugust 15and prior to setting the tax levy inSeptember. Italso provides that:



### -45-Honorable Joe Max Shelton, page 2 (H-11)

11

. . . emergency expenditures, in case of grave public necessity, tomeet unusual and unforeseen conditions which would not, by reasonably diligent thought and attention, have been included inthe original budget, may from time to time be authorized by the Court as amendments to the original budget.
. . .‘I Article 689a-20 provides, in part:

“Nothing contained inthis Act shall be construed as precluding the Legislature for making changes in the budget for state purposes or prevent the County Commissioners’ Court from making changes in the budget for county purposes . . .I’ The reported cases have little to say about Article 689a-20. Article 689a-llhas been before the courts for interpretation. Ganeralljr, they have held that its provisions must be met and that the circumstances must show “unusual and unforeseen conditions”,‘grave public necessity”, etc. Bexar County v. Hatley, 136 Tex. 354, 150 S.W. 2d 980 (1940); Guerra v. McClellan, 243 S.W. 2d715 (Tex. Civ. App. San Antonio, 1951, nowrit history). Inmost situations amendments to a county budget will have tomeet the requirements ofArticle 689a-11, V. T. C.S. Whether circumstances exist which will warrant anamendment to the budget will be aquestion of fact in each case. However, as to salaries ofcounty officers and employees, the rule has been impliedly amended by the enactment, in 1971, ofArticle 3912k, which provides, in part:

“Section 1. Except as otherwise provided by this Act and subject to the limitations ofthis Act the commissioners court ofeach county shall fix the amount ofcompensation, office expense, travel expense, and all other allowances for county and

-46-- _

.- :

,

.’ I

Honorable Joe Max Shelton, page 3 (H-l 1)

precinct officials and employees who are paid wholly from county funds, but inno event shall such salaries be set lower than they exist at the effective date ofthis Act. ”

“Section 2(a), The salaries, expenses, and other allowances of elected county and precinct officers shall be set each year during the regular budget hearing and adoption proceedings on giving notice as provided by this Act.
. .” This statute has not been the subject of construction by the courts. However, it is awell recognized rule of statutory construction that the granting ofan expressed power by the Legislature gives with it, by necessary implication, every other power necessary and proper to the execution ofthe power expressly granted. Terre11 v. Sparks, 104 Tex. 191, 135 S.W. 519 (1911); Moon v. Allred, 277 S.W. 787 (Tex.Civ. App. 1925, error dism. ). Following these authorities ithas been the consistent interpretation of this office that, where the Legislature has authorized county commissioners tofix or raise salaries for county officials and employees, the commissioners court has the implied power toamend the county budget for the purpose ofauthorizing the payment of such salaries. Attorney General Opinions V-857(1949); C-505( 1965); and M-436( 1969). Section 1ofArticle 3912k gives tothe commissioners court authority tofix all county salaries, for elected officials and employees alike, provided they are paid wholly from county funds. Section 2, which applies only to elected county and precinct officers, requires that their salaries be,set during the regular budget hearing. The absence ofany such restriction regarding the fixing ofnon:elected employees’ salaries indicates that salaries ofemployees other than elected county and precinct officers may be fixed at times other than during the regular budget hearing. To the extent that this is inconsistent with Article 689a-11, Article 3912k furnishes an implied exception thereto. Lane v. State, 305 S.W. 2d 595 (Tex. Crim. , 1957); City ofMarshall v. State Bank, 127 S.W. 1083 (Tex.Civ.App., 1910, error ref. n.r.e.); 53 GJur. 2d 162, Statutes 5111.

-47-Honorable Joe Max Shelton, page 4 (H-l 1)

We therefore answer the first part ofyour question that the Grayson County Commissioners Court may amend the county’s 1973 budget and allow an increase in the salaries of county employees other than elected county or precinct officers. As to elected county and precinct officers, any increases intheir salaries must await budget hearings for the next fiscal year. Your letter tous, dated January 1, 1973, asked ifthe raises could be given effective as ofthat date. Itis our opinion that any salary increases authorized by the commissioners court must operate prospectively and not retroactively. Article 3, Section 53, Constitution of Texas; Pierson v. Galveston County, 131 S.W.Zd 27’(Tex. Civ. App;, Austin, 1939, nowrit history); Fausett v. King, 470 S.W. 2d 770 (Tex. Civ.App. , El Paso, 1971, nowrit history). -SUMMARY - Pursuant to the provisions ofArticle 3912k the Grayson County Commissioners Court may amend its 1973 Budget toallow an increase inthe salaries of non-elected employees, such increase tobe effective at the time ofits adoption or thereafter butnot retroactively. Very truly yours,

JOHN L. HILL c/ Attorney General of Texas APPROVED:

DAVID M. KENDALL, Chairman Opinion Committee -48-