. -..

r

Hon. Ralph M. Hall Opinion No.M- 827 Chairman, County, District & Urban Affairs Committee Re: Constitutionality of S.B. Senate Chambers, Capitol Bldg. NO. 213, 62nd Leg., R.S., Austin, Texas 78711 1971, providing for a county civil service system Dear Senator Hall: in certain counties.

Inyour recent letteryou inquired whether a.county civil service system couldbe established without a constitutional amendment. **Senate** Bill No. 213, 62nd Leg., R.S., 1971, would provide for such a system in certain counties.

Section 2of the Bill authorizes a county civil service system to cover only II. . .all **pmcdovees** of **the** county." **Other** provisions of theBill clearly afford protection to **the** emolovees covered against demotions, suspensions or removals from their positions. (Emphasis supplied.)

An employee isdefined inSection 1 (3)as follows: II. . .any person who obtains his position by appointment and who isnot authorized by statute to perform governmental functions inhis own right involving some exercise ofdiscretion, but does not include aholder ofan office the term ofwhich is limited by the Constitution of the State ofTexas: 88 . . .A question has been raised as towhether the coverage of employees by a county civil service system would conflict with the tenure limitations ofArticle XVI, Sections 30 and 65 of the Constitution of Texas. The coverage afforded by the Bill extends only to employees and not to officers. Therefore, there isno conflict with these constitutional provisions.

-4008-Hon. Ralph **M.** Hall, page 2 (M-827)

For your convenience we enclose herewith a copy of twoAttorney General opinions dealing with thedistinctions between employees and officers: they are opinions numbers O-304 (1939)and C-527 (1965).

The application of Senate Bill No. 213 to only counties of over 300,000 population raises the question of its constitutionality inview of the prohibition inArticle III, Section 56, against certain local and special laws.

In our opinion thebill is constitutional in this respect, there being a reasonable ground for the classification. City ofFort Worth v. Bobbitt, 121 Tex. 14, 41 S.W.2d 228 (1931); Bexar County v. Tvnan, 128 Tex. 223, 97 S.W.2d 467 (1936);Miller v. El Paso County, 136Tex. 370, 150 S.W.2d 1000 (1941). SUMMARY Senate Bill No. 213proposing to authorize the creation of county civil service systems in certain counties is constitutional. It does not contravene Article XVI, Section 30, limiting the term of certain offices to twoyears, for the reason that thebill by definition excludes from the system aholder of an office the term ofwhich is limited by the Constitution. The bill is constitutional and not inviolation of the prohibition ofArticle III, Section 56, of the Constitution, prohibiting certain local and special laws, the classification based onpopulation being areasonable one. Very truly yours, CRAWFORD C.MARTIN Attorney General ofTexas

BY NC&AWHITE First Assistant -4009-Hon. Ralph M. Hall, page 3 (M-827)

Prepared by James S. Swearingen Assistant Attorney General APPROVED: OPINION COMMITTEE Kerns Taylor, Chairman W. E.Allen, Co-Chairman J. C. Davis Roger Tyler Robert Flowers Houghton Brownlee MEADE F. GRIFFIN Staff Legal Assistant ALFREDWALKER Executive Assistant

-4010-