August 31, 1970 

Honorable Jw Reeweber 

County Attorney 

Harris County Courthouse 

Houeton, Texas 77002 

Dear Mr. Resweber: 

Opinion No. M-678 

Re: May Harris County create 

the position of executive 

assistant to the four County 

Commissioners under the 

stated fact situation and 

related questiona. 

Your recent request for an opinion asks for an 

answer to questions as follows: 

"1. Is the Commissioners Court authorized 

to create the position of executive afssistant to 

the four (4) County Commissioners (and provide 

for a salary of $14.400.00 per year and an automobile and other equilxaent for much porition) at 

thin time without ruch position having be&n pre- "" 

viously approved and eatabliahed in the 1910 

County Budget? 

” 2 . Could such action legally be taken by 

the Conunisrrioners Court without the matter having 

been specifically included in the written notice 

of the meeting at which such action was taken? 

“3. Can Harrie County legally expend funds 

for the payment of the salary and automobile 

(and equipnent) prwided for as indicated in "1" 

and “2” above?" 

In answer to your fir8t question, it is our opinion 

that the Conmimuioners Court is authorized to hire an "executive amrL8tant" and prwida for him indicated eguipmenh for 

tha purpose of performing adminimtrative and executive function8 and dutias a@ an employee. So’ long as thm dimamtimuy 

-3239- 
Honorable Joe Resweber, page 2 (M-678) 

and policy making functions of the coanniaaionera are not delagated to the employees, no legal inhibition is involved. 

In 15 Tex.Jur.Zd 277, Counties, Section 48, it is 

stated: 

"In the absence of an enabling statute the 

powers of a commiaaionera' court that involve 

exercise of judgment and discretion cannot be 

delegated. . . ." 

This office has previously held, in Opinion O-1175, 

(1939) that there is no authority for the office of "w 

aentative" of the commissioners court: however, where the 

Dallas County Commissioners Court hired an engineering firm to 

assist the county road engineer, an employee, the court said: 

II 

. . . It is further well settled that the Commissioners' Court may employ persona to assist even 

an officer in the performance of statutory duties: 

. . . or to perform services which do not involve 

the exercise of any qwernmental function: . . ." 

Hill v. Sterrett, 252 S.W.Zd 766 (Tex.Civ.App. 1952, 

Ref. N.R.E.) citing Terre11 v. Greene, 88 Tex. 539, 

31 S.W. 631 and Strinser v. Franklin Countv, 123 S.W. 

1168 (Tex.Civ.App. 1909, no writ.). 

The general rule is that counties have implied 

authority to employ agents and servants. 20 C.J.S. 896, 

Counties, Section 101(l): p. 1014, Sect. 180. 

In gano v. Palo Pinto Countv, 71 Tex. 99, 8 S.W. 634, 

636 (1888). the Supreme Court of Texas recognized that it is 

the duty of the Coanniaaioners Court ". . . to select themselves 

such agents as may be necessary to assist them in the discharge 

of their functions. . . .'I 

Again, in md 61 Abbott v. m, 162 Tax. 617, 

350 S.W.Zd 333 (1961), the Supreme Court was faced with the 

question of whether the Commiaaioner8 Court had the implied 

authority to contract for certain sorviwa. Noting tha constitutional and statutory duties and functions of the Coaaaiaaionera Court, the Court made the following holding: 

-3240- 
. . 

Honorable Joe Hesweber. page 3 (M-678) 

"Admittedly the Commiaaionera Court is not 

expressly clothed with constitutional or statutory 

authority to contract for the services detailed ?.I? 

this agreement, but we think that authority is implied from the powers that have been expressly 

granted to and the duties imposed upon this body 

by law. ” (at p. 334). 

In view of 'the foregoing, we must hold that the Harria 

County Commiaaionera' Court has the implied power to hire an 

"executive assistant" employee to assist the commisaionera in 

the discharge of their functions and duties. Howaver, this 

position is not an office and the holder thereof may not in any 

measure usurp the functions and duties of the members of the 

Commiasionera' Court as public officers. It necessarily follows 

that the commissioners court also has the authority to pay the 

employee a salary and provide him with the equipment reasonably 

necessary to perform the functions for which'the employee or 

assistant was hired. This would include an automobile, provided it,waa deeme necessary to accomplish the task of the 

position. 

Answering your next question, we note that budgetr 

for counties over 225,000 population are controlled'by Article 

1666a, Vernon's Civil Statutes, which reads, in part, as follows: 

II . . . Upon final approval of the budget 

by the Commissioners Court, a copy of such budget 

as approved shall be filed with the County Auditor, 

the Clerk of the Court, and the State Auditor, and 

no expenditures of the funds of the county shall 

thereafter be made except in strict compliance with 

said budget. . . ." 

This article further allows for the transfer of surplus budgeted funds, during a year, to another fund, as long 

as the total budget is not inaeaaed. 

Article 1666a further provides in part that: 

II . . . The amount set aside in any budget 

for any purchase order or requisition, contract, 

special purpose, or salary and labor account shall 

-3241- 
. . 

Honorable Joe Reoweber. p89e 4 (M-678) 

not be available for alloc8tion for ahv other 

purnoae unless an unexmnded balance remains ia 

the account after full discharqe of the obliaat&: 

or unless the reauiaition. contract, or alloaatiq 

has Men cancelled in writinq bv the Coaania8ionu8 

c 

In answer to your budget question, we have concluded 

that the salary for the new aaaiatant can be provided for if 

the proviaiona for re-allocation of budgeted funda, emphe8ised 

above, are strictly complied with, and the total budget is not 

increased. Your 8econd question is thus anmwered in tha affirmative. 

Your second question raise8 the gueation of whothar 

specific notice to the public is required in the abwe m8ttum. 

Routine matter8 of bu8ine88, 8uch a8 the hiring of an'employee, 

may ba considered oven though not mentioned in the notice ,of 

meeting required by Article 6252-17, Vernon'8 Civil'Statute8, 

as amended by Senate Bill 26, Chapter 227, 618t.Leqi8lature; 

The statute expres8ly excepts frcm its application thole deliberations wherein consideration is given to the appointment 

or employment of an employee. If such could be accompli8hed in 

a "closed meeting" it would not appear that the name would necessarily have to be included in the notice to the public, which 

may ba excluded from that type of proceeding. 

Cur answer to your first question include8 tha answer 

to your third question. 

SUMMARX 

The Commissioners Court is authorized to 

hire an "executive aaaiatant" to the four cornmiaaionera, with proper limitationa of power, 

and to provide such employee with variou8 item8 

of eguipnent and an automobile nema8ary for the 

performance of hi8 duties. The expen8e of the 

position, including salary, may be met by reallocation of budgeted funds if the methods fa 

-3242- 
Honorable Joe Reawbu, pSqe 5 (M-678) 

re-allocation set aut in Article 1666a, Vernon'8 

Civil Statutes, are strictly adhered to. It 18 

not necerrary to ?OSt notic of the hiring Of 8r. 

employee prior to camni88ionera caurt meeting. 

Prepared by Melvin E. Corley 

Aaaiatant Attorney Qeneral 

APPROVED: 

OPINION CCMMIlYBB 

Kerns Taylor, Chairman 

W. E. Allen, Co-Ch8irmen 

Gordon Cans 

'Bob Plowers 

John Banks 

Roland Allen 

MEADE F. GRIFFIN 

Staff Legal ASSiStant 

ALFRED WALKER 

Executive ASSiStant 

NOLAWHITE 

First ASSiStSnt 

-3243-