DAN MORALES 

.ATTORNEY GENERAL 

QBffice of tfie 2Utornep @eneral 

&ate of Ill;exa$ 

July 29,1996 

Honorable Bobert Hill Trapp 

Criminal District Attorney 

San Jacinto County 

P.O. Box 430 

Coldspring. Tacas 7733 1 

Opinion No. DM-405 

Re: whetherawuntysalatyglievance 

wmmittee may consider an aggrieved 

elected county officer% complaint after the 

start of the county’s &al year (RQ-826) 

Dear Mr. Trapp: 

You explsin that the San Jacinto County Commissioners Court, on 

Decemba21.1994. approved a srdary increase of $1,000 for the 1995 &al year for 

elected county officials. The 1995 fiscal year began on January 1. 1995. The 

commissioners court tmanimoudy approved the 1995 budget on January 9,1995. 

Your office determined that the commissioners court had not no&d the public of 

the proposed increase in salaries of elected county officers in accordance with section 

152.013(b) ofthe Local Govermnent Code. You therefore advised the county judge that, 

as you state, “the S1.000 salary increase for elected officials was invalid and that the 

elected officials could only be paid at the ssJary figure set for the previous fiscal year.“t 

Your office further advised the county judge that elected county 05cials, now denied the 

proposed salary increase, may, pursmmt to section 152.016 of the Local Govemment 

Code, request a hearing before the salary grievance committee. 

You indicate that thirteen of eighteen elected county 05cers in fact availed 

themselves of the grievance procedure provided in section 152.016 of the Local 

Govemment Code. On March 20,1995. the tU nine-member salary grievance committee 

unanimously voted to grant the $1,000 salmy increase to the aggrieved elected officials, 

effective at the earliest date allowable by law. See Local Gov’t Code § 152.016(c). You 

ask whether the recommended salary increase may take effect prior to the commencement 

ofthel996tiscalyear,onJanuary1,1996. 

Your question assumes the salary grievance committee properly met after the 

wmmencement of the new tlscrd year. We do not believe, however, that the process 

outlined in the Local Oovemment Code authorizes the salary grievance committee to meet 
Honorable Robert Hill Trapp - Page 2 (DM-405) 

after the wmmencement of the fiscal year. We conclude, therefore, that the salary 

&VMW committee’s actions are void. We will begin our analysis by briefly summarizing 

the wunty budget process. 

Chapter 111, subchapter A of the Local Government Code provides the only 

method available for budget preparation in a county with a population less than 225,000 

people.2 Compare Local Gov’t Code $ 111.001 (providing budget preparation method 

for county with population of 225,000 or less) wifh id. 4 111.061 (providing alternative 

budget preparation method for county with population higher than 125,000). During the 

seventh month of each fiscal year, section I1 1.003 requires the county judge, with the 

assistance of the county auditor or county clerk, to prepare a budget covering “all 

proposed expenditures of the county government for the succeeding fiscal year.” The 

budget also must estimate revenues the wunty expects to receive in the succeedmg year. 

Id. $ 111.004(b), (c). 

When the county judge has prepared the proposed budget, he or she must file a 

wpy of it with the wunty clerk, who will make the wpy available for inspection “by any 

taxpayer.” Id. 5 111.006. After the i%enth day of the “month next following the month 

in which the budget was prepared,” but before the county wmmissioners court levies 

taxes, the wmmissioners court must hold a public hearing on the proposed budget. Id. 

5 111.007(b). “At the conclusion of the public hearing, the wmmissioners wurt shall take 

action on the proposed budget.” Id. $ 111.008(a). 

When the wmmissioners court has finally approved the budget, it must file the 

approved budget with the wunty clerk. Id. 5 111.009. Once the budget is approved, the 

wmmissioners wurt may levy taxes and expend county funds only in accordance with the 

budget, except “in a case of grave public necessity to meet an unusual and unforeseen 

condition that could not have been included in the original budget through the use of 

reasonably diligent thought and attention.” Id. $111.010. The county wmmissioners 

wurt may, however, amend the budget “for county purposes.” Id. 8 111 .Ol 1, 

Placed within this framework for the county’s genera) budgeting process is a more 

specific procedure by which a county commissioners court sets the amount of 

compensation, expenses, and allowances each county officer and employee wholly paid 

from county timds will receive during the following fiscal year. Section 152.013 of the 

Local Government Code applies specifically to the salaries, expenses, and other 

allowances budgeted for elected county or precinct officers: 

(a) Each year the wmmissioners wutt shall set the salary, 

expenses, and other allowances of elected wunty or precinct officers. 

%n Jacinto County, the county about which you ask, has a population of spprcximateb 16,372 

people. See Bumau of the Census, U.S. Dep’t of Cbmma, 1990 Census of popllation: General 

Characteristica: Texas 3 (1992). 
Honorable Robert Hill Trapp - Page 3 (DM-405) 

The commissioners wurt shah set the items at a regular meeting of 

the court during the regular budget hearing and adoption 

proceedmgs. 

. 

(c) Before filing the annual budget with the county clerk, the 

wmmissioners court shall give written notice to each elected county 

and precinct officer of the officer’s salary and personal expenses to 

be included in the budget. 

Any elected county or precinct officer who is dissatisfied with the amount of salary 

or personal expenses the wunty wmmissioners court proposes to pay the 05cer during 

the succeeding fiscal year may seek redress through the county’s salary grievance 

wmmittee, which is composed either of a mixture of public servants and private citizens 

or wholly of private citizens. See id. $152.014(a). Section 152.016 provides as follows: 

(a) An elected wunty or precinct officer who is aggrieved by 

the setting of the officer’s salary or personal expenses may request a 

hearing before the salary grievance wmmittee. The request must: 

(1) be in writing; 

(2) be delivered to the committee chairman within five days 

after the date the officer receives notice of the salary or personal 

expenses; and 

(3) state the desired change in salary or persona) expenses. 

(b) The wmmittee shall hold a public hearing within 10 days 

after the date the request is received. 

(c) lf, after the hearing, sii or more of the members vote to 

recommend an increase in the officer’s salary or personal expenses, 

the wmmittee shah submit its recommendation to the wmmissioners 

court in writing. If six to eight members vote to recommend the 

increase, the commissioners court shall consider the rewmmendation 

at its next meeting. Ifnine members vote to recommend the incresse 

and sign the recommendation, the wmmissioners court shall include 

the increase in the budget before the budget is filed and the increase 

takes effect in the next budget year. 

(d) The committee’s authority is limited to the consideration of 

increases in the salaries or persona) expenses of county and precinct 

officers. The committee may not set policy of the county or add new 

items to a proposed county budget. 

When pieced together, chapters 111, subchapter A and 152, subchapter B of the 

Local Government Code provide the chronology of a county’s budgeting process. We 
Honorable Robert Hill Trapp - Page 4 (DM-405) 

will summarize the chronology of events pertinent to the issue you raise. Fit, once the 

wmmitioners court has received the proposed budget from the county judge, the 

commissioners court sets the salary, expenses, and other allowances of elected county 

officers “at a regular meeting of the court during the regular budget hearing and adoption 

proceedings.” Id. 3 152.013(a). 

Second, after the commissioners court has adopted the budget, but before filing it 

with the county clerk, the commissioners wurt notifies each elected county officer in 

writing of the salary and personal expenses the officer is budgeted to receive in the 

succeeding fiscal year. Id. 9 152.013(c); see also id. 5 111.009 (requiring county 

commissioners wurt to file approved budget with county clerk). Third, within five days 

of receiving notice, an aggrieved county officer must deliver to the salary committee chair 

a request for a hearing before the salary grievance committee. Id. $152.016(a). Fourth, 

the salary grievance committee, within ten days of receiving the request for a hearing, 

must conduct a public hearing. Id. 3 152.016(b). 

If, as in the situation about which you inquire? the vote to recommend an increase 

in the officer’s salary is unanimous, the wmmissioners wurt must include the rewmmendation in the succeeding year’s budget “before the budget is filed.” Id.; see uho id. 

$111.009 (requiring county commissioners wurt to file approved budget with county 

clerk). If the grievance committee’s vote is unanimous, the increase in salary or personal 

expenses “takes effect in the next budget year.“’ Id. 5 152.016(c). 

Thus, a county’s salary grievance committee may operate only in a brief, specified 

window of time, after the county wmmissioners court adopts a budget for the succeeding 

fiscal year and prior to the time the county commissioners wurt files the linal budget with 

the county clerk. The statutes do not contemplate that a grievance committee will operate 

at any time other than during the county’s regular budget process. According to the 

information you provided, however, the salary grievance committee in San Jacinto County 

heard a grievance after the beginning of the county’s fiscal year. The wmmittee was 

unauthorized to consider a grievance at that time. Its unanimous vote to increase San 

Jacinto elected county officers’ salaries by $1,000 is void. See Attorney General Opinion 

JM-27 (1983) at 2; Letter OpinionNo. 95-18 (1995) at 2. 

%ccansc you sitnation did not im’olw a recommendation approved by six to eight salary 

grievance committee memhm, we wed not comidcr whether such a temmmudstion, upon a timble 

vocebytheannmissionmcourt,mustkincludedinthebudgetwhenitisfil~totakceffsclinthe 

.mwecding hlldget year. 

41ndccd, previous opinions of this office have concluded that a commissioners court may modi@ 

an ekctcd coonty ofkial’s caky only during the regular bud@ hearing. See, e.g., Attomey General 

Opioions JM-839 (1988) at 6, H-643 (1975) at 2 (cmmtming statutory pdeceswr to Local Goxmmaxt 

Code section 152.013), H-l I (1973) at 3 (came). 
Honorable Robert Hill Trapp - Page 5 (DM-405) 

This result differs from our interpretation of the statutory predecessor to section 

152.016 ofthe Lucal Government Code, V.T.C.S. article 391215 section 2(d), in Attorney 

General Opinion MW-516 (1982). In 1982 V.T.C.S. article 3912k, section 2(d), provided 

that “[a] written recommendation signed by all nine committee members and delivered to 

the commissioners court becomes effective on the first day of the month following its 

delivery to the commissioners court.” See Act of May 29, 1983,6&h Leg., RS., ch. 336, 

5 1, 1983 Tex. Gen. Laws 1741, 1742 (proposing amendment to article 391235 section 

2(d)). Furthermore, no statute required the salary grievance committee to work in a 

specified period of time during the regular county budget process. 

Attorney General Opinion MW-5 16 considered a situation in which the 

commissioners court failed to give proper notice of a budget that proposed to increase the 

salaries of elected county officers, effective at the star of the next fiscal year, 

January 1, 1982. See Attorney General Opinion W-516 (1982) at 1-2. The district 

attorney advised the commissioners court that it bad not complied with the law and that 

the salary increases were, therefore, invalid. Id. All elected wunty officials appealed to 

the salary grievance committee, which awarded increased salaries for the year, effective 

March 1, 1981. Id. Thus, the officers apparently began receiving the recommended 

increases in the middle of the county’s fiscal year. See id. 

In 1983 the legislature amended V.T.C.S. article 391215 providing, among other 

things, a requirement that the commissioners court “prior to filing . the annual budget 

with the clerk of the county court” notify each elected county officer of his or her salary 

and personal expenses to be included in the succeeding year’s budget. See Act of 

May29, 1983, 68th Leg., R.S., ch. 336, 5 1, 1983 Tex. Gen. Laws 1741, 1742. 

Additionally, the legislature established the time line now found in section 152.016 of the 

Local Government Code: within five days of receiving notice of the budgeted salary and 

personal expenses, an aggrieved elected county officer must request a hearing before the 

salary grievance commhtee; within ten days after receiving the request for hearing, the 

salary grievance committee must conduct the hearing. See id. The legislature also added 

the language setting the effective date of a recommendation signed by nine members of the 

salary grievance committee and providing that such a recommendation becomes effective 

“in the next budget year.” See id. 3 1, at 1743. 

Testimony before the House Committee on County A!%irs indicated that, by 

chmging the effective date of a recommendation of nine memh of the salary grievance 

committee, the proposed amendment would improve the timing, relative to tbe county 

budgeting process, for implementing the recommendation. See Hearings on H.B. 804, 

68th Leg. (Apr. 20, 1983) (testimony of Janet Coplin, representing Dallas County 

Commissioners Court) (tape available from House Video/Audio Services Oflice) (stating 

that amendment regarding time salary grievance committee could meet would coincide 

better with commissioners court’s budget scheduling). witnesses understood tbe 

proposed amendment to require an elected county officer who wished to 6le a grievane 

to do so before the county commissioners court finalizes its budget for the upcoming fiscal 
Honorable Robert Hill Trapp - Page 6 (DM-405) 

year. Id. (testimony of C.C. Smith, Van Zandt County Commissioner); see id. (testimony 

of Janet Cophn, representing Dallas County Commissioners Court). 

In our opinion, the legislature amended the statutory predecessor to section 

152.016(c) of the Local Govemment Code in 1983 to preclude a result such as that 

described in Attorney General Opiion MW-5 16, in which a county is faced with increased 

expenses in the middle of the budget year. See aLw Hearings on H.B. 804 Before the 

County Atfairs Committee, 68th Leg. (Apr. 20, 1983) (testimony of Sam Hilhard, Van 

Zandt County Judge) (tape available from House Video/Audio Services Office) (stating 

that, under current system, it is “very ditlicult to operate and keep a balanced budget” 

because salary grievance commission may change budget at any point during year). 

To the extent Attorney General Opinion MW-516 is inconsistent with this opinion, 

it has been overruled by the 1983 amendments to V.T.C.S. article 391235 wdiied in part 

asLocal Government Code sections 152.013 and 152.016. 
Honorable Robert Hill Trapp - Page 7 (DM-405) 

SUMMARY 

Under section 152.016 of the Local Government Code, an 

aggrieved elected wunty officer may request a hearing before the 

county’s salary grievance committee within five days of receiving 

notice f?om the wunty commissioners court of the officer’s salary 

and personal expenses for the upcoming budget year. The salary 

grievance committee must meet to consider the grievance within ten 

days atler receiving the request for a hearing. A salary grievance 

committee may not meet a&r the county has filed with the county 

clerk the final budget for the succeeding fiscal year. The salary 

grievance committee certainly may not meet atIer the start of the 

fiscal year. Any actions taken by a salary grievance committee at an 

unauthorized meeting are void. 

To the extent Attorney’ General Opinion MW-516 (1982) is 

inconsistent with this opinion, it has been overruled by the 1983 

amendments to V.T.C.S. article 3912k, codified in part as Local 

Government Code sections 152.013 and 152.016. 

DAN MORALES 

Attorney General of Texas 

JORGE VEGA 

Fii Assistsnt Attorney General 

SARAH J. SHIRLEY 

Chair, Opinion Committee 

Prepared by Kymberly K. Oltrogge 

Assistant Attorney General