. 

Honorable Toti A, Craven 

.County Auditor 

McLennan County 

Waco, Texas 

Dear Sir: n Opinion No. O-5184 ( .. 

7 :.R.q:, Amendment of the’county 

budget. 

Your letter’ of April 3, 1943, requesting the opinton of this dep.artment on certain questions stated therein with reference to an amendment 

of the county budget reads as follows: 

., :~~ 

,: : 

“Article 689a-9 provides, among other things, that a, 

county budget shall cover all proposed expenditures of the 

county government for the year being budgeted and shall also 

contain a complete financial statement of the county and shall 

include a statement of the fun~ds available from all sources 

during the year budgeted. In compiling any budget covering a 

future period of time, it is. of course, necessary to make estimates both as to probable expenditures and revenues. Using 

. 

past expertences as a guide, usually a county budget can be reasonably, accurately compiled. The amount of tax collections 

is not difficult to estimate correctly but fees of office charged 

for services rendered the publiccan not always be as accurately 

estimated. The demands for expenditures out of the Officers 

Salary Fund of a county are contingent, to a degree, .on the volume of services rendered the public as reflected in the fee revenues, Article 689a-11 outlines the conditions under which a 

county budget may be amended. Would the collection of fees for 

the benefit of the Officers Salary Fund in excess of the amount 

estimated under the budget, become available for expenditures 

beyond those’antic.ipated in the budget but necessary in connection with the efficient operation of the departments in the Officers Salary Fund Group ? 
Honorable Tom A~. Craven, Page 2, O-5184 

?.War conditions have brought about a number of changes 

in our business economy-- some of which might have been anticipated several months ago and others which reasonably diligent 

thought might have not revealed. Necessary living costs in some 

areas have ad,vanced more than might have been expected. This 

is particularly true in counties such as McLennan County having 

large increases in population due to war activities, Competition 

affects labor and salary schedules. This does not necessarily 

mean direct competition with governmental and defense agencies 

but as the surplus man-power has been cons.umed ~by industry or 

otherwise, operations outside those defined as essential to the 

war effort must compete for the services of those yet available 

for such operations. Because of these conditions, the departmental officials of McLennan County contend they will be unable 

to efficiently carry out the duties and functions of their respective departments during the remainder of 194.3 without an increase 

in salary allotments above those set out in the 1943 county budget. 

,. 

.- _.., 

“Would the contention of these departmental officials, if sub- ‘. .. 

stantiated by them, justify an emergency amendment to the county 

budget under the provisions for making such amendments as outlined in article 689a- 117 * 

On April 13, 1943~. we wrote you requesting certain additional information relative to your request and in compliance with our request for additional information on April 21, 1943, you wrote us as follows: 

“In reply. to your letter of April 13th asking for additional 

information relative to opinion request o-51.84, I shall make a few 

general observations followed by more specific information. 

“Supplement.ing the information given in paragraph 1 of my 

letter of. April 3rd, I wish to add that not only this year but frequently 

we have situations arise under which conditions have changed sfnce’ 

budget making time which require an expansion of operations in a 

given office beyond what was anticipated, or could have been anticipated, at the time the budget was made, and, in many instances, the 

expansion of ope,rations brings in additional revenues. In most of 

these instances, the regular working personnel as anticipated under 

the budget is unable to efficiently handle the work under the expanded 
Honorable Tom A. Craven, Page 3, O-5184 

operation~.,;As.anexa.mple, .of,~one of these situations, reference 

might be made to the .fact that some twelve ,months ago the demand 

for birth certificates from the County Clerk multipliedseveral 

,. 

times,: In McLennan County this, additional work required two extra 

. . dep~uties, to handle,tbe situation efficiently. The increased ,work produced revenues not anticipated under the budget.. Another situation 

.would ,be a large: increase in the number of poll taxes collected., : 

The fees received by a county for collecting poll-taxesdo not _ 

amount to enough to cover the expense of such collections and subsequent handling. of the poll lists. These examples are, submitted 

mshow that we.are sometimes .confronted with a propos~ition of, 

spending Morse fork deputy~ hire than was anticipated under the budget 

but in spending that additional,amount, .increased revenues. inthe, 

same-,,off~ice are produced. While on the other hand, we frequently 

have an expanded operation which does-not produce sufficie~nt additional revenues to, cover the ,additional. co& of the expansion. Again, 

we might have a: s.urplus of increased~ re~venues in one. offices of the 

_.. Officers’.Salary Group and a-deficit caused by a necessary e.xp.anded 

program in another. office ~of’the same-group.’ When application is 

,made’.by ‘a:department head for additional deputies to <meet some 

unexpected operation,. the commissioners’ cour.t, almot invariably, 

calls attention to the fact that the expenditure would overdraw the 

~budget., :. ::.:i-. ~.:? :: : ~. 

“Although under the application we wish to make at’the present 

~. ..time,,.the.two questions asked in my letter of April 3rd are closely 

r.elated,. fundamentally,...they are separate questions.. .: ~.. ~. 

~.;. ,. 

“AS in most defense areas, war,. conditions Ihave,;brought about I.,: 

conditions which I think are well known to you and which exist now 

in McLennan County under which it .is.difficult, if not .almost impossible; to retain clerical personnel at the salary schedules of,budget .~. :.. 

making time, July 1942. I am not so sure but what the commissionersi 

court could have, by diligent effort, .foreseen this condition, but the 

fact remains that provision was not made bind the budget,for 1,943 to 

.-meet such increased requirements: This question is whether ornot 

a. commissioners*; court could legally~ amend. a budget under such conditions to meet.,increas.ed deputy hire and justify such amendment 

under the emergency provision as outlined in article 689A-ll ? 
Honorable Tom A. Craven, Page 4. O-5184 

“The present salaries paid county officials ar~e set at 

the maximum allowed by law and we, of course, wish $0 make 

no application of any theory that might be set out in your opip 

ion to the compensation of the,se officials. We are familiar 

with the maximum compensation that can.be paid deputies of 

county officials and know that under n,o circumstances could 

. ‘salaries to such deputies be raised legally beyond such maximums., ,Incidentally, however, the salaries of deputies of 

McLennan County officials, at present, are substantially below 

the maximums allowe,d under the statutes.. 

~-one question is, would increased revenues beyond that 

anticipated in the budge~t justify the use of dlscretlon by a corn.- 

miss.ioners*.cotirt ln allowing increased expenditures beyond 

that anticipated in. the budget to pay deputy hire, within the maxi: 

mums allowed under the statutes necessary to efficiently operate 

.a county department, ?,ssuming the official head of the county 

office 1s able to convince the court that his department cannot 

operate efficiently without ‘such increased ~expenditures ? The 

. . other ,question 1.8 whethe.r or not when a county is unable to 

.“~ retain experienced personnel at the salary schedule set up in 

a bu.dget. would an emergency amendment to the budget be justified under the provisions of article 689A-1~1 7” 

Article 689a-9, Vernon’s Annotated Civil Statutes, provides 

for the preparation of the county budget. 

A.rticle 689a-10, Vernon’s Annotated Civil Statutes, prov1de.s 

that when the budg.et f,or the county has been prepared and completed a 

copy of the same shall be filed,with.the clerk of the county court, available for the inspec,tion of any taxpayer. 

Article 689a.T11. Ve,rnon’s Annotated Civtl Statutes, reads 

in part as follows: 

YThe comm~issioners’ court in each county shall each year 

provide for a public hearing on the county budget. . . which hearing shall take place on some date t,o be named by the.commissioners*,court subsequent to August 15 and prior to the levy of taxes 

by said commissioners~” court. Public notice shall be given that 

2.. 
‘; J. .’ “, 

Honorable Tom A,. Craven, Page 5, O-5184 

on &id date of hearing the budget as prepared by the county judge 

will be considered by the commissioners’ court. Said notice shall 

name the hour, the date and the place where the hearing shall be 

conducted, any taxpayer of such county shall have the right to be 

. 

present and participate in said hearing, At the conclusion of the 

hearing, the budget as prepared by the county judge shall be acted 

upon by the commissioners’ court. The court shall have authority 

to m~ake such changes in the budget as in their judgment the law 

warrants and the interest of the taxpayers demand. When the budget has been finally approved by the commissioners’ court the bud’ 

get as approved by the court shall be filed with the clerk of the 

county court, ,ar+d taxes levied, only in accordance therewith, and 

no expenditure of the funds of the county shall thereafter be made except 

in strirt compliance with the budget as adopted by the court. Except that emergency expenditures, and cas,es of gr.ave public necessity, to meet unusual and unforese,en conditions which could not, by 

reasonable diligent?.ho.Fght and attention have been included in the 

_ .-. 

original budget, may from time to tjme be authorized by the court 

;: as amendment to the original,budget. In all cases where such amendment to the original budget is made, a copy of the order of the court 

amending the budget s,hall be filed with the clerk of the county court 

.I 

and attached to the budget originally adopted.” 

,Article 689a-20, Vernon’s Annotated Civil Statutes, provides asfollows: 

.: 

YNothing contained in this Act shall be construed as preclud- i 

ing the Legislature from making changes in the budget for State 

purposes or prevent the County Commissioners’ Court from making 

changes in the budget for county purposes or prevent the governing 

body from making changes in th& budget for school purposes; and 

the duties required by virtue of this Act bf State, County, City and 

Schbol Office.rs or Representatives shall be performed f~or the compensation now provided by law to be paid said officers, rkspectively.” 

In construing the foregoing provision (Article 689a-20) this de?;. - 

partme& has repeatedly held ‘we are of the opinion, upon considering the act ’ 

as a whole, that Section 20, quoted above, does not authorize the commissioners* court to make changes so as to increase the amount of the budget after 
Honorable Tom 4. Craven, Page 6, O-5184 

,’ 

its final adoption except in cases of emergency. . .~. We do not think it 

authorizes the commissionerss court to ~increase the budget after its 

adoption. To so hold, would destroy the very purpose of the Act..” (See 

our opinion No. O-,1053 and an opinion written by Honorable Joe J. Alsup, 

Assistant Attorney General dated October 3, 1935.) 

c ,.~ “. 

It ins ,stated in our opin& Nb.. O-3146: 

:. 

,, 

.~ ,:..; . 

‘The only way the county budget may ,be amended’after 

its adoption is in strict com~pliance; with the above statutory 

provis.ion. This department has consistently ruled that whether 

a .situation. is one which ,can be cla.ssified as an emergency under 

the, budget laws so as to perm,it the commissioners’ cqurt to 

:. amend the, budget, is a question of fact primarily to be passed 

upon~by,the~commissioners’ court. See Opinion O-07, o-1022, 

an~d O-1728, Annual Opinion Reports of the Attorney General for 

1939, pages 2; 274 and 455, respectively. 

. ..~“Y’ . 

,,.?Tl-+e Quoted statutory~ provision provides that no expendi- 

. ,1’ ture of the funds of the county shall be made after the budget is 

finally apprqyed and filed withlthe clerks except in strict compliante w.,ith,the,adopted budget. An exception to the foregoing is 

made, however. as to ‘emergency expenditures.“” 

As we understand your letters, as,quoted above, you,desire our 

opinion on the questions presented in the last paragraph of your second letter. 

Under the facts stated and in view of the foregoing authorities, 

you are advised that it is the opinion of this department that the c~ommissioners’ court of the county is unauthorized to make any expenditures, of the funds 

of the county, except in strict~ compliance with the budget, except emergency 

expenditures in case of grave public necessity, to meet unusual and unforeseen 

conditions which could not, by reasonable diligent thought and attention, have 

been included in the original budget. Suc.h emergency expenditures must be 

made in compliance with the proper amendment to the budget by the commissioners’ court. Whether or not the situations presente,d in your inquiry are 

such as can be classified as a grave public necessity requiring emergency 

expenditures under the budget law, so,a,s to permit the commissioners’ court 
Honorable Tom A. Craven, Page 7, O-5184 

to amend the budget, is a question of faci primarily to be passed upon by 

the commisstoners” court. 

Yours very truly 

ATTORNEYGENERALOFTEXAS 

AW:db 

Ardell Williams 

Assistant 

ATTORNEYGENERALdFTEXAS 

_. 

-- 

. -