Untitled Texas Attorney General Opinion ( 2015 )


Menu:
  •                                              KEN PAXTON
    ATTORNEY GENERAL OF TEXAS
    August 10, 2015
    The Honorable Anna D. Hord                                 Opinion No. KP-0032
    Hockley County Attorney
    802 Houston, Suite 211                                     Re: Whether an independent school district
    Levelland, Texas 79336                                     police chief may simultaneously serve as a
    constable in the precinct in which the school
    district is located (RQ-0012-KP)
    Dear Ms. Hord:
    You tell us that the school district chief of police has submitted his name to the county
    commissioners court for appointment to a vacant constable position for the precinct that serves the
    school district. 1 Concerned that the two positions might be incompatible, you ask whether the
    chief of police of an independent school district may simultaneously hold the office of constable
    in the precinct in which the school district is located. Request Letter at 1.
    Incompatibility of office derives from the Texas Constitution and the common law. Article
    XVI, section 40 of the Texas Constitution provides that "[n]o person shall hold or exercise at the
    same time, more than one civil office of emolument." TEX. CONST. art. XVI, § 40. This prohibition
    applies if both positions are civil offices that are entitled to an emolument. State ex rel. Hill v.
    Pirtle, 
    887 S.W.2d 921
    , 931 (Tex. Crim. App. 1994) (orig. proceeding). An emolument is "a.
    pecuniary profit, gain, or advantage." 
    Id. We presume
    that both positions about which you ask
    are compensated, so we consider the nature of the two positions.
    For purposes of article XVI, section 40, a "civil office" is a "public office." See Tilley v.
    Rogers, 
    405 S.W.2d 220
    , 224 (Tex. Civ . App.-Beaumont 1966, writ refd n.r.e.) ("We see no
    difference in the meaning of public office and civil office."); see also Tex. Att'y Gen. Op. Nos.
    GA-0214 (2004) at 2, JM-480 (1986) at 1, MW-415 (1981) at 1-2. A public officer is one upon
    whom "any sovereign function of the government" has been conferred "to be exercised by him for
    the benefit of the public largely independent of the control of others." Aldine Indep. Sch. Dist. v.
    Standley, 
    280 S.W.2d 578
    , 583 (Tex. 1955). The A/dine analysis involves a determination of
    whether the actions and decisions of the officer are subject to the control of others, and whether
    the employment may be terminated at will by a superior body: It cannot be said that an officer
    1
    See Letter from Honorable Anna D. Hord, Hockley Cnty. Att'y, to Honorable Ken Paxton, Tex. Att'y Gen.
    at I (Feb. 9, 2015), https://texasattomeygeneral.gov/opinion/requests-for-opinion-rqs ("Request Letter").
    The Honorable Anna D. Hord - Page 2                    (KP-0032)
    subject to such control exercises authority "largely independent of the control of others." 
    Id. at 583;
    see also Tex. Att'y Gen. Op. Nos. GA-0688 (2009) at 2, GA-0393 (2006) at 3.
    Relevant here, opinions from this office have already addressed the nature of both of the
    positions about which you ask. We have consistently determined that the office of constable is a
    public office within the scope of article XVI, section 40. See Tex. Att'y Gen. Op. Nos. GA-0540
    (2007) at 2, GA-0402 (2006) at 1. Moreover, we have previously determined that the office of a
    school district police chief is not a public office to which article XVI, section 40 applies because
    the school district police chief answers to, and is subject to the control of, the school board and the
    superintendent. See Tex. Att'y Gen. Op. No. GA-0688 (2009) at 2; TEX. Eouc. CODE ANN.
    § 37.081(a), (e), (f) (West Supp. 2014) (detailing that the scope of a peace officer's duties are
    established by the independent school district's board of trustees and providing that that chief of
    police "shall be accountable to the superintendent and shall report to the superintendent"); see also
    Tex. Att'y Gen. Op. No. DM-212 (1993) at 2, 5. Accordingly, a school district police chief is not
    prohibited by the constitution from simultaneously holding the office of constable in the precinct
    in which the school district is located.
    The common-law doctrine of incompatibility has three aspects: self-appointment, self-
    employment, and conflicting loyalties. Tex. Att'y Gen. Op. No. GA-1083 (2014) at 2. Because
    neither office involved here hires, employs, or supervises the other, the dispositive issue involves
    the conflicting-loyalties aspect. See Tex. Att'y Gen. Op. No. GA-0688 (2009) at 1. Yet, as with
    article XVI, section 40, conflicting-loyalties incompatibility applies only when the two positions
    are both officers under the Aldine analysis. See Tex. Att'y Gen. Op. No. GA-0393 (2006) at 3.
    The fact that a school district chief of police is not a public officer warrants the same conclusion
    with respect to conflicting-loyalties incompatibility: The school district police chief is not
    prohibited from simultaneously serving as a constable in the school district's precinct. 2
    2As   a practical matter, the commissioners court, in appointing this individual to fill the constable vacancy,
    must determine whether the duties the individual must perform as a school district's police chief will impact his or
    her ability to adequately serve as constable. See generally Tex. Att'y Gen. Op. No. GA-0569 (2007) at 3.
    The Honorable Anna D. Hord - Page 3         (KP-0032)
    SUMMARY
    Neither the Texas Constitution nor the common-law doctrine
    of incompatibility prohibits an independent school district police
    chief from simultaneously serving as a constable in the precinct in
    which the school district is located.
    Very truly yours,
    KEN PAXTON
    Attorney General of Texas
    CHARLES E. ROY
    First Assistant Attorney General
    BRANTLEY STARR
    Deputy Attorney General for Legal Counsel
    VIRGINIA K. HOELSCHER
    Chair, Opinion Committee
    CHARLOTTE M. HARPER
    Assistant Attorney General, Opinion Committee
    

Document Info

Docket Number: KP-0032

Judges: Ken Paxton

Filed Date: 7/2/2015

Precedential Status: Precedential

Modified Date: 2/10/2017