Untitled Texas Attorney General Opinion, GA-0831

El Paso County established the El Paso County Ethics Commission and adopted the El Paso County Code of Ethics under Chapter 161 Local Government Code.
Chapter 161 applies only to certain counties; applicability here depends on whether El Paso County is within the scope (population, border location, pre-2009 ethics board).
Question presented: whether the District Attorney of the 34th Judicial District and his/her staff are subject to the County Ethics Code.
Statutory definition of 'county public servant' includes attorneys when participating in the performance of a county governmental function.
Non-attorney DA staff are not attorneys and thus are not 'county public servants' under Chapter 161; they are not subject to the code.
Decision: DA and DA attorneys are subject to the ethics code when participating in county governmental functions; non-attorney staff are not subject to the code.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether the DA falls under Chapter 161 as a county public servant	Bernal contends subsection 161.002(8)(C) covers attorneys.	Hodge construes to apply only when county functions are involved.	Yes; attorneys subject when performing county functions.

Hernandez v. Ebrom, 289 S.W.3d 316 (Tex. 2009) (statutory interpretation governing intent and plain language)
State v. Shumake, 199 S.W.3d 279 (Tex. 2006) (interpretation of statutory terms in context)
Entergy Gulf States, Inc. v. Summers, 282 S.W.3d 433 (Tex. 2009) (plain meaning and context; avoid absurd results)
Fleming Foods of Tex., Inc. v. Rylander, 6 S.W.3d 278 (Tex. 1999) (construction when language yields absurd results)
City of Waco v. Kelley, 309 S.W.3d 536 (Tex. 2010) (statutory interpretation in context)