Case Information
*1 OFFICE OFTHEAlTORNEY GENERALOFTEXAS
AUSTIN
Honorable B.F. Howell c0imy Audit02 I !>
upton county Rankin, Texoe ,:. .~~. '1 --> \
Opinion No. o-Iwe‘----... '\ We ars In reoe
Ion upon the following
might be conrstrued a oommlsaioner of CO the (LB- 000raing ar from whioh he re- ler The saseesad valuetlon ior your depertment be BO kind 88 to ren- *Will der us an opi.nion on above mentioned Pacts in order to olearlfy the payment of ealariee to Commlf3sionere in this county."
Honorsblr B. F. Efarrll, Psga 2
It is our opinion that drtlclas 2350, 2350 (1) and 2350 (2) or Vernon's Annotated Civil Statutes provide iamwar to your qurrtion. They road ar follows:
Artiolr 2350:
"In Countlam having tha followi~ aw~rr~rd valuationa, rrrpaotivol~, aa shorn by the total aarrmed raluatlonr ot all properties certified by the oounty awo8wr and approrrd by the Com- misalonrrta Court, for oounty purpoeon, forth. year, from tlw to time, the County
prwiour Commiseionara of ruch oountlrr rhall each reoaltr annual nalarirlr not to rroaad the anwunt8 harrin ~paolfird, mid ralarlrrr to ba paid in equal month- ly inetallmantr, at lrasb one-half, and not ox- oseding thrrr-rourthr, out of tbs Road and Bridge Fund and thg rameindrr out Of the Oansral Fund Of the county; asid asresmd rsluatione and salari8r applloablr thereto bring as follows:
Salarfro to be paid eaoh Comalsrlonrr P ,000,001 and 1ers than . . . l . .$1400.00
10,000,000 not to rxorad . 10,000,001 and lass than . . . . . .~1600.00
$13,000,000 not to arcrod . $13,000,001 and laae than $g!o,oco,ooo not to exorod . . . . . . .9laoo.o0 $20,000,001 and lorr than
~p,ooo,ooo not to exo~od . . . . . . .42250.00 $30,000,001 and 1088 than . l . . . .82400.00
~78,000,000 not to rxo8a . 78,000,OOl and lrar than 30,000,000 not to l xorrd. . . . . . .$3400.00 L #130,000,001 and 10~8 than l . . . l .$~3600.00 $150,000,000 and to axcood. . . . . . .$4200.00 ~150,000,001 end over . . . "In oountlra having arsraaod osl.uatlnn of 1e11r than Four ~lllian Fivr Runbred Thouesnd Dollara ($4,500,000) rsah oornmisrioner shall receive Blrr *3 Iionorabls B. F. EUw811, Pago 3
Dollar8 ($5) per day for rash day rsnrd OS oom- mismlonrr, end a llka rmount whan aotlng as ex- offioio rosd 8upmAntandsnt in him Commlsslon~r*8 Preolnot, providing in no srant rhall hi8 tots1 oompansatlon sxoaad Nlnr Hundrrd Dollar8 ($900) in sny on8 year.
"In oountlss h8vlng 8s8ssssd rslustlon OS more than Fonr !Xllllon yirs Kundrrd Thourand and Ona Dollars ((6,500 001) and lrss thsn Six 3llllon Doll8rr (#6,000,000~ reoh Comlsrlonrr 8hall rs- arirs Firs Dollars ($5) psr day ror esoh day rrnsd as oomulsslonsr, and 8 like amount whsbm acting as 4x-ofilolo rood 8uprrintsndsnt in his Comslrrionsr*s Prrolnot. Provided In no stmt shall his tot81 ma- pmsstlon rxamd Tw@lvr Hundred Dollars ($l200) in any on8 ysmr. w
Artlola 2350 (1):
*Ths 8alary of sash aounty oommlsslonsr snd ~ssoh County Jtld@I a8y bs paid wholly Out of th. County Cbnaral l?und or, at the option of the Cm- misslonm8 Court, lpay ba paid out of the County fkinrral Fund and out of ths Road snd Rrid68 Fund in the following proportions1 County Jud@s not to exeord ssvsnty-rlvs par osnt (75s) or 8uoh rslarlrs may be paid out of thr Road and Brfdgs Fand, snd the rsmmindsr out of the General md oi tha County, and oaoh County C~mmlsslonor~s l el8ry my, 8t the dlaorstlon of the Commlssionors Court, all br paid out of the Road and Bridge ?undi protldnd thl8 Ssotlon shall not apply sxospt in ooantls8 where oonstltutional limit or twentpflrr usnts (2511) on thr One Kundrod Dol.lrrs ($100) ~lr~larird iOr (Ion- oral purpo~os.~
Artlals 2350 (2):
*The Commlsslon8r8 Court at Its first regular meeting rach year shall, by order lhtly mada and l ntsrstl upon the illnotes of ram Court, ilx the salarlas of the County Commission8r8 SCW euch year, within ths limits as prorldsd for in this Aot.” *4 Honorable B.F. Howell, Page 4
It will be noted that Article 2330 provides that where oounties have omtsin aswesed valuations, the County Conmissioners of these counties shall eaoh receive o salary not to exceed a fixed maximum sum de- pendent upon the amount of the assssaed valuations. The crignirioant prorision for the purpose 0s this opin- ion ia the phraas, *ior tha previous ymBr.* The langu- ags of the statute is oleer and srplioit to the effeot that the annuel ma~ii~~ SolaPis Of oonuniselonera In OOuntimS arfeoted are to be based on the total eai~sassd valuations of omnty properties for the year prowding the payment of the salaries.
Taking the total assessed valuation of a oounty for the par 1939 as falling between ths figures #10,000,68'and lesa than $13,000,000, it follow8 from the obvickm app~ioatlon of Article 2380 that this valus- tion oould,ohly be the basis for the 1940 salaries to be paid oomml6sioners in that oounty, a6 such total am- sssssd valuation in 1939 would be that of ths ysar pm- Yious to 1940. In this ease, tha 1940 salary would be an amount not to exceed )1600.00. The 1939 salary would not haste this figure as a ceEllng unless the aemesssd valuation of the county for 19W wa8 betwesn $10,000.01 amI $13,000,000.
Artiolo 2330 (2) etatea that the Commlesionerr* aourt at Its first regular meeting aauh year shall fir the salaries of the County Commissioners *for such year, within the limita as proridsd for in this Aot.*
vim limits= referred to in Arti 2330 (21 are plainly set out in ArtiOle 2330. If the total as6sss- eb valuation of a oounty for the preoeding year felln within any of the monstery bra&eta astablfehed in the latter article, then the salary sum for that partloular bracrket automatleally becomes the maxiplum amount oounty co~znissioners may reoeivs a8 annual oompensetlon ths subsequent year.
The County Conzmissloners* Court is only au- thori'zced to base the salaries of the current year upon the total aosessad valuation of the preceding year. *5 Honorable B. B. BowelI., Page 3
Artiole ES50 (1.) 'indiaate the county fund6 from which the salarlea o$ the County Commlseeiomrs may be paid and the proportions in whioh euoh monier mey be used.
In enctwer to your speoiflo question, it i,a our opinion that Artiule 2330, Vernon's Annotated Civil Statutes, ornnot be conetrued to mean that the salary of a County Oanmiseloner could be fixed by the County Commlssionars* Court according to the total aaeeaeed valuation of the oounty for the year for whloh the Ccm- m.iselomr'reoei~es the oompensation but on the other hand, the statute plainly and unemb $uouslp provide8 i
that the salary of a County UommFesionsr, as set out In it, be paid on the bade of the tote1 aseeeeed valuation of the county for the year previous to that year for whioh the salary 18 to be paid to the County rJom~~lssion- em,
Trusting that we have fully answered your in- quiry, we are
Your8 very truly DSlOb
Enolomneo