The opinion
February 18, lg50
Bon; James C; Martin opinion Ho; V-1006.
County Attorney
meoes county Rer p ;E;l$b'Uty of S. B.
COPDUS f&.PiSti. Texas * g.,
- authorizing
inkrkases ln the pay of pge-
ainct, oounty, and district
officers, to the,compeasa-
tibn of members of the Juve-
Dear Sir% tile Board.
Your request'for en opinion is aa followst
'A motion was made in the Oommlssi~ners~
Court of Rneces ~County to raise the salaries
of the members of the Juvenile Board the reg-
ular 25s authorleed by Senate Bill # 92 for
all preoinct, county and district offices;
This motion was tabled to,deteraine the va-
lidity of granting the increase, all elected
offioials In Rueces County being granted this
increase in July, 1949;
"In Section 1 of Senate Bill #92 the
Camlssitierst Court of each county was an-
thoplzed to Increase the oompensation of the
precinct, gounty and distriot offices in an
additional amount not to exceemprotided
that if the salaries of the Cosmhisioners
Court were raised, al1 other offices would
have to be raised In proportion.
"Article 5139, VCS, provides that in
couuties of betveen 70,000 and 100,000, fin
vhlch.Rueces County falls, a Juvenile Board
would be formed oonsistlng of Distriot Judg-
%s and County Judge'; Under this stat,ute each
of these judges In Rueaes County are paid
$1200;00 per year, in addition to ~the salary
as judge, for serving on said Board.
"It is mg opi&Lon that the members of
the Juvenile Board should not be allowed the
a&j
Hon. James C. MaStin, page 2 (V-1006)
25% increase authorieed in Senate Bill #92 be-
cause they are not called office&under Arti-
cle 5139, WS, but merely men&em. This opin-
ion is substantiated b the case of Janea v.
Alexander, 59 SW 26 10150, which decided that
membership on a Juvenile Board was not ‘public
office’ so as to prevent receiving at the same
time, a salary as a member of the board and as
a judge;”
Article 5139, V.C .S i, as amended by S; B; 426,
Acts 51st Leg., R.S. 1949, chi 366, pi 699, provldes in
part:
“In any county having a population of
more than seventy thousand .(70,000) inhabit-
ants and less than one hundred thousand (lOO,-
000) inhabitants acoordlng to the last preced-
ing Federal Census, the Judges of ths: several
Mstriat and Criminal District Courts of such
cotmty~ together with the County Judge of such
county, are hereby constituted a Javtile
Board for such oouuty; The members oomposing
such Juvenile Board in such c,ouM=y shall eaoh
be allowed additional colnjpensation of not.
less than Six Hundred ($600;00) Dollars per
annum, nor more than One Thousand Puo Hundred
($1,200;00) Dollars, p6r annum, which shall be
paid in twelve (12) e&al installments out of
the Qeneral Fund of such county, such addi-
tional compensation to be fixed by the Commis-
sloners Court of such county;”
In the case of Jones vi Alexander, 122 Tex; 328,
59 SX2d 1080 (1933), the court ln’holdlng provisions,
identical with those above quoted, constitutional stated
$hat membershl~ on juvenile board did not constitute a
public office in vIolatl.on of Section 40 of Article XVI
of the Constitution of Texas prohibiting the same person
from holding OP exercising at the 883118time more,than one
civil office of emolument. The court held that the Act
merely Imposed additional duties on the d&strict judges
rather than creating an additional office.
Section 1 of Article 3912g, K0.S; (S; B; 92,
Acts slat Leg;, R.S. 1949, oh; 320, p; 601) provides%
“Section 1; The Codssioners Court in
each county of this State is hereby autho~ieed,
.
Han; James C; Martin, page 3 (V-1006)
when in their judgment the financial condition
of the county and the needs of the officer ,jw-
tify the increase, to enter an &der inereas-
lng the compensation of the precinct, county
and district offfoers; or either of them, in
an additional amount not to exceed twenty-five
(25s) per cent of the sum allowed under the
law for the fiscal yea* of 1948, whether paid
on fee or salary basis; provided, however, the
members of the Commissioners Court may not
raise the salaries of any of such Commission-
ers Court under the terms of this Act without
ralslng the salary of the remaining county of-
ficials in like proportion;"
The provisions of Article 3912g, c;CiSi, are
llmited to "the precinct, county and district officeran
and"the deputies, assistants end clerks of any district,
oounty or preainct officer;" Letter opinion to Han; IL
Fi ICl.eke, County Attorney, Lee County, dated January 14,
1950;
We agree with the conclusioe reached by you in
the brief subsdtted with your request. SFnce the mem-
bers of Juvenile Boards are not public officers as such,
neither are they district- or county officers within the
meaning of Article 39126. Therefore the compensation of
said members as such may not be Increased under the pro-
vlsl.ons of Article 3912g.
An additional reason sustains the above result;
Senate Bill 92 was passed May 31, 1949, and beceme ef-
fective June 6, 1949, while Senate Bill 426 va8 passed
June 9, 1949 and became effective June 13, 1949. Since
Senate Bill 426 is a specific statute governing the sal-
aries of the members of the Juvenile Board and was pass-
ed and became effective stibsequent to Senate Bill 92 (a
eneral law), it would control over the rotisions~of
iiienate Bill 2; Townsend vi Te~ell,,~l~,"4~~,~~~6
SX'2d 1063 ?1929> Canales V* Lannlil , l ,
2i4’s ;w ;2a 451 (v&8> .
Sa M M AR Y
The compensation of members of Juvenile
Boards as such may not be incr$ased under the
provisions of Article 3912g, V.C.Si, since
membership on a Juvenile Board does not con-
stitute a public office as such. Jones vi Al-
exander, 126 Texi 328, 59 S;W;2d 1680 (1933) .
Hon. Japles Ci Martin, page 4 (WOO6)
The salaries of the members of the Juve-
nile Board are governed by the~~PrOVlslOns of
Senate Bill 426, Acts 51st Leg., RiS. 1949,
ch; 366, p; 699, being a specific statute.
a later statute
169, 2
Yours very truly,
PRICE D4RIEL
APPRO?XDr Attorney General
J; C; Davis, Jr. ,A&-.
county Affairs Mvlsion
Charles Di Mathews
Executive Assistant ' Assistant
JRtmurbh