Skip to main content

Incompatibility Of Offices

Summaries

KP-0172
Ken Paxton

Whether certain department meetings constitute budget preparation contrary to Local Government Code chapter 111 is fact specific and beyond purview of attorney general opinion|Common-law doctrine of incompatibility does not prohibit simultaneous employment as county employee and county budget officer

KP-0228
Ken Paxton

Overlapping boundaries of taxing entities in Jim Hogg County - person may not simultaneously serve on both entities|Jim Hogg County Judge may not simultaneously serve as Jim Hogg County Independent School District trustee|Person may not serve as Jim Hogg County Judge while simultaneously serving as Jim Hogg County Independent School District trustee|Jim Hogg County Independent School District trustee may not simultaneously serve as Jim Hogg County Judge

GA-1075
Greg Abbott

Maverick County Hospital District, Board member of, not prohibited by Texas Constitution article XVI, section 40(a) from serving the county in other official capacities|Maverick County Hospital District, board member of, whether simultaneous service as a commissioner of a housing authority is prohibited by the conflicting loyalties aspect of the common-law doctrine of incompatibility where the two entities have contracted with each other, depends on whether holding both offices is detrimental to the public interest or whether the performance of the duties of one interferes with the performance of those of the other. Such a determination is a factual inquiry that cannot be resolved through the opinion process.|Maverick County Hospital District, board member of, not prohibited by the conflicting loyalties aspect of the common-law doctrine of incompatibility from simultaneously serving as the Maverick County treasurer|Maverick County Hospital District, Board member of, not prohibited by Texas Constitution article XVI, section 40(a), from serving the county in other official capacities

KP-0265
Ken Paxton

Article XVI, section 40 of the Texas Constitution, which prohibits dual office holding in certain circumstances, does not prevent the City of Ranger chief of police from simultaneously serving as city manager.

The common-law doctrine of self-employment incompatibility prohibits one person from holding an office and an employment that the office supervises. Language in the Ranger city charter suggests that the city manager may supervise the chief of police. To the extent that is the case, an individual may not serve in the two separate positions of city manager and chief of police.

If the city commission exercised its authority to combine the roles of city manager and chief of police, the city commission could employ a single 1.ndividual to perform both roles without raising concerns about self-employment incompatibility.