2004-08-23 Regular Meeting, Public Hearing, and Workshop Meeting

Browse Search

The commission is required to conduct a hearing whenever a "fire fighter or police officer wants to appeal to the commission from an action for which an appeal or review is provided by" chapter 143. /d. § 143.010(a). The commission must "conduct the hearing fairly and impartially ... and shall render a just and fair decision." /d. § 143.010(g). "Each concurring commission member" is directed to "sign a decision issued by the commission." /d. § 143.011(a). In sum, we believe it is clear that a municipal civil service commissioner holds. a public office. A commission member serves for a fixed term, adjudicates rights and is subject to removal only for cause.. Accordingly,it may fairly be said that a commissioner exercises his or her duties "largely independently of the control of others." Aldine, 280 S.W.20 at 583. As a result, a civil service commissioner holds a public office and may not be reappointed. to -a second consecutive term as -civil service commissioner. You also ask whether the reappointment of a commissioner constitutes a'criminal offense. See Request Letter, supra note 1, at 1. Section 143.006(h) of the Local Government Code provides: The chief executive of a municipality or a municipal official commits an offense if the person knowingly or intentionally refuses to implement this chapter or attempts to obstruct the enforcement of this chapter. An offense under this subsection is a misdemeanor punishable by a fine of not less than $100 or more than $200. Tex..Loc. Gov't Code Ann. § 143.006(h) (Vernon 1999). It is not clear whether the reappointment of a civil service commissioner to a second consecutive term would, constitute a "refus[al] to implement" chapter 143 or an attempt to "obstruct the enforcement" of that chapter. /d: § 143.006(h). In addition, section 143.006(h) states that an offense occurs only if the person acts "knowingly or intentionally." /d. The existence of some confusion on the issue under consideration, as evidenced by your request to us, indicates that even if a reappointment could be characterized as a refusal to implement or an attempt to obstruct; it might be difficult to demonstrate the existence of intent.. In any event, whether to proceed in such a case.is a matter squarely within prosecutorial discretion.