HomeMy WebLinkAbout610132.tiffTHE STATE OF COLORADO
DEPARTMENT OF LAW
OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL
Denver 2
CIRCULAR NO. 5 - SERIES OF/1,961/
from the COLORADO TAX COMMISSION
Hon. 0. F. Adams
District Attorney
Third Judicial District
Trinidad, Colorado
RE: Salaries of Deputies and Assistants
Dear Sir:
You, together with the County Attorney, have requested an opinion
as to the following facts:
FACTS: The Board of County Commissioners in approving the salaries
fixed for deputies and assistants by the appointing officials has
reduced the salary of the deputies or assistants without approval of the
appointing official.
QUESTION: Can the Board of County Commissioners reduce salaries
without the consent of the appointing official?
ANSWER: No.
ANALYSIS: Salaries of deputies and assistants are fixed by the
appointing officials with the approval of the Board of County Commissioners.
The statute so providing is 56-2-10, '53 CRS which states:
"The County clerks, county treasurers, county assessors and
county superintendents of schools of the respective counties
may appoint such deputies, assistants, and employees as shall
be necessary at such compensation, payable monthly, as shall
be fixed by said officers with the approval of the hoards of
county commissioners of their respective counties."
The Colorado Supreme Court has interpreted the provision in two cases.
In Commissioners of Routt County v. Morning, 72 Colo. 200, the Board and
the County Judge agreed on the salary of a clerical assistant. At the
end of the year, without approval of the Judge, the salary of the assistant
was reduced by the Board.
An action was brought for the regular salary, and the Court in holding
for the plaintiff said:
"This clearly gives to the county judge authority to fix the
salary of his assistant subject only to the approval of the
board of county commissioners. They have no independent
authority in the matter. When the salary has been fixed
by the judge and approved by the board, it is the established
salary until the two parties which established it agree to
change it." (Emphasis supplied)
A somewhat similar ruling was made by the Court in Watson v.
Commissioners of Lincoln County, 80 Colo. 14. There the Court found
that payment of vouchers constituted approval by the Board of the
salary fixed by the appointing official.
From these authorities it appears that neither the appointing
official nor the Board of County Commissioners has a superior right to
determine salaries of assistants. The official and. the Board must agree
and if they do not, the salary originally fixed for the position applies.
(COPY)
Very truly yours,
(Signed) DUKE W. DUNBAR
Attorney General
p,4 OGO9'
"c
Hello