The district judges have requested that the commissioners court remodel the new justice center to provide them with an adequate jury room. (The two jury rooms that were built in this new facility are not hardly big enough to fit twelve jurors into; one is too narrow to hold a table and the jurors, but all that is another story).

The item was on the agenda for commissioners court this morning; the recently elected county judge announced that he was appointing a committee to study the problem and come up with a solution. One of the other commissioners questioned whether the judge could appoint this committee without approval from the commissioners court. That is my question here.

I cannot find anything statutory. However, because the judge is only a coequal member of the commissioners court and the county can only act through the court as a body, I question whether he can appoint this type of committee without a vote of the court.

Any thoughts or ideas on this are appreciated.

Seems to me that the presiding officer of a board or commission has the right to create a task force or other committee with a specific job such as to do research into a matter and report back. I know when I have chaired boards I was presumed to have and used that power.

The County Judge is an equal member of the Commissioners Court for voting purposes; however, he is the presiding officer. I believe that the power to appoint a "fact finding" committee that will report back to the full body is inherent in the position. The commissioners appointed to the committee could not bind the Court, nor should they promise their vote one way or another. However, their input with regard to funding and such could be quite valuable.

Lisa L. Peterson
Nolan County Attorney

Only in County government and more so only in Commissioners Court could a debate occur over the authority of a non-binding committee appointment. I suspect that the inherent powers of the County Judge stops with the need for two more votes. However, if only one Commissioner voiced objection then perhaps the rest have acquiesced (always a good word to use with Commissioners.)

If you go to Roberts Rules for finality on this issue, you will be more confused.

So did the reluctant Commissioner object to his non-appointment? I don't see why the County Judge could not name his very own committee. Other commissioners could create their own committees. That way with five committees each consisting of only one Commissioners Court member, the Open Meetings Law would be preserved from violation.

(1) can the County Judge appoint a committee (no commissioners, just citizens) to advise the Commissioners Court without at least naming that committee on the record in the Commissioners meeting?

(2) can the Commissioners enact rules of procedure requiring any ad hoc or standing advisory committee be approved by the Court as a whole?

My answers (probably wrong):

(1) The county judge can appoint a group as the kazoo band to the commissioners court, but the court doesn't have to acknowledge or accept input from them. They can, just as they can listen to any group of citizens who want to comment on something (as long as it's on the agenda). But they may get to listen to the wailing and gnashing of teeth from other members of the community who weren't invited to the CJ's party. It's really more of a political problem than a legal one.

(2) The commissioners court can adopt controlling procedural rules for the conduct of its business that are consistent with law, so long as it does so by vote of a quorum reflected in the minutes. There's no law I know of that precludes the court from soliciting advice, either from individuals or groups (if they can pay professionals for advice a-la Guynes, they probably can accept it from amateurs for free). If they choose to formalize the process for selecting those groups, I think they need only comply with the Open Meetings Act and any procedural rules they previously have adopted to do so.