The following text was automatically extracted from the image on this page using optical character recognition software:
The Honorable CarlE. Lewis - Page 4 (L096-100)
Although the amendments to the civil service provisions succeeded the 1973 en- actment of Government Code section 41.105, we do not believe the legislature manifestly intended that the civil service provisions prevail over Government Code section 41.105. We find nothing in the language of the 1989 amendment of Local Government Code sec- tion 158.001(2) evidencing such a manifest intent, nor do we find anything in the legislative history of the amendment." We conclude, therefore, that Government Code section 41.105, the more specific provision, prevails over the inconsistent provisions in Local Govemnent Code chapter 158. Accordingly, the county civil service commission may not by rule include personnel of the county attorney's office in the civil service sys- tenm. SUMMARY Government Code section 41.105, which deems all personnel of a county attorney's office terminable at will, prevails over Local Government Code chapter 158, which provides for a civil service system for county employees generally. Consequently, a county civil service commission may not adopt a rule including within the county's civil service system employees or officers of the county at- torney's office. Yours very truly, K belIy Oltrogge Assistant Attorney General Opinion Committee 2 mFrom the legislative history of the 1989 amendments to Local Govenment Code sections 158.001(2) and 158.009(a), we deduce that the legislature was reacting to a 1988 district court decision that deputy constables are not employees for purposes of the civil service provisions because they are authorized to perform governmental functions requiring the exercise of discretion See House Comm. on State Affairs, Bill Analysis, S.B. 1006, 71st Leg., R.S. (1989). The legislation thus was intended to "ensure that constables are included in the definition of a county civil service employee." Id.