Could a South Carolina school board member also chair a regional council of governments?

Plain-English summary

A regional council of governments asked whether a person could be both its chair and an elected county school board member. The 2000 informal opinion concluded that this combination did not violate South Carolina's constitutional restriction on holding two offices of honor or profit. Earlier AG opinions treated a school board seat as an office, so the letter examined the regional council role and pointed to constitutional exemptions for council members who were elected or appointed public officials or government employees.

The AG cited the general office-holding test, including whether a position exercises sovereign power and whether law fixes its duties, tenure or qualifications. Its final answer rested on the regional-council exceptions it identified, rather than a broad declaration that a school board seat was not an office.

Currency note

This opinion was issued in 2000. Subsequent statutory amendments, court decisions, or later
AG opinions may have changed the analysis. Treat this page as historical context, not current
legal advice. Verify current law before relying on any specific rule, deadline, or remedy
mentioned here.

Common questions

Q: Did the AG treat an elected school board member as a public officer?
A: Yes. It said prior opinions had reached that conclusion for dual-office analysis.

Q: Why did concurrent service still pass the constitutional test?
A: The AG identified constitutional provisions exempting regional council members who also held elected or appointed government positions or worked for government.

Q: Did the opinion approve every combination of two public positions?
A: No. It addressed the school board and regional council combination and relied on the exceptions for that council role.

Background and statutory framework

The letter quoted the constitution's general dual-office prohibition, described the court's sovereign-power test and noted other office indicators. It then cited provisions concerning regional councils of governments and concluded that the described concurrent service was allowed.

Citations and references

• Sanders v. Belue, on exercise of sovereign power; State v. Crenshaw, on other features of a public office.
• South Carolina Constitution, Article VII, § 15 and Article VIII, § 13(C), the regional-council exceptions identified by the letter.

Official title

Concerning whether a dual office holding situation exists if an individual serves simultaneously as both Chairman of a Regional Council of Governments and as an elected member of a county school board.

Requester

James T. Darby, Jr., Executive Director, SLRCOG

Source

• Landing page: https://www.scag.gov/opinions/opinions-archive/august-29-2000/
• Original PDF: https://www.scag.gov/wp-content/uploads/2013/11/00aug29darby.pdf

Original opinion text

The State of South Carolina

OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL
CHARLES MOLONY CONDON
ATTORNEY GENERAL

August 29, 2000

James T. Darby, Jr.
Executive Director, SLRCOG
Post Office Drawer 1837
Sumter, South Carolina 29151

I
( •,;

Re:

Informal Opinion

Dear Mr. Darby:
Thank you for your recent letter inquiring whether a dual office holding situation would exist if an individual were to serve simultaneously as both Chairman of a Regional Council of Governments and as an elected member of a county school board. For the reasons discussed below, it is my opinion that concurrent service in these positions would not violate the State Constitution's prohibition against dual office holding. Article XVII, Section IA of the South Carolina Constitution, provides that "no person may hold two offices of honor or profit at the same time ... ,"with exceptions specified for an officer in the militia, a member of a lawfully and regularly organized fire department, constable, or a notary public. As concluded by Attorney General Daniel McLeod in an opinion dated April 26, 1977, "[t]o determine whether a position is an office or not depends upon a number of circumstances and is not subject to any precise formula." The South Carolina Supreme Court, though, has held that for this provision to be contravened, a person concurrently must hold two offices which have duties involving an exercise ofsomeportionofthe sovereign power of the State. Sanders v. Belue, 78 S.C. 171, 58 S.E. 762 ( 1907). "One who is charged by law with duties involving an exercise of some part of the sovereign power, either small or great, in the performance of which the public is concerned, and which are continuing and not occasional or intermittent, is a public officer." Id., 78 S.C. at 174. Other relevant considerations, as identified by the Court, are whether statutes, or other authority, establish the position, prescribe its tenure, duties or salary, or require qualifications or an oath for the position. State v. Crenshaw, 274 S.C. 475, 266 S.E.2d 61 (1980). Previous opinions of this Office have concluded that one who would serve on a county school board would hold an office for dual office holding purposes. See, e.g., Ops. Af!l'.. Gen. dated June 21, 1999; May 7, 1998 and October 14, 1994. Therefore, it must be determined whether serving as an appointed member of a Regional Council of Governments would likewise constitute an office .

.11

REMBERT

c. DENNIS BUILDING

I~ ~A tl~:l t:/. /fl71

•

POST OFFICE Box 11549

•

COLUMBIA,

s.c. 29211-1549

•

TELEPHONE:

803-734-3970

•

FACSIMILE: 803-253-6283

Mr. Darby

Page2
August 29, 2000
Enclosed for your review are copies ofS.C. Const. Article VII,§ 15 and Article VIII,§ 13(C) which exempt members of Regional Councils of Governments, who are elected or appointed officials or employees of government, from the dual office holding prohibitions of the State Constitution. Accordingly, it is my opinion that an individual may serve simultaneously as both Chairman of a Regional Council of Governments and as an elected member of a county school board without violating the State Constitution's prohibition against dual office holding. I trust this information is responsive to your inquiry and that you will not hesitate to contact me if I can be of additional assistance. This letter is an informal opinion only. It has been written by a designated Deputy Attorney General and represents the position of the undersigned attorney as to the specific questions asked. It has not been personally scrutinized by the Attorney General nor officially published in the manner of a formal opinion. With kind regards, I am Sincerely yours,

/~Wd/u.zeb C. Williams, III
Deputy Attorney General
ZCW/an