Could a South Carolina fire district chair also work as a city firefighter?

Plain-English summary

Pickens County's attorney asked whether the chair of the Crosswell Fire District could also work full time as a City of Easley firefighter. In February 2001, the AG said the constitutional dual office ban did not by itself prohibit the combination: the Constitution exempted members of organized fire departments from that rule.

The opinion identified a separate common law problem. If the district exercised any supervisory power over the city firefighter through personnel, equipment, pay, or funding, the person would occupy both sides of a master-servant relationship and could not hold both roles. The letter did not determine from the facts whether that supervisory relationship existed in this arrangement.

Currency note

This opinion was issued in 2001. 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.

Historical summary

Fire district commissioners

The AG said an officeholder's common law conflict could remain even when an exception removed a constitutional dual office obstacle. Its conclusion depended on whether the district could supervise the firefighter.

City firefighters

The firefighter role was within the Constitution's fire department exception for dual office purposes. That did not settle the separate master-servant question arising from the district's relationship to the city fire service.

Common questions

Was a city firefighter automatically a second prohibited public office?
A: No. The AG said the constitutional exception for fire department members meant these roles did not violate the dual office clause.

Could the fire district chair still face a conflict?
A: Yes. The opinion said simultaneous service would violate common law if the district supervised the firefighter through personnel, equipment, compensation, or funding.

Did the AG decide that this district actually supervised the firefighter?
A: No. It stated the common law conclusion conditionally, based on whether such supervisory power existed.

Background and statutory framework

The letter distinguished Article XVII's fire department exception from the common law master-servant conflict rule. It applied prior AG opinions about district commissioners who also served as firefighters to the described contract between Crosswell and Easley.

Citations and references

• The AG concluded that if the district acted “in any supervisory capacity over the city fire fighters,” the individual could not occupy both roles.

Official title

Concerning whether a dual office holding situation exists if a chairman of the Crosswell Fire District in Pickens County simultaneously serves as a full-time fire fighter for the City of Easley.

Requester

G. Edward Welmaker, Esquire

Source

• Landing page: https://www.scag.gov/opinions/opinions-archive/february-28-2001/
• Original PDF: https://www.scag.gov/wp-content/uploads/2013/11/01feb-28-welmaker.pdf

Original opinion text

The State of South Carolina

OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL
CHARLIE CONDON
ATTOR.'.'"EY GE1'1'ERAL

Februal)' 28, 2001
\

L

G. Edward Welmaker, Esquire
Pickens County Attorney
Post Office Box 899
Pickens, South Carolina 29671

~

Dear Mr. W clmaker:
By your letter of February 26, 2001, you have requested an opinion of this Office concerning whether an individual serving as chairman of the Crosswell Fire District in Pickens County may also serve as a full.time fire fighter for the City of Easley. You inform us that the Crosswell Fire District has a contract with the City of Easley for all of its fire protection. Article XVII, Section IA of the South Carolina Constitution provides that "no person may hold two offices of honor or profit at the same tin1e ... ,"with exceptions specified for an officer in the militia, member of a lawfully and regularly organized fire department, constable, or a notary public. For this provision to be contravened, a person concurrently must hold two public offices which have duties involving an exercise of some portion of the sovereign power of the State. See Sanders v. Belue, 78 S.C. 171, 58 S.E. 762 (1907). Other relevant considerations are whether statutes, or other such authority, establish the position, prescribe its tenure, duties or salary, or require qualifications or an oath for the position. See State v Crenshaw, 274 S.C. 475, 266 S.E.2d 61 (1980). As stated in the preceding paragraph, the Constitution exempts from dual office holding those persons who are members of a lawfully and regularly organized fire department. Thus, by operation of the Constitution, the position as fire fighter for the City of Easley would not be considered an office for dual office holding purposes. See OPS. ATIT. GEN. 1Wle 13, 1996; Jan.19, 1994. Although service in these two positions would not contravene the dual office holding prohibitions of the State Constitution, the relationship between the two positions is problematic because the chairman of the fire district and the fire fighter are both master and servant. The masterservant relationship has its basis in the common law rather than statutory law and concerns the inevitable conflict of interest that may arise when one office has supervisory power over the other.

i
/..

REMBD~T c.,DBNmi_!J~ING

)
/)./)

,t/

i

/1

~"'!'"

I~

-

,,,

•

Posr OFFICE Box 11549

•

COLU:.ABIA, S.C. 29211-1549

•

Ti!LEPHONB: 803-734-3970

•

FACSlMllE

803-253-6283

Mr. Welmaker
February 28, 2001
Page 2 of2
In at least two prior opinions of this Office we have discussed the master-servant relationship as it relates to a member of a fire district commission who also wishes to serve as a fire-fighter. See OPS. ATTY. GEN. Oct. 9, 1995; Jan. 19, 1994 (enclosed for your review). In these opinions we concluded that the service in both positions would violate common law and public poHcy. The reasoning applies to your question, as well. If the Crosswell Fire District, which provides fire protection to Easley, acts in any supervisory capacity over the city fire fighters, by the provision of personnel, equipment, compensation, funding, etc., a master-servant relationship exists and the individual could not occupy both positions. This letter is an informal opinion only. It has been written by a designated Assistant Attorney General and represents the position of the undersigned attorney as to the specific question asked. It has not, however, been personally scrutinized by th~ Attorney General nor officially published in the
•
manner of a formal opinion.

With kind regards, I remain
Very truly yours,

Susa1mah Cole
Assistant Attomey General