Could a Dillon County police chief also serve on the county school board?

Plain-English summary

In 2011, the South Carolina Attorney General concluded that one person could not simultaneously serve as a municipal police chief in Dillon County and a member of the Dillon County School Board. Both positions counted as public offices for the state's constitutional dual office holding rule.

The AG followed earlier opinions treating police chiefs and school-board members as officers. It also cited a South Carolina Supreme Court decision recognizing a police chief as a public officer. Because the two positions each involved public office holding, the proposed combination contravened the constitutional prohibition.

Currency note

This opinion was issued in 2011. 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

Could a municipal police chief sit on the Dillon County School Board at the same time? A: The AG said no. In the positions described, both roles were public offices under the constitutional rule.

Why did the chief's position count as a public office?
A: The opinion relied on earlier AG opinions and a South Carolina Supreme Court decision treating a police chief as a public officer.

Did school-board membership count too?
A: Yes. The AG followed its prior opinions classifying county school-board seats as public offices.

Background and statutory framework

A state representative asked whether the two roles could be held together. The AG applied Article XVII, Section lA of the South Carolina Constitution, which barred simultaneous holding of two offices of honor or profit, subject to specified exceptions. Its analysis used the established test of whether a position carried continuing duties involving an exercise of state sovereign power.

Citations and references

The opinion quotes Article XVII, Section lA and discusses Sanders v. Belue, State v. Crenshaw, and Edge v. Town of Cayce in defining public office. It also follows earlier AG opinions addressing the two positions.

Official title

Regarding dual office holding. Specifically, whether a person may hold the office of Chief of Police of a municipality in Dillon County and also serve as a member of the Dillon County School Board.

Requester

The Honorable Jackie E. Hayes, SC House of Representatives

Source

• Landing page: https://www.scag.gov/opinions/opinions-archive/may-19-2011/
• Original PDF: https://www.scag.gov/wp-content/uploads/2011/05/hayes-j-e-os-9258-5-19-11-dual-office-holding.pdf

Original opinion text

ALAN W IL.50N
AITORNEY G ENERAL

May 19, 2011

The Honorable Jackie E. Hayes
South Carolina House of Representatives, District 55
333-D Blatt Building
Columbia, South Carolina 29211
Dear Representative Hayes:
We received your letter requesting an opinion of this Office concerning dual office holding. You asked whether a person may hold the office of Chief of Police of a municipality in Dillon County and also serve as a member of the Dillon County School Board. This Office has addressed the question of whether police chiefs and members of a school board are considered officers for purposes of dual office holding in several prior opinions. This opinion is based on those prior opinions and relevant law.

Law/Analysis
Article XVII, Section lA 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, member of a lawfully and regularly organized fire department, constable, or notary public. For this provision to be contravened, a person concurrently must hold two offices which have duties involving an exercise of some portion of the 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., 58 S.E. 762, 763. 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. State v. Crenshaw, 274 S.C. 475, 266 S.E.2d 61 (1980). This Office has advised on many occasions that a police officer or police chief would be considered an office holder for dual office holding purposes. See, Ops. S.C. Attv. Gen., October 14, 2010; February 4, 1994; November 2, 1994; September 8, 1992. Moreover, in Edge v. Town of Cayce, 187 S.C. 171, 197 S.E. 216 (1938), the South Carolina Supreme Court concluded that a chief of police was a public officer. Further, we have also determined numerous times that members of county school boards hold offices within the meaning of the dual office holding

REMBERT c. Dmoos Bun.DING • POST OFFICE Box 11549 • COLUMBIA, SC 29211-1549 • Tul.EPHONE 803-734-3970 • FACSIMILE 803-253-6283

The Honorable Jackie E. Hayes
Page2
May 19, 2011
provision. See, Ops. S.C. Atty. Gen., September 3, 2010; December 12, 2007; June 16, 2006; January 29, 1997; July 31, 1992; September 24, 1982. Moreover, in a prior opinion of this Office dated September 8, 1992, we opined that simultaneous service as a police officer and a member of a school board would most probably be considered dual office holding. Conclusion

Consistent with our prior opinions, it is the opinion of this Office that simultaneously holding the positions of a police chief and a member of the Dillon County School Board would constitute dual office holding in contravention of Article XVII, Section lA of the South Carolina Constitution.

Assistant Attorney General

REVIEWED AND APPROVED BY:

~ -~

Robert D. Cook
Deputy Attorney General