Did a Columbia city manager hold a second public office by supervising public safety departments?

Plain-English summary

In October 2003, South Carolina's Attorney General said Columbia's newly appointed city manager did not hold a second public office merely because he continued to supervise police, fire, emergency services, and emergency communications. On the facts supplied, these functions were additional duties of the city manager role.

The opinion followed an August 2003 opinion about the same person while he served as interim city manager and director of public safety. Both answers turned on the city's treatment of the public-safety work as part of one position.

Currency note

This opinion was issued in 2003. 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

City managers and municipal officials

The AG described direct supervision of the police chief, fire chief, and other department directors as city-manager duties in the arrangement presented. Continuing to serve in a law-enforcement accreditation role was also described as an additional duty.

Public safety administrators

The office applied its earlier view that assigning more responsibilities to an existing office did not itself create a second office. Its conclusion depended on the information Columbia supplied about this manager's role.

Common questions

Did supervising both police and fire make this city manager a dual office holder?
The AG said no; the supervision was part of the city manager's duties on these facts.

Did the answer change when the interim manager became city manager?
No. The AG said its earlier reasoning still applied after the appointment.

What about his accreditation-commission role?
The opinion listed continued service with the law-enforcement accreditation organization among the duties that did not create a second office in this arrangement.

Background and statutory framework

Columbia asked whether the August 2003 dual-office conclusion still applied after Charles P. Austin, Sr. became city manager. The office reiterated that adding duties to one existing office did not create another and found no dual-office problem from the specific duties described.

Citations and references

The opinion followed the office's August 27, 2003 opinion about the same Columbia official.

Official title

Regarding dual office holding issued on August 27, 2003. Specifically, Interim City Manager/Director of Public Safety for the City of Columbia and being appointed City Manager.

Requester

Ms. Dana Turner, Administrative Advisor, City of Columbia

Source

• Landing page: https://www.scag.gov/opinions/opinions-archive/october-14-2003-1/
• Original PDF: https://www.scag.gov/wp-content/uploads/2013/03/03oct-14-Turner.pdf

Original opinion text

The State of South Carolina

OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL
HENRY McMASTER
ATTORNEY GENERAL

October 14, 2003

L
I

Ms. Dana Turner, Administrative Advisor
City of Columbia
Post Office Box 147
Columbia, SC 29217
Dear Ms. Turner:
You have asked for an opinion as a follow up to an earlier opinion issued by this Office on August 27, 2003. In that opinion, we concluded that Charles P. Austin, Sr. was not dual office holding by holding the position of Interim City Manager/Director of Public Safety for the City of Columbia. There, we found that "the positions of Interim City Manager and Director of Public Safety have been combined into one position by the City of Columbia. In our view, " ... the City of Columbia has assigned the additional duties of the director of public safety to the Interim City Manager." Consistent with our longstanding opinion that "the mere assignment of additional duties to an already-existing office would not create a second office," we concluded that no dual office holding problem was presented by Mr. Austin's status. You now advise that Mr. Austin has been appointed City Manager. As City Manager, you indicate that as part of Mr. Austin's duties, he will "continue to have direct supervision over the Police Department, the Fire Department, Emergency Services Operations and 911 Emergency Communications." You note that "the Chief of Police, the Fire Chief and the directors of the other departments all report directly to the City Manager." As City Manager, Mr. Austin will, according to your letter, "continue to serve as Commissioner for Commission of Accreditation for Law Enforcement Agencies, a national organization for the accreditation oflaw enforcement agencies." These all appear to constitute additional duties of the City Manager for Columbia. Accordingly, in our opinion, based upon the information provided, the reasoning of the August 27, 2003 opinion remains applicable and no dual office holding problem is presented by Mr. Austin's performance of these duties. Ve~urs,

fofe{i.cook
Assistant Deputy Attorney General
RDC/ph

11

RE~ERr£. D~UJWING • Posr OFFICE Box 11549 • COLIJMBIA, S.C. 29211-1549 • TELEPHONE: 803-734-3970 • FACSIMILE: 803-253--6283

~~Y' l"c:' . /lfh• .