Can someone serve on a Texas river authority board and a county appraisal district board at the same time?

Texas AG Opinion DM-0047: River Authority Director May Also Serve on an Appraisal District Board

Plain-English summary

The chairman of the Guadalupe-Blanco River Authority asked whether one of its directors could also serve on a county appraisal district board. The Attorney General concluded that nothing prohibited it.

Two doctrines could have applied. The first is article XVI, section 40 of the Texas Constitution, which bars a person from holding two "offices of emolument," meaning paid offices. An appraisal district director receives no compensation, only reimbursement for actual expenses, so the seat is not an office of emolument and the constitutional ban did not apply. The second is the common-law doctrine of incompatibility, which prevents one person from holding two offices where one could impose its policies on or control the other. An appraisal district appraises property for the taxing units in the district, so if the river authority taxed property in that appraisal district, serving on both boards would likely be incompatible. But the Guadalupe-Blanco River Authority has no power to impose taxes, and the opinion found no other basis for incompatibility. The dual service was therefore permissible.

Currency note

This opinion was issued in 1991. Subsequent statutory amendments, court decisions, or later AG opinions may have changed the analysis. Treat this page as historical context, not current legal advice. The opinion itself flagged that section 6.03(a) of the Tax Code had earlier overridden common-law incompatibility for appraisal district board members tied to a taxing unit's governing body, and that the relevant language was removed effective September 1, 1991. Verify current statutes and any taxing authority of the specific river authority before relying on this analysis.

Common questions

Can a Texas river authority director also sit on a county appraisal district board?
For the Guadalupe-Blanco River Authority, yes. The opinion concluded neither the constitutional ban on holding two paid offices nor the common-law incompatibility doctrine prevented it.

Why didn't the constitutional dual-office ban apply?
Because article XVI, section 40 only reaches "offices of emolument," meaning paid offices. An appraisal district director receives expense reimbursement, not compensation, so the seat is not one of emolument.

Would the answer change for a river authority that levies taxes?
The opinion suggested it might. If the river authority taxed property in the appraisal district, serving on both boards would likely be incompatible under the common law, because the appraisal district appraises property for the taxing units. The Guadalupe-Blanco River Authority has no taxing power, so that conflict did not arise.

Background and statutory framework

Article XVI, section 40 of the Texas Constitution prohibits one person from holding two offices of emolument. The opinion relied on Tax Code section 6.04(c) (appraisal district board members receive no compensation, only reimbursement of actual expenses) and Attorney General Opinion JM-1266 (1990) (expense reimbursement is not an emolument), and noted that Guadalupe-Blanco River Authority directors receive $25 a day plus expenses under Acts 1969, 61st Leg., ch. 432, with Water Code section 50.059 as the general provision on river authority director compensation. On incompatibility, it cited the appraisal district's core function of appraising property for ad valorem tax purposes under Tax Code section 6.01(b), and concluded that because the river authority has no taxing power (Acts 1975, 64th Leg., ch. 433), there was no incompatibility. A footnote observed that Tax Code section 6.03(a) had, in its then-current form, overridden common-law incompatibility for board members connected to a taxing unit's governing body, but that the relevant language was removed as of September 1, 1991, by H.B. 864, Acts 1991, 72d Leg., ch. 371, § 11. The opinion also referenced prior Attorney General Opinions JM-129 (1984), JM-97 (1983), and JM-1157 (1990).

Citations

Constitutional and statutory provisions:

• Tex. Const. art. XVI, § 40 (prohibition on holding two offices of emolument)
• Tax Code § 6.04(c) (appraisal district board members receive no compensation, only expense reimbursement)
• Tax Code § 6.01(b) (appraisal district function: appraising property for ad valorem tax purposes)
• Tax Code § 6.03(a) (override of common-law incompatibility; language removed effective Sept. 1, 1991)
• Water Code § 50.059 (compensation of river authority directors)
• Acts 1969, 61st Leg., ch. 432; Acts 1975, 64th Leg., ch. 433; H.B. 864, Acts 1991, 72d Leg., ch. 371, § 11

Prior Attorney General opinions referenced: JM-1266 (1990), JM-129 (1984), JM-97 (1983), JM-1157 (1990).

Source

• Landing page: https://www.texasattorneygeneral.gov/opinions/dan-morales/dm-0047
• Original PDF: https://www.texasattorneygeneral.gov/sites/default/files/opinion-files/opinion/1991/dm0047.pdf

Original opinion text

Best-effort transcription from a scanned PDF. Minor errors may remain — the linked PDF is authoritative.

Office of the Attorney General
State of Texas

DAN MORALES
Attorney General

October 3, 1991

Mr. John C. Taylor
Chairman
Board of Directors
Guadalupe-Blanco River Authority
P.O. Box 271
Seguin, Texas 78156

Opinion No. DM-47

Re: Whether a member of the board of a river authority may serve on a board of an appraisal district (RQ-140)

Dear Mr. Taylor:

You ask whether a director of the Guadalupe-Blanco River Authority may also serve as a member of the board of directors of a county appraisal district.

Article XVI, section 40, of the Texas Constitution prohibits a person from holding two "offices of emolument." Because no compensation is attached to the office of director of a county appraisal district, the office is not one of emolument. See Tax Code § 6.04(c) (members of board of county appraisal district receive no compensation but receive reimbursement for actual expenses); Attorney General Opinion JM-1266 (1990) (reimbursement for actual expenses is not an emolument for purposes of article XVI, section 40); see also Acts 1969, 61st Leg., ch. 432, § 1, at 1465 (directors of Guadalupe-Blanco River Authority to receive $25 a day plus expenses); Water Code § 50.059 (general provision regarding compensation of directors of river authority). Therefore, the constitutional prohibition on dual office holding is inapplicable to the facts you describe.

The common-law doctrine of incompatibility prevents a person from holding two offices where one office might impose its policies on the other or subject it to control in some other way. See Attorney General Opinions JM-1266 (1990); JM-129 (1984); JM-97 (1983). The main function of an appraisal district is to appraise property in the district for ad valorem tax purposes of each taxing unit that imposes ad valorem taxes on property in the district. Tax Code § 6.01(b). Thus, if the Guadalupe-Blanco River Authority imposed ad valorem taxes on property in a particular appraisal district, service on both the board of the river authority and the board of the appraisal district would likely be incompatible under the common law.[1] The Guadalupe-Blanco River Authority, however, has no authority to impose taxes. Acts 1975, 64th Leg., ch. 433, § 1, at 1150. We find no other basis in the relevant statute for concluding that service on the board of the Guadalupe-Blanco River Authority would be incompatible with service on the board of an appraisal district that appraises property within the boundaries of the river authority for ad valorem tax purposes.

SUMMARY

Article XVI, section 40, of the Texas Constitution does not prohibit a person from serving on the board of directors of a river authority and the board of directors of a county appraisal district.

Service on the board of the Guadalupe-Blanco River Authority is not incompatible with service on the board of an appraisal district that appraises property within the boundaries of the river authority for ad valorem tax purposes.

Very truly yours,

DAN MORALES
Attorney General of Texas

WILL PRYOR
First Assistant Attorney General

MARY KELLER
Executive Assistant Attorney General

JUDGE ZOLLIE STEAKLEY (Ret.)
Special Assistant Attorney General

RENEA HICKS
Special Assistant Attorney General

MADELEINE B. JOHNSON
Chair, Opinion Committee

Prepared by Sarah Woelk
Assistant Attorney General

[1] Section 6.03(a) of the Tax Code, in its current form, overrides the common-law doctrine of incompatibility to the extent it would be applicable in this context by providing that an "individual who is otherwise eligible to serve on the board is not ineligible because of membership on the governing body of a taxing unit." See Attorney General Opinion JM-1157 (1990). As of September 1, 1991, that provision no longer appears in section 6.03(a). See H.B. 864, Acts 1991, 72d Leg., ch. 371, § 11.