Attorney General's Opinion 1982-83 #731
VIRGINIA FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT. SALARIES. ONE PERSON WHO HOLDS TWO POSITIONS. DISCLOSURE REQUIRED IF SALARY IS OVER $10,000 PER YEAR.
April 5, 1983
The Honorable Jon C. Poulson,
Commonwealth's Attorney for Accomack County
82-83 731
This is in reply to your letter which we received on March 28, 1983, requesting an Opinion regarding the Virginia Freedom of Information Act, 2.1-340 through 2.1-346.1 of the Code of Virginia (the "Act"). You have advised that the County administrator is paid a salary for serving as county administrator in excess of $10,000. The same person also serves as the local Coordinator of Emergency Services (the "Coordinator") His salary for serving as the Coordinator is less than $10,000 per year and is based on a pro rata percentage of his salary as a county employee.
You have asked whether two salaries are being paid to one person, one for performing the duties of county administrator and one for performing the duties of the Coordinator. If the answer is in the affirmative, you have asked if the salary for serving as Coordinator is subject to disclosure under the Act, or if the two salaries are to be added together, thereby making both subject to disclosure if the total exceeds $10,000 even though one may be less than $10,000.
Section 2.1-342 (a) provides that all "official records" shall be open to inspection and copying, except as otherwise specifically provided by law. Although 2.1-342 (b) (3) specifically exempts personnel records from the mandatory disclosure provisions of the Act, 2.1-342(c) requires disclosure of the salaries and positions of certain public officials. Prior to the enactment of this subsection in 1978, this Office had interpreted 2.1-342(b)(3) as exempting all salaries from mandatory disclosure, as being a part of the personnel record. See 1975-1976 Report of the Attorney General at 416. Section 2.1-342(c) provides:
"Neither any provision of this chapter nor any provision of Chapter 26 (2.1-377 et seq.) of this title shall be construed as denying public access to records of the position, job classification, official salary or rate of pay of, and to records of the allowances or reimbursements for expenses paid to any public officer, official or employee at any level of state, local or regional government in this Commonwealth whatsoever. The provisions of this subsection, however shall not apply to records of the official salaries or rates of public employees whose annual rate of pay is $10,000 or less."
Section 2.1-342(c) requires, inter alia, the disclosure of records of the position, job classificantion, official salary or rate of pay of public officials or employees whose annual rate of pay is over $10,000.1 It is my opinion that the salary which must be disclosed is that which corresponds to the position or job classification of the public official or employee in question.
Accordingly, I am of the opinion, based on the above facts, that two salaries are being paid to one person.2 The two salaries would be considered separately for purposes of the Act. The salary for performing the duties of the county administrator, if over $10,000 per year, would be subject to the mandatory disclosure provisions of the Act and the salary for serving as Coordinator, if less than $10,000 per year, would not be subject to such mandatory disclosure requirements.3
____________________________
FOOTNOTES
1 See Opinion to the Honorable Shirley F. Cooper, Member, House of Delegates, dated March 7, 1983.
2 The fact that the salary for being the Coordinator is based on a pro rata percentage of his salary from the county does not alter this conclusion.
3 The Act does not prohibit discretionary disclosure of either salary. See 1980-1981 Report of the Attorney General at 394. Consequently, the salary of the position of Coordinator could likely be obtained through the budget papers or other records, excepting personnel records.
