Can McManus legally be the Chief of three separate Police Departments? (San Antonio: attorney, litigation)

[winterscorpion]

As of late this question has surfaced as have many different rumors stemming from the recent merger of all three departments.

If I am wrong, I will gladly concede and admit my mistakes. Having said that here is what I heard (I have not seen any proof one way or the other, so perhaps you could help me or give me some guidance) on the topic.

What I know for sure is that a vote was taken on the merger of The Airport Police, The Park Police and The San Antonio Police Department. What was voted on, ratified and submitted to City Council was an agreement that all three departments would be brought under the effective control of Chief McManus. Each entity would then have a "Commander" overseeing the day to day operations of the departments, but would be a division of San Antonio Police Department. This would allow the budgets allocated for the two smaller departments to go to SAPD. McManus made statements that he in no way had any intention of getting rid of either department and made several public statements to that effect.

At this point in time, The Park Police Budget is still accessed through the Department of Parks and Recreation, and not through SAPD as originally intended. So now this is where its gets fuzzy for me....

Rumor #1 - TCLEOSE (the governing agency responsible for ALL Texas Police officers) made contact with McManus and stated that by law, he cannot be the Chief of three separate agencies. In otherwords he would have to assimilate the merged officers into his department and pay them what the other officers get or return the "merged' officers to thier original status thereby violating the contract that was agreed upon opening not only himself up for civil litigation but the city as well.

If things stayed as they are currently, that would mean that all three agencies would have the same identification cards, all with the Chief McManus's signature stating that he approved the commission and that the officers were in essence SAPD. The SAPOA has been dead set against this for quite some time citing a desparity in training even after having been proved wrong on that front. The other thing that prevents full assimilation is thier existing Pension Plan. So the battle rages on.

Rumor #2 - This one has been floating around for awhile. In order for him to avoid this dilemna, The San Antonio Police Departments Union can lobby up in Austin to change city charter as it has been done before.

I am not an attorney nor will I claim to have the research prowess so many attorney's have. I would like to know your thoughts on this and Im hoping that you can provide me with a link so I can research it a little more. This is not a "who's better than who" thread. I am looking for honest answers here. Nothing more, and nothing less. The merger is done, there is one Chief, but what happens if he chooses not to abide by TCLEOSE mandates? Will there be sanctions imposed? Fines levied? Or will no action be taken due to the size of the city's exponential growth? Has there ever been a case like this to hit the court system and if so what was the outcome?

Peace
Winter