,
TREATTOIRNEY GENERAL
OF TEXAS
A%USTIN. -,bXAS 78711
April 11, 1975
The Honorable Tom Hanna Opinion No. H- 579
Criminal District Attorney
Jefferson County Re: Whether a county may purchase
P. 0. Box 2553 and maintain parks with general
Beaumont. Texas 77704 fund revenues instead of holding
an election to levy a park tax
under articles 6078 or 6081e.
Dear Mr. Hanna: V. T. Ci S.
You have requested our opinion regarding whether a county may purchase
and maintain parks with general fund revenues without holding an election for
the purpose of levying a park tax under article 6078 or article 6081e. V. T. C. S.
Article 6078 authorizes the commissioners court of a county to:
. . . levy and collect
a tax not to exceed five (5) cents
on each one hundred dollars assessed valuation of the
county for the purchase and improvement of lands for
use as county parks.
Collection of such tax must be ratified by “a two-thirds majority of the property
taxpaying voters” of the county. The commissioners court is also authorized
to “levy and collect an annual tax sufficient in their judgment to properly main-
tain such parks” and to make various permanent improvements.
Article 6081e empowers “[a]ny county or any incorporated city of this state,
either independently or in cooperation with each other:’ to acquire parks, and
for their purchase and/or improvements, to:
levy a tax not exceeding ten cents (lO$) on the One
Hundred Dollars ($100) valuation of taxable property.
. . . Art. 6081e, section2, V. T. C.S.
Counties and incorporated cities may also “levy a tax of not exceeding five cents
(50 on the One Hundred Dollars ($100) property valuation to create a fund for
tie improvement and operation of such parks.” Id,, sec. 3.
p. 2580
The Honorable Tom Hanna. page 2 (H-579)
Article 6081f, enacted in 1965, repealed all ad valorem tax limitations
with regard to parks or park bonds of all counties and incorporated cities,
towns and villages, “except for those ad valorem tax limitations imposed
by the provisions of the Constitution of the State of Texas.”
Prior to 1967, counties were required by the Constitution to maintain
separately the four constitutional funds: general, permanent improvement,
road and bridge, and jury fund. The tax levy for the acquisition and improve-
ment of parks was allocable to the permanent improvement fund, and the tax
-for the maintenance and operation of parks was allocable to the general
fund. Attorney General Opinions V-284 (1947) and V-744 (1948). We believe
that, even prior to 1967, a county was permitted to expend moneys from the
general fund for park maintenance and operation, even though no specific
park tax had been authorized pursuant to the election provisions of articles
6078 and 6081e. Those statutes place no limitation on the authority of a
commissioners court to expend funds for park purposes: they merely provide
a means of raising tax revenues. Furthermore, since article 6081f has
repealed the tax rate limitations of articles 6078 and 6081e. it can no longer
be argued that permitting a county to expend from the general fund for park
maintenance and operation without holding an election provides a means of
circumventing the ceiling imposed by the statutes.
Expenditure from the general fund for the purpose of acquiring and
improving parks presents a more difficult question. As we have noted, the
tax levy for the acquisition of parks is allocable to the permanent improvement
fund. But the 1967 amendment to article 8, section 9 of the Texas Constitution
provides that:
(a)ny county may put all tax money collected by the
county into one general fund, without regard to the
purpose or source of each tax.
A previous opinion of this office has interpreted this language as
discretionary:
. . . it seems clear that ‘a county may use cne general
fund for its taxes, subject to its outstanding debts, or
a county may use the four funds in question according
to its own judgment . . .
Attorney General Opinion M-207 (1968) other parts of
which were overruled by Attorney General Opinion H-194
(1974).
p. 2581
- c
I
The Honorable Tom Hanna, page 3 (H-579)
The opinion held further that a commissioners court may consolidate fewer
than all four funds into the general fund, and may maintain one or more
funds separate and apart from the others.
If a.county has consolidated its permanent improvement fund into its
general fund, as authorized by article 8, section 9 of the Texas Constitution,
it may then expend moneys from the general fund for park acquisition and
improvement, since article 8. section 9 places no limitation on the “purpose
or source” of tax moneys in the general fund. If the county continues to main-
tain,a separate permanent improvement fund, however, we believe that ex-
penditures for acquiring and improving parks should be made solely from this
fund, since it is the fund into which taxes levied for such purposes are allocated.
-See Attorney General Opinion V-284 (1947).
In summary, it is our opinion that a county may expend moneys from its
general fund for the maintenance and operation of parks without holding an
election to levy a park tax. A county may expend moneys from its general
fund for the acquisition and improvement of parks without holding an election
to levy a park tax only where the permanent improvement fund has been con-
solidated with the general fund, otherwise, such expenditures must be made
from the permanent improvement fund.
SUMMARY
A county may expend moneys from its general fund
for the maintenance and operation of parks without
holding an election to levy a park tax. A county may
expend moneys from its general fund for the acquisition
and improvement of parks without holding an election
to levy a~park tax provided the county’s permanent
improvement fund has been consolidated with its general
fund: otherwise, such expenditures must be made from
the permanent improvement fund.
Very truly yours,
/ / Attorney General of Texas
p. 2582
The Honorable atom Hanna, page 4
(H- 579)
APPROVED:
DAVID M. KENDALL, First Adsistant
I
C. ROBERT HEATH. Chairmar ,.
Opinion Committee
p. 2583