Untitled Texas Attorney General Opinion

Honorable Tom Hanna Opinion No. M-1250 Criminal District Attorney Jefferson County Courthouse Re: Questions concerning consoli- P. 0. Box 2553 dation of funds from the Beaumont, Texas 77701 special road and bridge tax fund and the farm to market and lateral road tax fund with the general fund of the Dear Mr. Hanna: county. Your request for an opinion asks the following questions: “1. Can the fifteen cent (lS$) special road and bridge tax fund be transferred into the general fund and used for other purposes? “2. Can the money received from the special road and bridge tax fund or the farm to market and lateral road tax fund be used for any pur- pose other than road and bridge?” fin First State Bank and Trust Company of Rio Grande City v. Starr County 206 S.W.2d 246 (Tex.Civ.App. 1957) it was Id that where the ioters of the county had authorized {he cceation of a special road and bridge fund, the commissioners court had no authority to tidns.fer such money to another fund. Likewise it was held in Carroll v. Williams,,109 Tex. 155, 202 S.W. 504 (1918), that tax money raised ostensibly for one purpose may not be expended for any.~other purpose. Subsequent to the above cited cases, Section 9 of Article VIII of the Constitution of Texas was amended so as to provide: “Sec. 9. The State tax on property, exclusive of the tax necessary to ay the public debt, and of the taxes provided for t 1 e benefit of the public free schools, shall never exceed Thirty-five Cents (354) on the One Hundred Dollars ($100) valuation; . and no county, city or town shall levy a tax rate in excess of Eighty Cents (804) on the One Hundred -6116- . . . . Hon. Tom Hanna, page 2 (M-1250) :. * Dollars ($100) valuation in any one (1) year for general fund, permanent improvement fund, road and * bridge fund and jury fund purposes; provided fur- ther that at the time the Commissioners Court meets to levy the annual tax rate for each couhty it shall levy whatever tax rate may be needed for the four (4) constitutional purposes; namely, eneral fund, permanent improvement fund, road and %ridge fund and jury fund so long as the Court does not impair any outstanding bonds or other obli- gations and so long as the total of the foregoing tax levies does not exceed Eighty Cents (8Ot) on the One Hundred Dollars ($100) valuation in any one (1) year. Once the Court has levied the annual tax rate, the same shall remain in force and effect during that taxable year; and the Legislature may also authorize an additional annual ad valorem tax to be levied and collected for the further maintenance of the public roads; provided, that a majority of the qualified property taxpaying voters of the count voting at an election to be held for that purpose s i all vote such tax, not to exceed Fifteen Cents (15e) on the One Hun- dred Dollars ($100) valuation of the property sub- ject to taxation in such county. Any county may put all-tax money collected by the county into one general fund, without regard to the purpose or source of each tax. And the Legislature may pass local laws for the maintenance of the public roads and highwaysi without the local notice required for special or local laws. This Section shall not be construed as a limitation of $owers dele ated to counties, cities or towns by any other Sect x.on or Sections of this Constitution.” It is noted that the constitutional provision authorizes a levy not to exceed a tax rate in excess of Eighty Cents (80$) on the One Hundred Dollars ($100) valuation “needed for the four (4) constitutional purposes; namely, general fund, permanent improvement fund, road and bridge fund and jury fund so long as the Court does not impair any outstanding bonds or other obli- gations . . . .*I The constitutional provision also authorizes the Legislature to provide for an additional tax for the mainten- ance of public roads, provided such tax is voted at an election not to exceed Fifteen Cents (1st) on the One Hundred Dollars ($100) valuation. After providing for these levies, the consti- tutional provision states: “Any county may put all tax money -6117- Hon. Tom Hanna, page 3 (M-1250) collected . by the county- into.one gener,al .. fund, without regard to tne purpose or source or eacn tax:. It is noted that Section 9 of Article VIII is ‘self- enacting with regard to authorizing the levy of the Eighty Cents ‘(804) tax for the four constitutional funds, whereas the levy of the special road and bridge tax requires legislative authorization as well as a vote of the taxpayers. Such constitutional provision. therefore must be construed as a whole and effect given to the special road and bridge tax. Therefore it is-our opinion ;irt the principle of law announced in.Carroll v. Wi;ll;a;s~i~ora, First State Bank and Trust Company of R’ G d y v. Starr ‘County, that tax money raised os:&sibly for one purpose may not F=’ e expended for any other purpose, was not changed by the amendment to Section 9 of Article VIII of the Constitution of Texas. On the contrary, such amendment only authorizes the con- solidation of the four constitutional funds involved in the Eighty Cents (804) levy; namely, general fund, permanent improve- ment fund, road and bridge fund, and jury fund. This principle was recognized and followed in Attorney General’s Opinion M-369. (1969), wherein it was stated: “The Commissioners Court of a county may consolidate the general fund, permanent improve- ment fund, road and bridge fund and jury fund into a county general fund? .as provided for by the 1967 amendment,to Sectron 9 of Article VIII, Texas Constitution. However, where such an election has been made, and such consolidation achieved, the Commissioners Court may not con- solidatethe Officers’ Salary Bund with the resultant general fund of the county.” Attorney General’s Opinion M-369 [1969) was clarified in Attorney General’s Opinion M-438 (1969), wherein it was stated: “Attorney General’s Opinion M-369 (1969) is applicable only to those counties in Texas having a population of less than 190,000 in- habitants. Counties having a population in excess of 190,000 inhabitants may consolidate the Officers’ Salary Fund with the general fund of the county. The authority for doing so being granted by Section 19(i) of Article 3912e, Vernon’s Civil Statutes.” In view of the foregoing it is our opinion that the -6118- . . Hon. Tom Hanna, page 4 (M-1250) ’ amendment to Section 9 of Article VIII of the Constitution of Texas authorizing the consolidation of the four constitutional funds has no application to the special Fifteen Cents (15$) road and bridge’tax fund authorized by the provisions of Article 6790, Vernon’s Civil Statutes, nor to the ThirtyCents (30#) farm to market and lateral road tax fund provided by Section la of Article VIII of the Texas Constitution and Article ?048a, Vernon’s Civil Statutes. You are accordingly advised that the Fifteen Cents (1st) special road and bridge tax fund may not be transferred into the general fund and used for other purposes. In answer to your second question you are likewise advised that money received from the special road and’bridge tax fund or the farm to market and lateral road tax fund may not be used for any purpose other than roads and bridges. Article VIII, Section la, Texas Constitution;* Article 7048a, Vernon’s Civil Statutes. ‘SUMMARY The ‘Fifteen Cents (154) special road and bridge tax fund and the farm to market and lateral road tax fund may not be transferred into the general fund and may not be used for any purpose other than roads and bridges. VerYG UlY yours, Prepared by John Reeves Assistant Attorney General .\ APPROVED: OPINIONCOMMITTEE Kerns Taylor, Chairman W. E. Allen, Co-Chairman John Banks Bill Campbell Roland Allen Jay Floyd -6119- Hon. Tom Hanna, page 5 (M-1250) SAMUEL D. MCDANIEL Staff Legal Assistant ALFRE'DWALKER Executive Assistant NOLAWHITE First Assistant -6120-