Untitled Texas Attorney General Opinion

Honorable Henry Wade Oplnlon~No. C- 458 District Attorney Records Wllldlng Re: Several questions relat- Dallas, Texas lng to levy and assessment of ad valorem taxes by Dallas County Junior Dear Mr. Wade: College District. You ask the opinion of the Attorney General In answer to the following five (5) questions relating to the levy and assessment of ad valorem taxes by Dall'asCounty Junior College District: 1. Can a valid contract for the assessment and collection of taxes be.entered Into by the Board of Trustees of Dallas County Junior College District and the County of Dallas for the Tax Assessor and Collector of Dallas County to assess and collect thentaxes for the Junior College District? 2. In the event that the answer to Question No.-1 Is in the afnrmatlve, what fees and commlss1ons camthe Tat .Assesaor and Collector of Dallas County ~legal1.s charge the Dallas County Junior College Metriot. +or the.aiiaessmentand collection of the above referred to taxes? 3. Can taxes be levied and collected for the year 1965? 4. May the .Mstrlct *ax lntangl.bZepropertles within its boundaries? 5. Can the Mstrlct assess and lew a tax on the rolling BtOCk .ofa railroad or trans- portation company? Tfierelevant facts are as follows: The Dallas County Junior College District (hereinafter referred to as District) was created on May 25, 1965, pursuant to the provisions of -2177- I I Honorable Henry Wade, Page 2 Opinion No. C-458 Article 2815h of Vernon's Civil Statutes. The boundaries of the District are coterminous with the boundaries of Dallas County. At the election, the voters elected a Board of Trustees of the District and granted them the authority to assess and levy a tax for the support and maintenance of the District and to Issue bonds to be paid for by a tax which was also authorlzed. We answer your questions in the order In which YOU ask them. 1. Your first question asks If the District may contract with the Tax Assessor and Collector of Dallas County‘to assess and collect Its ad valorem taxes. Our answer Is that It may enter Into such a contract pursuant to the provlslons of Sec. i'b(c)of said Article 2815h. This Article In Its rele- vant portions reads as follows: "When a majority of the Board of Education of such Junior College District prefer to have the taxes of their district assessed and collected by the County Assessor and Collector, or by the City Assessor and Collector of.an Incorporated city or town In the limits of which the Junior College District or a part thereof Is located, or collected only by the County or City Tax Collector, game may be assessed and collected, or collected only, as the case may be, by said county or city officers, as may be determined by the Board.of Edudatlon of said Junior College District, and turned over ,to the Treasurer of the Junior College District for wh$ch such taxes have been collected. . . . 2. Your.s&cond question asks what fees and cOmmlsslOnS may be paid In the event we answer~your first question In the affirmative. Our answer Is that the following provision of said Article 2815h, Sec. 7b(c) sets forth.these fees and commissions In the following language: -2178- Honorable Henry Wade, Page 3 Opinion No: C-458 II . When the County Assessor and . . Collector are required to assess land collectithe taxes on Junior Colleges' Districts they shall respectively 'receive-ione 1% per cent.for assess~ lng and'one I1% ]'per cent for ~collectlng ' ,8ame; .,".." .‘~.~. -’ ‘.3- . .Your third question asks whether the Dls$rlct.can .levyand collect taxes for the year 1965. Our answer Is that It can. qnder the following authorities, the levy and assess- ment of taxes by the Mstrlct Is-governed by the same laws governing taxation by Independent ,school dlatrlcts. . I~j a) Sectlon,.7.:o,f'sald Article 2815h:.provldes,In part: .' _.~.~: ,/)' ,t. .''~'?Phe . -:ikauanceOf the‘bonds .for Junior 'College-piuposes,~ and the .pror~~ vision of the ~s~inklng fund for ~the~retlre- ment :th'ere#,W%nd.-the payment of InteFest and the levying 'afkaxes for the support and maintenance ,ofthe:Junlor College,.. Ishall In so X&r as same ‘Is.appllcable,: be In accordance with the general-'election laws and the laws governing the Issuance of bonds.and the levying of taxes In the Independent School District, . . ." ,; ..-.;-,:.,v,:. ..~,.'..,,::!:& :y;,.,,. i: - :.;.zI,,..~~. '-<'~ -b) Sectloni7a~~f..said:~rMcle.~281~h'.(.Acts. 19373%.@th Leg., p. 248, ch. 130, sec. 3) further . : . ,; ::_ provides, ..~. ( ,. In y"t: i;,. .-,a-.: I_. “!t!he~&BeBsOr~&nd -&lledtor~of'auch ,:3 ~:. 2,.'. J~nior'Collcge?:Dl~trl;ct~ shall-agB&KShe ~~.?'-. ~taxesand MGlect-.the .BELme .lnthe:aaiitier";:~ now provided by law,for the collkctYon~~Y of ad valorem taxes by County Assessors t;: and Collectors-and where Shere Is.tiot':*~~... :herelh:contained any'BpeclfZc,provlbfk%~ '-" .-::'ordlrbetton a~'%0 how,anythlng .connecte&': .I ;;:' 7;..,_l/l,tk *he s;Ss.esqm~nt: and 'oollectidn of;*.;"? :-." ~'.:..~taxed shall'% dotie,' then.the-protislons'::' .of thi~Gerieral-'Law s+$l prevail.". L ..'1. : c) The c&e .ofShepherd v. San Jaclnto Junlor:College District, 363 S.W.2d 742 (Tex.Sup: 1963), holds that Section -2179- , .~ Honorable~Henry Wade, Page 4 ~0plnlon:No.'C- 458. 3 of Article VII -of..our State Constltutlon .pertalnlng to taxation for benefitof schools land.school districts Is .I applicable to,Juni;or, College Districts. I ~ii . . Although,.*he:college district 'wasnot:.createduntil May 25, 19659.*the,,di&rlct~,has,t&!authority to -levy and .';, collect taxes for the year 1965 on ill property,.:wlthln such newly created district which was owned by the taxpayers~ on January 1st. Blewltt v. Meuargel County Line Ind. Sch. Dlst., 285 S-W. 271 (Comm.App. 1926); Yorktown Independent School Dlatrlct'.V,..Afferbach, ~124.W.2d.130 (Cm.App. 1929 Cadena.m.State, 185 :S.W&7~(Tex:Clv.App. .-1916,errorref. ” ,.- The court In Blewltt v. Meuargel, supra, stated': ,. '. .;I'~..y: i', .:: , ...::: ::: 17; , ‘, : : :;Ii,qhen.:an4ndependent school :;.) ‘:~. : >:'. .::;dlsty&zt :%a:oreated.afterthe:l&:of:c: 11.: * .~, ,. Jsnuary of a given year, all proverte .,'.I,.3: .w%thineuoh'fnewly created .dlstrlct,::~,. i which was owned by the taxpayer on Jan- uary ~.%~t:sE~~fhat~~year?,,$is:subject to any -tax.&uthorlzed. by.3aw,--..whether:..: I Y j:such.-taxes.?have:.been.authorized there-, I-tofore'm stayi-~~author~zedl~ubi :the -yegr,:andioan he;.devl.ed . :by$he: body i!I? given &he -power.to3evy at--anyt$me i:._ during.the;~ear.%; . .+i %~.r(Underqcorlng ., added&&:;; :.:i : :i-,..::t.: y:::d:,~;. ;~, ; aif;*>I.,, ..:j.; .,,. 1 y.; ;...-~ .ii'?' k-z..y,~:.j r,&..: : C-I-' y.:. .:_~',?,;., .:. :.i;.>;.: *J-i.-l;:t;:. _.,., '..~f ,,., L> ,I<, !;-,? Your fourth &estlon asks whether the ~&t%ldt may tax 4nj%ng&$ei.~~rt~~.~~.fh~nt.~~~-~d~les~:~ 7r.i.:r--. r;,\,: ;-. In general,:;.al~rpr?opereies,:l~etrl-:and; personal and tangible andran~~~ej,:.~avlngra.~..t~b~e:,altus *rithln the Dlstrlchare.~,t~b~e~i~~the~J)lstrlct.~: ArU&es~~7145 and 7153, Vernon's ;Oi~~~~Statu~s;;jjt.trucas~.np: P..:Uy .itco.v. city of El Paso,::Lgs,;.~.~86,;!85\ S,N%!d 24 r{l93~)+jPexas Pipe Line Co. v. Anderson3r100'S.W.2d-.754... 7%xiCiv~iApp. 1937. error ref., cert. den., 332 U.S. 724); Brown County, Texas Y..Atlantic.Plpe-,.Llne Co.; 91 IP.2d.394-(~C.C.A. 5th 1937, :.cert.. den-, .302,u.s,. 747];-.,.:. ‘:;F -I.;- .. ' : ..;.;- :~.~., -2180- . Honorable Henry Wade, Page 5 Opinion No. C- 458 5. / Your fifth question asks whether the District may assess and levy a tax on the rolling stock of a railroad or transportation company. Whether rolling stock has acquired a business sltus In a county for ad .valorem tax purposes mu& be dgtermlned from all the relevant facts. Many court decisions and opinions of the Texas Attorney General have considered and passed upon the various fact situations, and these may be referred to by you for your consideration of particular fact situations. Your fifth question further asks whether the Dlstrlct may assess and levy an ad valorem tax on the rolling stock of a railroad company. Our opinion Is that the apportlon- ment of the value of railroad rolling stock allocated to Dallas County by the State Tax Board pursuant to Chapter 4 of Tltle 122, Vernon's Civil Statutesiomay be taxed by the mstrlct. State.v.,Texas.& P. .Ry 62 S.W.2d 81 (Comm.App. 1933). This case holds that t;i value of railroad rolling stock apportioned .to El Paso County acquired a fixed taxable.situs In that county. The Court further held that the value of such rolling stock was taxable by a road district composed of El Paso County and the contiguous Hudspeth County because the Act.under which the road district was created provided that ad valorem taxes should be levied "agalfistthe property In kach of the counties, respectively." The Court then heid with reference to this quoted provision: 11 . . . This language, ln.the connection used, plainly comprehends all property sltuated.slther actually or by operatlof: of law; in-any of the counties as such. The Court then'further stated that although Article 7105 authorized the Intangible assets of companies therein mentioned to be taxed only for State and County purposes, that since the Legislature had authorized this road district to levy Its taxes "against the property In each of the counties, respectively'!that the rolling stock of the Railroad Company was subject to taxes by the road district. The Court stated that the reasons for Its conclusion was that the sltus of the rolling stock apportioned by the State Tax Board under Chapter 4 of said Title 122, to El Paso County had become I, . . . fixed In the county at large, but not, of course, in any particular portion of the county." -2181- I I Honorable HenFy'Wade, Page 6 ':'. OpinionNo; :C--458 In view of the foregoing authorities, we hold that the District may and should assess and levy Its taxes upon the value ,of all railroad rolling stock apportioned by the State.Tax'Board to Dallas County. :'.' ' :In ao.far as prlor~~opInion~No;~S-i84,(1%5).of..the Attorney Ceneral~cohfllcts~i#lththisopi-nlori,~lt~~~le~-hereby overruled;. .',. I. ..: c S U.%I-MAIR Y ------- t I Dallas County Junior College District, created'pursuant .to.Axtlcle.2815h,~ V.C.S. -on+ay.~25; 1965, has the:.following .' .: :. pow&s: 1 . .It:may:c6ntractlwiththe 'Tax.Assesso* and Colle'cto+Of Dallas County ,~tO : "' asse.&s.&d ..tiolle.c,t ~.Sts:;ad :,valoreti taxeti-. L.. ..,:::.~c :;. -2:1 Thy fees~and~~ormnisslons,-of suOti"l'ax - :;Assessor-Collector;foF~hls.servS~es .~e'~~~'for:as,sesslng.-andl$!for collecting. : .'.: .,, ... ,The'Dlstaictm& -levy.andicollect'taxes'~- for:.the,ye%r'J965:~ .: .:.-I :I ., _; : : 4; The Iistri&:&qr tax~.lntanglblepropertkes within ltsr-bouridarles:under:the' general T. rules of law applicable to taxation of such ‘p~~p&-tie.s e:::. in : of5 . . :.,.:‘,..... . .^ _, v~:i I~ : .‘. >: $‘.,~.:,.t .The Dl~~lat!mag~~ax~fh~rsol~lng 'stock %f.~a:~allroad~ol' trarisportat%ni&mpany under the conditions stated In this opInIoni. .~.'.$ ::,.'. ., .' 1'>_: :*i:.: ,' :. '::I~. '.(,.,*.,/ :.T;'.;.j-' ':., ;:. :: Y,‘::~ ‘ ~.. : (1 :. !ZC'. ~ Ycurs iery 'trylTF?: ...,i:.. ::.. :.Y, , ',-pf,. .~. :; : i -?I: WAQ(JmR CAm .'.~ :,; 1' Y.," : ;yI,! i ."~ ~Attoqntiy,$eneral.' 1': 3.:“.:, ... . . Assist-t- ::. !:.~‘: :. ~, . -2182- Honorable Henry Wade, Page 7 Opinion No. C-458 WEA:dl APPROVED: OPINION COMMITTEE: W. V. Geppert, Chairman Gordon Cass John Pettlt Jack Goodman John Reeves APPROVED FOR TRE ATTORNEY GENERAL By: T. B. Wright -2183- , . c .-.- 4 C-458 has been withdrawn and replaced by C-533