Untitled Texas Attorney General Opinion

ALT~~xTVILTEXAR VILL WIL?3ON .,'rTO*NE:Y G.*:N~**AL August 26, 1957 Honorable Hubert W. Green, Jr. Opinion No. WW-24.0 Criminal District Attorney Bexar County Re: Authority of Bexar San Antonio 5, Texas County to pay the City of San Antonio costs of acquiring rights-of-way under the facts submit- Dear Mr, Green: ted, You have requested an opinion on the following ques- tion: "Can the Commissioners Court legally author- ize the payment of this claim of the Cfty of San Antonio, and can the County Auditor legally issue voucher warrant in payment of such claim?" The facts on which this question is based, according to your request, are substantially as follows. The Commiss:ion- ers' Court of Bexar County on July 9s i952y entered into an agreement with the Highway Department whereby the Comrnission- ers' Court of Bexar County agreed to obtain certain rfghts-cf- way for the construction of a State Highway under the provisions of Article 6674-n, Revised Civil Statutes of Texas, 1925, as amended. Prior to the acquisition of the property in question and on September 25, 1952, the City of San Antonio annexed the territory wherein the property is located, Thereafter, the County of Bexar and the City of San Antonio entered into an agreement whereby the City of San Antonio would acquire such property and the Commissionerst Court of Bexar County agreed to comnensate the City of San Antonio for its services up to the .%nnof $35,OOO.OO,whichhad been set aside by the County for that purpose. The City of San Antonio acquired the property in ques- tion and has now filed a claim with the Commissioners' Court for the sum of $33,500.00. The City of San Antonio acquired the property by condemnation proceedfngs and had to pay in excess of the sum of $339500.00 for its acquisition. Section 52 of Article III of the Constitution of Texas authorizes counties and political subdivisions to issue bonds for the purpose of construction, maintenance and operation of macadamized, gravelled or paved roads and turnpikes, or in aid thereof. In construing this provision of the Constitution it Honorable Hubert W. Green, Jr., page 2 (bfw-240) was held in Citv of Brackenridge v. Steuhens Counte, 120 Tex. 318; 40 S.W.2d 43 (1931) that the Commissioners' Court has au- thority to expend county road bond funds for the improvement of city streets where such city streets form integral parts of county roads or State Highways, when such improvements are made without conflicting with the jurisdiction of the municipality or with its consent or approval. See also Hughes v, Harris County, 35 S.W.2d 818 (Tex.Civ.App. 1931). A similar q-Jestion to that presented in your request was involved in the City of Breckenridze case, supra. In that case the City of Brecken- ridge sought to recover on a contract with Stephens County wherein the county agreed to pay a part of the costs of im?rov- ing one of the streets of the city and the street ir question was a connecting link and an integral part of a county road and State Highway; and in that case the Supreme Court held: "From what we have said it is evident that we hold that under the Constitution and laws of ::his state the county in the instant case had the right to make the improvement in que,stionhere, Of course, if the county had the right to make the im- provement, it had the right to make the contract so to do. a e ." Since the acquisition of the right-of-way in question was for a State Highway, it is apparent that i';forms "integral parts of county roads or state highways" and you are therefore advised that the county is authorized to pay the clain in ques- tion under the facts submitted, and that it is the duty of the County Auditor to countersign the warrant for the payment of the claim. SUKMARY The County has the authority to expend County Road Bond Funds for the payment to a city for the acquisition of rights-of-way for the county within the corporate limits of incorporated cities or towns where the property in question forms integral parts of county roads or state highways. Yours very truly, WILL WILSON Attorney General of Texas JR:wb Assistant Honorable Hubert W. Green, Jr., page 3 (WW-240) APPROVED: OPINION COMMITTEE H. Grady Chandler, Chairman Mary Kate Wall W. R. Hemphill Roger Daily REVIEWED FOR THE ATTORNEY GENERAL BY: Geo. P. Blackburn