Untitled Texas Attorney General Opinion

EXE A ORNEY GENERAL OF TEXAS September 10, 1951 Eon. Wm. P, Davis Opinion No. V-1272 County Auditor Ellis county Re: Legality of using Warahaohis, Texas oounty funds to pay r0r 0ffi013 ~~ppiie~, sqUipm6nt and tels- *one faallitiee for county Home Demon* stration Agents ana . County Agricultural Dear Mr. Davis: Agents; .. Your request for an opinion presents for determination the following qussclon: “Can the County of Ellis legally pay for office supplies and equipment, telephone esrvios and long distanoe tolls for the use of’ the County Agri- aultural Agents ana the County Home Demonstration agents?” The deoisions of the Texas courts have repoatadlp held that the commissioners’ court is a oourt of limited jurisdiction and has only such powor‘s as are oonrerred upon it, either by express terms or by necessary lanplioation, by the statutes and Constitution of this State, Chlldress Countat V. State, 127 TAX. 3b3, 92 sew0 2av Pan Rosenberg v. Lovett, 173 SOW, 508 (Tex. Cib. A 1 15 f ) Roper v. Hall, 280 S.W. 2f;~"(T~x.'C?*&~s i9;5); Art. 2351, V.C.S.; 11 mx. Jur. 632, Countieti, Set, 95. Article 164, V.C.S,, provides: “The Cor:missionerPs Court of any bounty of this State is authorized to establish and oonduot oo-operative demonstration work in Agriculture and home economics in oo-operation with the Agricultural and Meohanical College of Tex- upon such teims and conditions Eon. Wm. P, Davis,. page 2, (V-1272) as may be agreed upon by the Commis- sioners’ Court and the agents of. the f$zic;;ural and kechanical College ; and nay employ such means, and appropriate and expend such sums of money as may be necessary to of- reotively establish and oarry on suoh demonstration work in Agriculture and Home Economics in their respective counties .I* This office ha8 held that Article 164 pro- vides authority for the expenditure of county funds for the erection of a building to house the County Agricultural Agent and the Home Demonstration Agent. Att’y Gen. Op. O-2516 (1940). $6 have also held that the same statute authorizes the expenditure of county runas for the purchase of kitchen equipment to be usea by the home demonstration agent. Att’y Gen. Op. O-620 (1939). In view of the foregoing, it is our opinion’that authority exists for th6 payment of tele- phone service, office supplies and equipment, and long distance tolls for the offioes or the County Agricul- tural Agent and the County Home Demonstration Agent. However, the expenditure of County funds for suah pur- pose and the necessity thert:,Pore is left to the dis- cretion af the Commissioners’ Court of Ellis County. Att’y f&n. Op. O-620 (1939). SDMJURY The Commissioners’ Court of Ellis County is authorized to expend county funds in payment ot telephone service, off+ioe supplies and equipment, and long distance tolls for the orfices of County Agricultural Agent and County Home D6mon- stration Agent. The neoessity for these, expenditures is left to the discretion of the Court. APPROVED: Yours very truly, J. C. Davie, Jr. PRICE DANIEL County Aftairs DivisiOn Attorney General Jesse P. Luton, Jr. Reviewing Assistant Everett Hutohinson Exxeoutive Assistant ;1 BW:Qs:awo