TICTIE
OFTEXAS
July 5, 1950.
Eon. Rdger Hutchins opinion AO. v-1078.
County Attorney
Hunt county Re: The authority of the
Greenville, Texas Comlu~ssioIlers ’ court
to devote the balance
of proceeds of a bond
issue to acquire and
improve an airport to
repair former airport
buildings wbfch are now
tb be used for county
Dear Blr: fair purposes.
Your request for an opinion IS as follows :
“In 1942, Hunt County ordered a bond
Issue for the purpose of ‘acquiring and im-
proving an Air Port. @ The County acquired
some 1,500 acres of land to be used as an
Air Port and entered into a lease contract
with.,the United States Government under the
terms of which generally, the Government
agreed to establish an Air Field, and it
established Haj ors Field, p eragraph 12 of
that contract is as shown by copy attached
hereto . Subsequent to this oontract the
County and the Government entered into two
other contracts copies of whioh are attach-
ed hereto. In July 1947 the Government with
the permission of Hunt County assigned its
lease contract to the City of Greenville.
“The City of Greenville is willing to
assign, if it has not already done so, to
the Hunt County Live Stock Assoolation,
which is a non-profit organization, the use
of saue five or six buildings to be used
for County Fair purposes. Hunt County sold
its bonds and used the funds In acquiring
the real estate leased to the Government.
;zt.as some $~,OOO.OO left with this bond
. It Is very necessary that these build-
ings be repaired if they are to be permanent
buildings. The lease to the Government which
Hon. Edgar Hutchins, page 2 (v-1.078)
;;slF6n assigned to the City expires
. The Commissioners Court wish
to be informed whether it may use this
$~,OOO.OO in repairing hese buildings
and that question is sll ti4Itted to you. It
It is well settled in this State that the
proceeds der$ved frap the sale of bonds must be de-
voted to the purpose for vhlch the bonds vere issued
and no other. Lewis v. City of Fort Worth, 126 Tex.
604, 89 9 .W.2d 975 936) * Simpson v. City of Racoq-
doches, 152 3.W. 85 ‘(Text Civ. App. 1913, error dism. 1.
In 1942 bonds were issued by Runt County
for the purpose of “acquiring ana improving an air-
port for said county.” It la our opinion that the
proceeds of the bond issue can only be used for that
purpose and not for the purpose of tmprovlng build-
ings used for County Fair purposes. Since it Is con-
templated that these buildings are to be used for
County PaI* purposes, It Is our o Inion that the Dcm-
missioners I Court cannot expend $g ,OOO.OO of the bond
proceeds for repairing these buildlngs.
We express no opinion as to the authority
of the county to lease the airport facilities in
question to the Hunt County Livestock Assoclatlon.
SUbQilARY
Proceeds of a bond issue for the
purpose of “aoqulrlng and improving an
airport” cannot be used to repair bulld-
inns to be used for Counts Fair purposes.
LeGis v. CLty of Fort Worih, 126- Tek.
CFtG
4 89
of iiI&ioches
2 975 (‘152
936)
Civ. App. 1913, err& dism.).
APPROVED
: Yours very truly,
J. C. Davis, Jr. PRICI! DAHIEL
County Affairs Division Attorney General
Joe R. Greenhill
FLrst Assistant
Price Daniel
Attorney General Assistant
JR :mw: jmc