NEY GENERAL
F %-EXAS
AUSTIN 11. TEXAS
DANIEL
PRICE
ATTORNEY
GENERAL
July 9, 1949.
Ron. F~auk C. Dickey opinionno. v-837.
County Attorney
Coke County Re: Issuance of time warranlls
Robert Lee, Texas under facts submitted.
DeaP StPI
You have requested an o$Snion regarding the
authmU,g or the C~mml.ssl&e~~’ Court of Coke County to
issue time warrants for the construction or a county
hospital under the following circumstances. On May 20,
1949, the Commissioners’ Court gave notlae to the bld-
ders that on ,June 18, 1949, the Commlsslone~s~ Court of
Coke County would let a contract for the building of a
county hospital and pay fop the constpuctlon by the ls-
suance of time wamants payable ovep a period of years
not to exceed twenty. On June 18, before bids wepe
opened and befope any aotion was taken on the letting
of the eontract, a patltlon of duly qualified property
taxpaying voters numbering in excess of ten per cent of
the number of quallflecl pnoperty.,ta.xpaylng voters as
shown by the last a proved tax rolls was presented to
the Commissioners t Eourt in writing to submit to a ~ef-
erendum vote the question as to the issuance of bonds
for the purpose of paying for the construction of the
county hospital named in the notice of May 20, 1949.
It was held in Attorney~General’s Opinion Do,
V-7 9 that if the poceedlngs authorizing the lssuanoo
of z 67,000 of warrants inquired about in that opinion
were in accordance with the tepms and conditions of Ar-
ticle 2368a, and if no referendum petition wepe filed in
connection therewith, then such warrants could lavfully
be Issued. It was held in Attorney Genepal’s Opinion
v-728 that the Commlssione~s~ Court was authorized to
issue additional warrants for the purpose of itqmovi
the grounds of Dexar County Agricultural and Livestee 2
Building subject to t& ylghtof referendum by the vot-
OFS*
Accord to the facts submitted by you, a pa-
tltion ?L fled voters In exxhear of ten pep
of duly qua
sent of the numbwr Or qualified votorr shown by the la*%
Bon. Frank C. Mcksy, page 2~ (V-837)
approved tax rolls was presented within the tllae pro-
scribed by law to the Comlas$ane~s~ Court in urltlng to
submit to a referendum vote tha question as to the lssu-
ance of bonda for the purpoae.of paying for the conrtruc-
tion of the county hosplt81 in question. Section 4 of
Article 2368a gives the vqters the right to file a ref-
erendum petition on such questions; and Article 4478
V.C.S., upon the petition by tau per cent of the quall-
fled property taxpaslrig votem, autho#?lees an election
for the laauance of bonds fop the establishment, enlarge-
ment, and eqllipment or the county hospital. In rim of
the facts eubmltted, It Is our opinion that the ComaIs-
aionem' Court of Coke County ovot legally issue the
time warrmt8 in question, buli must submlt to the quall-
fled property taxpaying voters the question as to the
issuance of bonderior the purpose 0r paJlng for the oom-
atruetlon of the county hospital.
Uhero a referendum petition by ten POP
cent of the quallfled property taxpaying vot-
ers of a county has been presentad to the
Commlasionera~ Court wlthln the time prs-
scribed by law, petitioning the court to rub-
nit to a vote the question as to issuance 0r
bonds for the purpose of paylng for the con-
atructlca of a county hospital, the Commls-
sltoners 1 Court does not have the authority to
iasae t&w warrants for such purpose, but
ruHi sunbelt to the Voter6 the question of ia-
aimme of bonds for the purpose 0r paying r0r
the oomtruotlon.
Pour8 very truly,
APPROVBD ATTORHEY
GEXEZALOF TEXAS
l .
a+@“;“”
I R ST ASSISTANT
ATTOltElK 0-L
JRrbh