R-909
THEATTORNEY GENERAL
OF TEXAS
Auwrx~ 11.-a
PRICE DANIEL
.4TTORNEYGENERAL *
December 3. 1947
Hon. LaVern I. McCann Oplalon lo. v-437
County ,Attorney
Hockley County Rer Tsability of lend
Levelland, ‘T,ex~ purchased fop a coun-
ty poor farm but prer-
eatly I~eaae& or rented
to tn-ird pertlea
Dear Madsmr
You have requested a~ opinion from this De-
partment ila to the taxability of certMn land owned by
Eockley County. Your request adviser us’oi’the follow-
ing iacts :
G”Ia 1928 Bockleg County bought a
labor of’ land containing 177 scpea, i~or
a County Poor Farm. There is not~rnd
never has bean any~‘htieM OS tmprooementa
on the farm. The lend has been l,eesed
and rented for agrloultural, pumoaea and
also l,es,aed to dn o,iP company for the de-
velopment .and prod,ucti.on of oil: and at
this time there are three ,produclng oil
wells on the farm. All the Income deriv-
ed from the land In question, whether
from egrlculture or 011 production, has
been turned into the Genersl Charity Fund
of the County and has never been used for
any other purpose.
“The farin la located in the~Level-
land Independent Sohool District and has
been placed, on the 1947 tax ,rolla of the
District. The County end S&o,01 are rux-
ioua to know their legal ,poaition Yn the
mstter and the taxes will be paid or the
farm will be removed fMm the dlatHct*r
tex,rolls 8a soon lo an oplaiou orn be had
from your d spa rtment ’l
“The property. of cout&thes . ., . ow~ff, end
hold only for public ,pmoaea . . .” is dmol utely
H0n. LeVera I. McCann - Page 2 (V-447)
exempt from taxation by virtue of Article XI, Section 9
of the Conatitutlon of the State of Texas. hphaaea
added throughout this opinion). A. & M. Consolidated
School Dlatrict v. City of Bryan, Texas, 143 T 348184 .
. 0 1 914 Likewise, i to the power'con-
ferred by Ariicle VIII,, Se%?%s??fethe Constitution
I,
( * * . but the Legislature may, by general lawa, exempt
from taxation public property used ,.for public purpoaea.
"), the Legislature ensoted, Section 4 of Article
i140; V.C.S., exempting wall property; whether real or
personal, belonging exclusively to this State, or an
olitical subdlvlalon thereof. . .'I This, pravls-37---L
on
een held olleiatfve as 'an exercise of all the power
the Leaislature had. * valid to that extent. and‘deolara-
tory o? an exemption for "public property used for plb-
lit purposes. . . .I' City of Abilene v. S?%'i%, 113
S. W. (2) 636. Seotlon 6 of Article 7150, V.d.S. reads
88 follows:
*Poor-houaea .--All landa, houses and
other buildings belonging to any county,
precinct or town, used exclualvely for the
support or accomodation of tha., poor.8
Thus it is appsrent that if the county had
accomplished its initial purpose of establishing a poor
farm on the land here Involved, said land would no8 ba
exempt from taxation. The question is whether the
present leasing and renting of the land to third partlea
prevents its coming within any of the various categories
of exemption above set ,out.
We are not advised as to whether or not Hockley
County still plans to utilize the land for a poor Sam.
If, in fact, there has been no abandonment of the puapoae
for which the land was orlalnalls bouaht. it is tax ex-
empt . City &AE;kene V* State.-11 S.li;, (2) 631; State
v. City of B 161 S.W. (2) 324. We enclose scope
of Opinion OJi2cIb 0; thla Department, which diseussea
these casea in detail in connection with a consideration
of the tax exemption of certaln~ olty property. Likewise
this opinion atates and adheres to tha convene ~of the
rule: I-e., tax exemption oannot be accorded property
whloh la not used for public purposes or held in further-
ance of a present intention t,o ~devote said property to 8
speaific public purpose even, though the public is benefit:
ed lndlreotly through funds derived from the property.
The Opinion also, distlngulahea the cases ,which have dealt
with situations in which the, property stood aa a aubsti-
Hon. LsVern I. McCann. - Page 3 (V-447)
tute for a special fund from the fact situation there
under consideration In which the’ property was held for
the benefit of a park fund. We view the dlstlnctlon
there dlvwn as applicable to the facts of thla oaae,
and you are therefore advised that if Hockleg County no
longer holds the land for a apeclfic public purpose, it
Is subject to taxation. Seotlon 6 of Article 7150, pre-
viously quoted, does not change this result. Even If
the language of this section were construed to include
the revenue derived from county-owned income producing
property and used exclusively for the support of the
poor, (and we do not think this construction the cor-
root one), such Inclusion would be an attempt to exempt
public property regardless of its use and ineffective
br reason of beinn in excess of the exemntive Dowers~
cbnferred by Article VIII, Sectby 2. City of- Abllene
v. State, 113 S.W. (2) 631.
Of course a determination of the exemption
atatus of the land owned by the county has no effect
on the taxation of the estate held by the owners of the
011 lease; for “since the ordinary form of oil and gea
lease passes to the lessee an Interest in real property,
he Is iiable for the tax thereon to the extent of the
31 Tex. Jur. a 452 and authorltiea cited there-
Therefore, the ownera of the 011 lease from the
cointy are liable for aid hold their estate subject to
all taxes imposed on their estate by the State, county,
School District, and any other taxing unit having jurls-
diction to impose a tax thereon.
SUMMARY
Land purchased for a county poor farm
is exempt from taxation If there has been
in fact no abandonment of the Intention to
use the land for auoh purpose even though
Dart of the land la Dresentlv leased for
ig&ultural purpose; and pa& for the pro-
duotion of oil. City of Abllene v. State,
631; State v. City f Beaumont,
2: ix*. . 344. If there Is n: present
Intention to devote the property to a specific
public purpose, the fact revenue derived from
the property goes to the General Charity Fund
of the county is not sufficient to exempt the
land from taxation. Opinion o-4285. The
estate created by the 011 lease from the ooun-
ty ia subject to taxation by the State, OoUnty,
Hon. LaVern I. McCann - Page 4 (v-447)
School Matrict and any other taxing unit
having jurisdiction to impose a tax thereon;
and the lessee Is liable for such taxes to
the extent of the grant. 31Tex. JUP. @
452.
Yours very truly
ATTORNEY
GENERALOF TEXAS
BymMW CrW
Assistant
APPROVRD:
%z- cz4LL-J
ATTORNEY
GENERAL