Untitled Texas Attorney General Opinion

377 OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF TEXAS AUSTIN Iionorable A. A. Miller County AttorneT Newton county Newton, Texas ' Dear Sir: By yours lettsr o ou submit r0r the opin- ion or this Departmnt the ther or not the Light imd Watrr eystea belonging Newton Is exempt under &tials 7150'Vernon"e Civil om ad valorem tares. f Nowton ie only furnish- a, and has not extended wns or vlllegee. oridee, In part, as follows: and unlrora. All property The Lagielaturs, in pureoance of the authority vested In It by Article VIII, Section 2 (supra) enacted Article 7150 or tha 378 Honorable A. A. Mller, Fage 2 Revised Civil Statutes of 1925, which reads In part a8 followa: *The following property shall be axe,@ from tar- ation, to-w1t: *. . . . “4. Fublio proparty. All property, whether real or pereonal, belonging exclusively to this State, or any political rub-dlvlelon thereof, . . . .I The town of Newton la a polltioal nub-division of the State, and under th% above @itad Oonatitutlonal provisions and Article 7150 R. C. S., all property, both real and persons1 be- longing to it that Is used for pub110 DUSDOBOB 18 exempt iron taxation. The only question to br deterninod i@ whether the light and water syatoa or the town of Newton lr public propartg mad ror a pub110 purpoea. It Is our oplaion, that .tha li&ht and water ayatam of the town of Newton lr public property used tar publio parporee and therefore exempt from the payment o,i ad valorem taxee. Fo baw our oplnlon upon the followl~ aathorlties. A reservoir looated In Denton Ooi.nty, owned by the City of Dallas and ueed by the City 80 rurnish water to It6 altl- zens WINIheld to be tax exempt. City of Dallae Y. Statr, 28 SW (2nd) 937 (writ nrua04). Xn the ease ot City of Abllene vs. State, 113 SB (2nd) 631 (Writ dlsmiesed) the Eastlend Court of Oivil~ Appeals held that oerteln property owned by the City of Abllene, which was bou&ht by said city for the purpose of erecting a reservoir for impounding w:tter for the use of the inhabitants of aaid city, wee exempt from taxation. The coart quoted Article VIII, Section 2, of the Constitution, en well ae Article 7150, aupra. In holding the property of thie munlolpal corporation to be tax exempt, the boart spoke ae follower “Counties,aities and towns are munialpal corporationa. Oonat. 11. They are political Article aubdlvlslona of the State. Id. Gorporatlon of San Felipe Ije Austin Y. State of Taxae, 111 Tax. 108, 229 S. V. 845. Property owned and held by counties, citlea end towns le publio r,roperty, subjsat 379 honorable A. A. %iller, Pass 9. to tzxation or exemption, aaeording to the condltlonr or cirau54tanose presorl sd by the Constitution and 1~~3 of the Stats. That the prosarty in question is pvblic property was determined in City of i;ellss v. State, Ter. Clv. -