Untitled Texas Attorney General Opinion

OFFICE OF THE AITORNEY GENERAL OF TEXAS AUSTIN Bonorable Olevelend Davis county Attorney BrazOPia COULty LLngleton, Texas Dear Sir: ~Yourrequest for .>$. has - nlentbeen reeelved snd ears g! . i‘.i ad Texas Girl1 , Vemon*e Annotated Texas Civil *The ooumdsslonera ooulrtshall eee that the road and bridge fund of thefr Bounty ia judiciouslyand equitablyexpended on the roads and bridges of their aounty, and, 88 nearly ae the oondltlon andneoemitp ef Wsnsrabla Clsreland Davis, Page 2 the roads wIl1 pewlt, It shall besvpsndsd la each oounty oolrmi~sionerspreoinot In pr&portlon to the amount oolleotsd In suoh preoinst. Money used In building permanent roada shall first be used only on first or seoond-olassroads, and on those whioh shall have the right of way furnished free of cost to make as straight a road as Is praotioableand having the greatest bonus oftered by the aitizens of money, labor or other property." Article 6741, Vernon's Annotated Texas Civil statut04) read8 as follows: "The oommlaeloneracourt may make and enfbroe all reasonable and necessary rules and orders for the working and repawIng of pub110 roaas, and to utlllse the lab& to bo used and money expended thereon, not in oonfllot with the laws orthla State. Said oourt may purebase or hire all neoelsaary road maohlnery, tools or tsams, and hire suoh labor atamay bs needed In addition to the labor required of oitiaens to build or repair the Toads." The oases of Willisma, et al v. De Pee, Osunty Judgs, 77 9. w. (2d) 729 and HI11 county v. Bryant 8 mrr- man, ~6 S, W. (2df 513, cited by you In your brief, hold that the Commissioners Court has authority to employ an engineer to supervise sn% aid In ths oonsttiotion al&imaln- tananoe 0r oouoty road8. We quote from 21 Texas Jurlsprudenoe , pai3es 644-5, a6 ronowe: "I 126. IPnployment or Engineer. - The state highway englnoer ia a statutory offioer. But for a oounty or road diatrlot the State Highway CommIssIannay, upon applloetlon, reoommend a oompstent oIvi1 engineer, and there is no doubt that under the general road law a oounty has Implied power to employ an ._ 343. fioaorabloOlereland Davlr, Page 3 engineer to mpervlse oonstructIonoaatraot8. It Is now expreeely provided that the engage- meat of an engineer shall not be eubjeot to oompetltivebidding. Whether a speolal road law governIn@ a partloular oounty authorize8 muoh employment,end, If 60, whether the engineer may be employed on a oomulaelon..~ bada, depend on what le expxessed OP,~ plied by the law In question. Generally, of oourse, the oompenrra- tlon of the engineer and other oblI@tlona Inter se are determinedby the oontraot lteelf. The question has been raised a8 to what oompensationla 80 exaesslva as to be of itself arldenae of fraud, and It ha been hold that a eontraotwa@ not Invalid ror.rraud beoause 81x per oat. or the ooet of the oonatruotionwork wa8 payable thereunber. 'Where road Improvmnt work Is under- tkkn by the oou&y 88 employer Or the uorben engaged, the en@neer-rupervlsor 10 not a oontraotorwithin the pu.rrIeV~of the statute requiring oontraotor8ior pub110 norks to fornlih a bond. traotl(-%ng%s~~ %~~~p%%d oharged with the duty or oreatlng and maintaining adequate road@, a oOmmlasioner8* court neoessarlly harsauthority to oontraot for road oonetruotionend Improreraent work. "*The bglalature has Been proper to oonfer upon the commlseIonermScourt the pourerand authority to nake contraotrr for the repairing and oonatruotlonof soad@ within Its oounty, and so long ES eaid aourte make oontrtiotawithin the matrio- tione of the oonstltutionand under the authbrlty of the law, it Is not for the honorableCleveland Davia~, Pags 4 oourts to substitutetheir judgment for that of the sommlasioners*oourt as to the wisdmn of such oontraots.' . . . . ,* You do not state in your letter whether or not BrazorIa County Is governed by the general road law but us assume from your letter that euoh Is the base and we base our answer to your question upon the assumption that your oounty Is governed by the general road law. On May 13, 1938, this departmsnt held, In a letter opinion written by Honorable R. X. Qray, Assrle- tant Attorney General,reoorded In Vol. 361, page 509, latter Opinions of the Attorney Daneral, that the Wm- timloners* Court had authority to maploy an en&tsar to uparvise and aid In the ooustruotionand malntenauoe aI aaunty roads, and that his salary should be paid from the road and bridge funda ot the oounty. It la therefore our opinion that the en&neer employ46 by Brazorla Cmmty to aonatruot and maintaintha publIo roada of said oounty should be paid from the read ra8 bridge funds oi mid aounty. AFPL:'.':.FLE20, 1941 W3FtGO ATTORNEY GENERAL OF TEXAS