50
OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF TEXAS
AUSTIN
Honorable Zurl Brittaln
County Auditor
San Patrioio county
slnton, Texas
Your requsst S
question ha8 been reoeiy
we quote rr0=
in the Conmlr-
base of road
PerxiianentIa-
that the Per-
be expended
ohinery, and I would
our opinion on thir.”
~&ationioik/S of the Texar Conrtitutlon,
tax on property, exolulrlre of
ry to pay the pub110 debt, and
ovlded for the benefit of the
0018 ( 8hall neyer exaeed thlrtp
he one hundred dollar8 talua-
oounty, city or town shall lsry
enty-fire oetts ror oity or oounty
pLtrp6888, 8nd !Wt eXO8edhlg fifteOn 08nt8 iOr
road8 and bridg88, and not 8roeedlng fiftern
aent8 to pay juror’l, on the on8 hundred dol-
lar8 valuation, rxoept for the paymnt of debt8
lnourred prior to ths adoption of the aneodmnt
:ept8rr,berEth, Ee3; and f&r the motion of
Ronorable Furl mittaln, Fega 0
pub118 buildlags, atmuta, aewbr8, xater work8
alia other permanent improvecmitr, not to ax-
04ed twenty-tiY4 Cent8 On th4 On4 hUndr8d dOi-
ler valuation, in any on4 year, and sxorpt a8
la in this Constitution otherwise provldod; and
the Leglrleture may also authorize au addltion-
al annual ad velorsm tar to bs 14vied end ool-
lsoted tor the tuther malatenanor ot thr pub110
roads; provided, that a majority of the qualified
property tax-paying votbrs of thr omnty voting
at an alectlon to be held Sor that purpose shell
rote 8uOh tax, not to er00ea rirteen 08Rt8 on
the one hundred dollar8 valuation ot the p;mdp-
arty subject to taxation lo suoh county,
the Legislature may pass local Zawa for the uain-
tenan Of th4 FUbliU road4 8ild hfghWey8, without
the looel notice required for speolal or looal
lawa."
Artiols 2351, Vernon19 Civil Statutes, setting
forth the power8 end duties of the Comlssionerst Court,
reads in r;art a8 follows:
". . .
*3. rep out and estnblish, o&m&e and MS-
continue pub110 roads and hlghvfaye.
"4. Build-bridge8 and keep them in rewlr.
"5. Appoint road OvBr66er8 Eub 8ppOrtfOn
hand8.
"6. 6rercise general control over all roads,
highways, Serrles end bridges in their oountles.
". . .n
Artiola 2352, Vernon's Civil Statutes, referring
to the Comnissfoners~ Cmrt, reads as follows:
"3ald court ehell have the paver to levy
and oolleot a tax ror county purposes, not to
exceed twenty-five oenta on the one hundred
dollars valuation, end e tax not to exaead iii-
teen csnta on t&e one hundred dollars valuation
to supylsnent the jury fund of the oounty, ana
Honorable Burl Brlttaln, Fag 3
not to ex00ed rirtee5 oents ror roads and
bridges 05 the one hundrdd dollars valuation,
except for the paytcent ol debts inourrad prior
to the adOption of the axandmsnt of the Conati-
tutloo, September 25, A. E. 1883, and for the
erection of publio buildl5sgs, 8treets, sewbra,
water works and other gmrzanont improvemanta,
not to exceed twenty-rive oeate on the 050 bun-
dred dollars valuation in any one year, and ex-
oapt ar in the Conatltutlon otherwisa provided.
lhep my levy an addltlonal tax for road pur-
posea not to exceed rirteen oents on the one
hundred dollar valuation of tha property sub-
jeot to taxation, under the limltatloas aad la
the manner provided ior in Artiols 8, Sec. 9,
or tha Constltutlon and ln pureuanoe of tha
laws relating thareto.w
The above quoted provision of the Conetftution
presoribes the maximum rats Or taxes ior &eneral pUrp#sal,
ror roads and brldgee, ror jurlss, and for permanent lm-
proveliants, respeotlvely. The monies accruing rroa taxes
levied and oolleoted ror eaoh oi the enumerated purposes
are oonstftutional funds; and the Coizmiaalonsrs' C?urt
has no power or authority to transfer money rroa one ru5d
to another, or to expend, for one purpoee, tax money raised
ostensibly ror another purpose.
Tha lle-,ediatepurpose or the above mentioned pro-
vi5105 or the Constitution 1s to li,mitthe amount of taxes
that might be raised ror these roveral purposes, respeot-
ruilyi but it 1s also deelg5ated to inhibit 4xoeasive ex-
penditures ror any such purpoSe, and to requlre that any
and all ~oney8 raised ror taxation for any purpolie shall
be applied to that partloular purwse and to 50 other. Tee
the ease of irult v. t!ale County, 116 5. 'A. 359.
The ease of smderaon Ccunty v. Zurkr, 242 n. w.
94, holds,asong other thinas,that the statute ropuires that
any aa all money raised by taxation r0r any such purpose
shall be applied, faithfully to that partloular purpose, aa
needed tnerafor, and not to any other purpose or use whatso-
ever,
The oa3e of Carroll v. ?+illiama, 202 '7. w. 504,
holds among other things that the Conrtltution oootemplates
that, as a matter or oomo5 honesty and ralr dealings, tax
money taken rrom the people ostensibly ror one purpose ah811
Honorable Burl Brlttaln, Faga 4
be expended for that purpose alone, as well a8 the tax rate,
ror that particular olass shall not exceed thr presoribed
5axi5u5.
In view 0r the rorsgoing authorltlsr,you are
respeotrully advised that it 1s the oplnlon or thla Da-
partment that money from the permanent improvement fund
oannot be usrd to purohasr road maohinary.
Trusting that tbr foregoing ray answera your
inquiry, ~83 refzalin
Yours very truly
AT’PXXEY Gl%XlAL OF TEXAS
BY
Ardell ~illlam~
Assistant