The Attormy General of Texas
hly 26, 1984
JIM MATTOX
Attorney General
Supreme Court Building Honorable Gary Thorlpson Opinion No. .JM-184
P. 0. BOX 12546 Chairman
Aus!in, TX. 76711. 2546 county Affairs Cora1ittee Re: Whether revenues received
5121475.2501
Texas House of Representatives from s hotel occupancy tax may
Telex 9101674-1367
Telecopier 5121475-0266
P. 0. Box 2910 be used to make improvements
Austin, Texas 70;69 to a county golf course
714 Jackson, Suite 700 Dear Representati\!e:
Thompson:
Dallas, TX. 75202.4506
2141742-6944
You have asku whether article 1269j-4.1, V.T.C.S., authorizes El
Paso County to UX: revenues from a hotel occupancy tax to purchase
4624 Alberta Ave.. Suite 160 golf carts or to :iinancegeneral Improvements for a county-operated
El Paso. TX. 799052793 golf course. We first conclude that, because it is a city tax, the
9151533.34a4 hotel occupancy tic:authorized by article 12693-4.1 does not apply to
El Paso County; mc’reover,we conclude that, although there is a county
,‘.lM)l Texas, Suite 700 hotel occupancy tBK that does apply to El Paso County. it does not
Houston, TX. 77002-3111 authorize the county to use revenues from the tax to purchase golf
7131223.5666 carts or to finanu general improvements for its golf course.
The legislatcre has enacted several hotel occupancy taxes.
606 Broadway. Suite 312
Lubbock, TX. 79401-3479
Section 156.051 of the Tax Code was enacted in 1959; it provides for a
6061747.5236 state hotel occupsrcy tax. See Acts 1959, 56th Leg., 3rd C.S., ch. 1.
at 187. All reunues frozhis tax are deposited in the state
treasury to the credit of the general revenue fund. Tax Code
4309 N. Tenth, Suite S
1156.251. The remaining hotel occupancy taxes are levied by local
McAllen, TX. 76501-1665
5121662.4547 government6 : soma by counties and some by cities. Each of these
local tax laws authorizes the local government to use the revenues
from the tax to finance certain specified county or city projects.
*Oil Main Plaza, Suite 400
San Antonio, TX. 76205-2797
512,225.4191
The county hcsteloccupancy tax is authorized by artf,cle2372d-8,
V.T.C.S. Section : of article 2372d-8 defines the counties to which
the article applies:
An Equal OPpOrtUnityl
Affirmative Action Employer Section 1. This article applies only to
counties with a population of more than 2.000.000,
according to the most recent federal census and to
counties that border the Republic of Mexico with a
population of more than 90,000, according to the
most re:,:nt federal census, excluding counties
which :,ntain three or lllOlX cities with
populations of more than 17,500, according to the
most recent federal census.
p. 806
.
Honorable Gary Thompson - :?.age
2 (~~-184)
‘I
El Paso is such a county and it is, therefore, authorized to levy a
hotel occupancy tax.
This office has prevL)usly discussed the proper disposition of
revenues from a city's tctel occupancy tax. In Attorney General
Opinion H-209 (1974)) the :ity of Temple asked whether it could use
revenues collected under a:ri:icle
1269j-4.1 to contract with the Temple
Cultural Activities Center for the provision of cultural services to
the community. The opinion deemed the use to be outside of those
specifically permitted by the statute:
However, we da)not believe the permissible uses
of occupancy tax revenues include general efforts
to support the acts. It may be that the programs
you describe, in certain situations, could have
the ancillary uffect of contributing to a
"solicitation ar.i operating program to attract
conventions and "isitors," but as you state in
YOU? inquiry, their main purpose is the
development of programs in the arts for the
general public of central Texas. Before Hotel
Occupancy Tax funds could be used to purchase
services, activ:.ties or programs for the
development of l:he arts, we believe they would -_
need to be directly related to the attraction of
conventions or to~lrists.
Attorney General Opinion l&Z:09 (1974). The county hotel occupancy tax
was intended to raise re'r,!nuesto support projects that encourage
conventions and tourism. !ection 2 of article 2372d-8 is. in fact,
titled "Improvements to Attract Visitors and Tourists." Section 6 of
article 2372d-8 specifies hc~wrevenues from the county hotel occupancy
tax may be used. The specj.f'ication in section 6(a) of article 2372d-8
is exclusive:
Sec. 6. (a) The revenue derived from any
occupancy tax authorized or validated by this
article may only le used for:
(1) the acqllisition of sites for and the
construction, improvement, enlarging, equipping,
repairing, operation, and maintenance of public
improvements such as civic centers, civic center
buildings, aui.i
toriums, exhibition halls,
coliseums, and ctadiums, including sports and
other facilities (either or all) that serve the
purpose of attrac,tingvisitors and tourists to the
county . . . . (Emphasis added).
p. 807
Honorable Gary Thompson - ?,ige3 (~~-184)
According to section 6(a), the county's disposition of hotel
occupancy tax revenues will be authorized by the statute only if both
of the following are true! (1) the revenues will be spent for a
"public improvement" such as those listed in section 6(a)(l); and (2)
this improvement will serve the purpose of attracting conventions and
tourists to the county. I.1deciding whether general improvements to a
county golf course may be :lassified as "public improvements," we must
invoke standard rules of Etatutory construction. The rule of ejusdem
generis applies to enumer;.tions-- lists of specific terms which are
preceded or followed by a Inore general term associated with the list
of specifics. The scope o:: the general term, "public improvements,"
is therefore defined by 1:llenon-exhaustive though limiting list of
terms which follow i~t. --_
Sot!Amplifone Corporation v. Cameron County,
577 S.W.2d 567 (Tex. Civ. .Y)p.- Corpus Christi 1979, no writ).
We note that each of the public improvements listed in section
6(a)(l) is a building. lhe only phrase in the list which could
conceivably embrace a county golf course is "stadiums, including
sports and other facilities." However, "the cardinal rule of
statutory construction ie to ascertain the legislative intent in
enacting the statute." FsJlk v. State, 608 S.W.2d 625 (Tex. Grim.
APP. 1980). The clear G?ent of article 2372d-8 is to raise local
revenues for projects whic:liwill attract visitors and tourists. The
list of suggested projec,:;;in section 6(a)(l) of article 2372d-8
contemplates "sports and other facilitj~es" which will draw large
numbers of ticket- buying spectators to the county, a arenas or
pavilions where spectator pzvents such as races or other competitive
games could be held. A colurtygolf course is not such a place. We
conclude, therefore, that .Icounty could not use revenues from a hotel
occupancy tax to build a ccunty golf course; accordingly, we conclude
that the county may not use these revenues to finance general
improvements to an existin::county golf course.
SUMMARY
The county of 'clPaso may not use revenues from
a county hotel o':b:upancy
tax collected pursuant to
article 2372-8, L.T.C.S., to purchase golf carts
or finance genel,al improvements for a county-
operated golf course.
J AVery truly yours
JIM
A
MATTOX
Attorney General of Texas
TOM GREEN
First Assistant Attorney G,nleral
p. 808
Honorable Gary Thompson - I?;ige
4 (JM-184)
DAVID R. RICBARDS
Executive Assistant Attornq General
Prepared by Rick Gilpin
Assistant Attorney General
APPROVED:
OPINION COMMITTEE
Rick Gllpin, Chairman
David Brooks
Colin Carl
Susan Garrison
Jim noellinger
Nancy Sutton
p. 809