OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF TEXAS
AUSTIN
Wnorablo 0. C. Randlo
Drr Sir:
pinion oi thir
on raadr in pert
8 a Daputy Tax
aity of xnnir,
608, rad uamled ,ln
tanand, of fan orrfoa
a thoorand population,
ding to maintain a DoputT Tax
or.8 ofT%oa, and ths bal8noa oi
o be btliltby tha altq of Bmts.
ION O?fEt Can the County lagallr axpad
mnd8 out Of the Permanent xmpro~nt Fun6 r0r
fhf8 ptlrpoEs?
Can the Couatf josntly with
the O;~~?%%?a~uil(I the abora propord building
8nd ll80 th8 P6man8tlt II&pPOVmWtt hlld8 iOr SeWlO?
*I ofta th8 Oa8e Or Denoy VI). DaVid8OZ2, S.W.
2nd 183-195."
555
556.
Elonoreblo
C. C. tiandle,'pago
3
held that a ohm&' not
jOin a Oity in puPoha8i;ocl
OOula 8
ERtBiOipd buildin& to be
wed by both tho~oounty and
the ait:;. We believe that thfr opinion togother with
tha authorities oltod themundrr fully ammar pur
question and we enclom it together with Opinion Ho.
O-5978 ior your Ob8eTWitiOn.
Thi8 a6partmntb* p2'*8Olttopinioa i8 be8.a on &ho
root that the proporsa building 18 to b* owned ma,oon-
trd.U jointly bl the City Of mi8 and ths County Of m118.
If there were a 8OVOl'~BOO88 $0 oWn8nl;hipuld OOlttFOl ~a
aitrerent rulr might re8ult.