Untitled Texas Attorney General Opinion

OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF TEXAS AUSTIN Zlonor%bl%B. Faua%ttYora%,Speeker Eotme of Reprsseittatives Au~tln, Tazslr Bear 81r: Bear in whloh pna r 18mled under t mmta8pro~ed and le$%l obli ot to sxeeed i1rte.n (16) year& e of refunding all tlw outstand- debtadmss of the G@wral l!'wd It 18 the opinion of this dePertment thati the bond8 6otaght to be issued under authority of the propolrod sasab- ment would be valid and lag%2 obLlgetion8of 8uoh OmRtjr, Honorable R. -Ott ldorse, IQne 14, 1939, page #I? but o&g to the oxtent that same are issued and exohsnaed for legal aad ralld outs~dlng WWrant indebtedness,ln suah mamier aslbnor provided by general law. The pro- posed amendment oeeks only to ahange the constltntlosal provlslons with rererenoe tc the levy or taxes lssofar as same arreots Red River County, and we do not think it la anywise alters the general laws sppertalnlng to the lsm- anoe of fundlog or refusdlagbonds. Aooordlnglf,we are of the opinion that the flegalltyof the wimrtmts sought to be runaed must be determinedbetore the Attornoy Qaaw82 oould properly approve the bonds to be issued la liea o? and in erahangs for such b&standing warrant lnd8btsdness. The resolution,clearly, does not undertake to vaLidate all warrant indebtednessnow outstandingagalsst the General l%M or Bed River County. Trustlng'thatthis satisfaotorilyass-8 $our ques- tloa, we are Very truly yotirs ATTOIGIEY GENERAL OB'TUAS