OFFICE OF THE AlTORNEY GENERAL OF TEXAS

Honorable R. E. Stone County Auditor

.'CassCounty Linden, Texas;

\, ? Dear Slr:~ AUSTIN

OpinionNO. Q-3383 Re:

missioner's Tlxe Xarranta

We assuxxethat you refer to aommissioner preoinots and not to defined road dlztrfcts in the question stated above. Therefore, we oonstrue your questions as followsr

Ftist, can a oounty oonmiscioner~s Court legally issue time warrants for roadmsohinery not provided for In the 1941 budgot, thereby oreating additional future indebtedness sgsinst the oounty?e.
.

1

. ..

HonorableR. E. Stone, Page 2

Second,what is the oontrolllne faotor in ddtermfning the maximum smount of time warrants that oan be issued or future indebtedness,thatcan be oreated against a oounty?

Generally speaking,wvithoutspecial euthorlty, the oourt ohorgedwith the administration of the business affalre of the county Iswithout the poser to isnue negotiable seourltiss, depriving tha county of true defenses against the origlnal oroditor. This restriotion does not, however,Rrevenb a county from entering Into contraots for publio Lmprove:;;ents and issuingnon-negotlsble interest bear@ warrants in payment thereoi. The co.zv&sioners court has t?d power to inour lndebtedn+s not only to the extent of the revenues of the oounty durin,r

the term of office of such oommlsslonerc,but also to the extent of contraotlnF, away revenues uaichwill bo oolleoted duringmany years, and to evidunoe the indebtednessby lnt8iast bearingv;arrsnts. The powar of the oo~mmissioners coUrt to issuewarrsnts exists by virtue of Itspower to provide pubI: buildings and improvements and to create a debt therefor, Countieshsve pov:orto oontroot for the construotion of courthous8s,or for the improvernont 

### 0rpublio roada, on the genersl oredit of the County, and may iSsUe as evidence of Indebtednessthereby Or8ated interestbearingwsrrants of the county. (Brisdgeisv. City of Lampnsaa, 249 S. X. 1083; Lasatar v. Lopez, aenoe, vol. 11, p. 63). 217 S. W. 373; Texas JurispruWe respeotrully answer your first questionin the affirmative. Provided, however, that at the tile the oontraot of purchase ismade, a tax is levied to pay the dabt and interestthereon as provided in Seotion 7,Artiole 11, Of the State COAStitUtiOn. (Also see Austin Bros. v. Xontague County, 291 ;j.'vi. 628, 10 S. ?I.(26) 707, 27 S. ‘il. (2d) 144; ColonialTrust Co. v. IX11 County, 294 S. X. 516).

The fact that the above mQAtiOnfJdtimewsrranta were not provided for in the 1941 budget Is imaterial. Rowever, after the lssuanoe of saidwarrants, tha obllCation evldenooa by thewarra.nts must be shown in the subsequent budgets of the oounty. Civil Statutes). (Art. 609a-9, brAOn'S Annotated

171threferenoe to your seoond question, the eontrolllnf faotor determining the msximum amount Of timewarrants on iuture indebtedness that oan be oreatedagainst a“.

.

. . ..

Honorable R. E. Stone, PSg0 3

oounty for the SboV8 mentioned purpose is oontrolled by Sad.'9, Art. 8 of the Stste Constitution, and Artiole 2352, Vernon's Annotated Civil Statutes, which authorize the oommissioner~e oourt to levy and oolleot a tax not 0XO80diAg iift80n oenta for road and bridges on the one hundred dollar valuation.

Therefore, you are advised that the commissioner*e oourt oan legally issue any amount Of timewarrants not 8x0 oeeding the statutory and constitutional llmltstlons above nantlonad,provided, that at the time the oontraot of purohase iS made, the taxes sre 18Vi8d to pay the debt and interest thereon as provided in Seotion 7,Artiole 11 of the State Constitution, togetherwith all other outstanding obligations which are to be paid out of the abovementioned tax.

Trusting that the foregoing fully answers your inquiry,we are Yours very truly ATTORNRY CENERAL,OF TEXAS



### BY baa11 willima

Assistant

APPROVECAPR 30,1941 

# hi -&=

ATTORNEY GE~TZRAL

0~ TEXAS