Hon. Max E. Ramsey 

County Attorney 

Andrews Cotint)i 

Andrews. Texas 

IDear Sir: 

Opinion No. V-1316 

Re: Time period between elections on levying a county tax 

for Farm-to-Market Roads 

or Flood Control. 

We summarize the following facts from your letter of 

September 14, 1~951, requesting our opinion on the above captioned 

matter. 

On July 21, 1951, an election was held in Andrews 

County to determine whether the 30$ county tax for Farm-toMarket Roads nor for Flood Control would be levied. A majority 

of the qualified property taxpaying voters of the county ‘voting at 

the election voted against the imposition of the tax. 

You desire to be advised as to whether the same proposition could be resubmitted to the voters at this time. 

Section l-a of Article VIII of the Constitution of Texas, 

which authorizes a county tax for Farm-to-Market Roads or for 

Flood Control, reads, in part, as follows: 

“From and after January 1, 1951, the several 

counties of the State are authorized to levy ad valorem 

taxes upon all property within their respective boundaries for county purposes, except the first Three Thousand Dollars ($3,000) value of residential homesteads, 

not to exceed thirty cents (3Oc) on each One Hundred 

Dollars ($100) valuation, in addition to all other ad valorem taxes authorized by the Constitution of this State, 

provided the revenue derived therefrom shall be used 

for construction and maintenance of Farm to Market 

Roads or for Flood Control, except as herein otherwise 

provided.” 

Article 7048a. V.C.S., implements the above quoted 

provision. Section 7 of Article 7048a reads, in part, as follows: 

“Before any county shall levy, assess and collect the Lax provided for herein the question shall by 

the Commissioners Court of the county be submitted 
Hon. Max F. Ramsey, Page 2 (V- 1316) 

to a vote of the qualified property taxpaying voters of 

such county at an election called for that purpose, either on said Commissioners Court’s own motion, or 

upon petition of ten per cent (10%) of the qualified 

property taxpaying voters of said county as shown by 

the returns of the last general election.” . 

The balance of this section and Section 8 regulate the ordering and 

holding of the election. These sections do not require that any fixed 

period of time must elapse before holding a second election in the 

event that a first election fails to carry. 

In construing analogous statutes in the past, this office 

has held. that no particular period of time need elapse after an election has failed to carry before a second election may be held on 

the assumption of school district bonded indebtedness (Att’y Gen. 

Op. O-4511 (1942), construing Article 2786b. V.C.S.), or on consolidation of school districts (Att’y Gen. Op. O-2266 (1940), construing Article 2806, V.C.S.), or on abolishing independent school districts (Att’y Gen. Op. O-2572 (1940), construing Article 2767, V. 

C.S.). The reasoning of these opinions is that since no intervening 

time period between elections is fixed by law, such limitation cannot be read into the statutes. We think this reasoning is likewise 

applicable to Sections 7 and 8 of Article 7048a. and you are therefore advised accordingly. 

SUMMARY 

Since Sections 7 and 8 of Article 7048a. V.C.S., 

do not require a fixed period of time to elapse before 

holding a second election on the question of levying a 

county tax for Farm-to-Market Roads or for Flood 

Control in the event the first election failed to carry, 

no such limitation may be read into the statute. 

Yours very truly, 

APPROVED: 

W. V. Genoert 

Taxation’Division 

PRICE DANIEL 

Attorney General 

Jesse P. Luton, Jr. 

B 

Reviewing Assistant Assistant 

Everett Hutchinson 

Executive Assistant 

MMC/mwb