The Attorney General of Texas 

December 8, 1978 

Honorable Ben F. McDonald, Jr. 

Executive Director 

Texas Department of Community Affairs 

Box 13166, Capitol Station 

Austin, Texas 78’7ll 

Opinion No. H- 1275 

Re: Authority of the Texas 

Department of Corn munitg 

Affairs to expend appropriated 

state funds on public works 

programs. 

Dear Mr. McDonald: 

You have requested our opinion regarding the authority of the Texas 

Department of Community Affairs to expend appropriated funds on public 

works programs. 

You state that the City of Raymondville, pursuant to section 304 of the 

Public Works and Economic Development Act of 1965, 42 U.S.C., section 3153, 

has recently applied for federal funding of a sewer lift system to serve a 

nearby farm labor camp. The farm labor camp is at present being upgraded 

under a grant from the Farmers Home Administration. An estimated $100,000 

has been budgeted for the sewer lift system, of which $15,000 has been 

allocated for services and the remainder for construction costs. 

As a condition to the expenditure of federal funds under section 304, 

the state must provide matching funds equal to 25 percent of the federal 

contribution. The state’s portion may derive from any state source, but may 

not include contributions by local governments or by private organizations or 

individuals. Thus, in order to make maximum use of the federal grant and lo 

fund the sewer lift system in the full amount of $100,000, the state must 

contribute $20,000. You indicate, however, that in past projects funded under 

section 304, the Department of Community Affairs “has abided by the policy 

of contracting to reimburse local governments for only the costs of 

professional services,” in this case $15,000. The department has not 

heretofore committed state funds for the reimbursement of construction 

costs. You ask whether it is prohibited from doing so. 

In order to justify the expenditure of state funds for a particular 

project, the project must be statutorily authorized and must also be supported 

by a specific appropriation. Attorney General Opinion H-944 (197’7). In 

P. 5044 
Honorable Ben F. McDonald, Jr. - Page2 (H-1275) 

addition, the funds may be expended only in furtherance of a valid public purpose. 

Attorney General Opinion H-1042 (19’77); Letter Advisory No. 107 (1975). 

The Department of Community Affairs is empowered to 

(3) provide financial aid to local governments and combinations of local governments for programs which are 

authorized such assistance. 

V.T.C.S. art. 4413(201), S 4. Furthermore, the department may 

apply for contract for, receive and expend for its purposes 

any appropriations or grants from the State of Texas, the 

federal government, or any other source, public or private. 

E section 13. In our opinion, these provisions furnish ample statutory authority for 

the department to expend state funds for the construction of a sewer system to be 

owned and operated by a city government. 

The current appropriations act allocates a total of $59,617,590 to the 

department for “Community Assistance and Resource Utilization” for fiscal 1979, 

including $1,358,911 for “Community and Local Development.” Of the entire 

amount, the sum of $710,549 is to be financed from general revenue funds. Acts 

1977, 65th Leg., ch. 872, at 2851. We believe that these items of appropriation 

furnish sufficient basis for the department to expend funds thereunder for the 

sewer lift project you have described. 

Finally, it is also our view that the department is not prohibited from 

expending state funds for this purpose by virtue of article 3, section 51 of the Texas 

Constitution. If the project has a proper public purpose, any incidental benefit to 

individuals does not invalidate the expenditure of state funds. State v. City of 

Austin, 331 S.W.2d 737 (Tex. 1960); Barrington v. Cokinos, 338 S.W.2d 133 (Tex. 

1960). In our opinion, the construction of a sewer lift system for a farm labor camp 

could be found to serve a valid public purpose of the State of Texas. See Housing 

Authority of City of Dallas v. Higginbotham, 143 S.W.2d ‘79 (Tex. 1940);Attorney 

General Opinions H-403, H-257 (1974); H-109 (1973); Letter Advisory No. 107 (1975). 

We conclude therefore that the Department of Community Affairs is not prohibited 

from expending state matching funds for the construction of a sewer lift system, 

owned and operated by a city, and serving a farm labor camp. 

SUMMARY 

The Department of Community Affairs is not prohibited 

from expending state matching funds for the construction of 

a sewer lift system, owned and operated by the City of 

Raymondville, and serving a farm labor camp. 

P. 5045 
Honorable Ben F. McDonald, Jr. - Page 3 (H-1275) 

Attorney General of Texas 

APPROVED: 

us 

DAVID M. KENDALL, First Assistant 

c gRg&g& 

Opinion Committee ’ 

P. 5046