sAmc-0~~xx GSNERAL 

OF TElxAs 

PRICE DANIEL 

r\TTORNEY GENERAL 

Hon. LaVerne P. McCann 

County Attorney 

Hockley County 

Levelland, Texas 

Opinion No. V-744 

Re: Authority Of commiasloners 1 Court to 

levy taxes to main- . 

Denr Sir: 

tain public parks.,. 

Your letter requests an opinion on several 

questions the f’lrst of which reads: 

“In case the voter3 of t’he County 

authorize the issuance of bonds to purchase and/or improve lands for Park 

purposes under Art. 6081X RCS, would the 

Commissioners Court, after the building 

of auoh Parks, have authority to levy 

a maintenance tax to. maintain ruch Parks 

independently of Art, 6078 ROM If’ so, 

would such tax so levied for meint+ance 

be chargbable against the General Rand?” 

aaid: 

Tn Opinion No, V-669 of this offi& it ia 

ftArtlclr 6078, Vernonts Civil Statutes, providea a method by which the Commisslonerst Court may purchase and improve 

parks and pay for such purchase and improvemont with money derived from a tax 

levy of not exceeding five cents on saoh 

one hundrrd dol&ru a&ressed valuation of 

property, after authorization to do so by 

two-third3 vote of the property taxpaying 

voter3 at an election held for such purpose. Such Court la further authorized 

to levy an annual tax to maintain such 

~~f~~~.Pa~~si~r~~~~~~~~~) 

“Article 60810,’ Vernon’s Civil Statutes, protides a method by which a county 
Hon. LaVerne F. McCann -,Page 2 (V-744) 

or en incorporated city, independently 

or ,jolntly with each other, ma 

and implbve public parks and --l?=Q p aygroun a ', 

and pay for the same with proceeds of 

bonds issued for,, such purpose. 

*It is made plain in Article 60854 

that it is limited to the issuance of 

bonds and that the proceeds of bonds iasued under that Article may not be used 

for any purpose other than the purchase 

and improvements of land for park puroses. The ten cent tax authorized in 

hat statute can be used only to pay Fhs 

requirements of bonds issued thereunder. 

"Article 6078 and 60814 stand separately* and, if submitted at the same time 

must be submitted sepa,rately on the balLet at an eIection authorized thereby, 

respectively, and may not ,bs submitted 

jointly." 

Article 60814, V. C. S. provides a method by 

which a, county or an 'incorporated city0 independently 

or jointly, may acquire and improve public perks and 

playgrounds and pay for the same with the proceeds of 

bonds issued for such purpose. 

Section 3 of said article provides that 'all 

dounties and incorporated cities are authorized to 

levy a tax not exceeding five (5) cents on the one hundred (#JOO,OO) dollars property valuation to create a 

fund f'or the Improvement and operation of such parks." 

Such tax is in addition to the ten cent tax to pay the 

bonds voted to purchase and improve parks, 

In Opinion O-7456 by a former Attorney General 

it is held that the park in question was not acquired 

under Article 60814, and therefore the county could not 

levy the five cent tax authorized by said section 3 of 

said Article, It is there said: 

"It is a 44ttl4a prinoipl4 of law 

that a county and its commissioners oourt 

have no powers or duties except those 

which are clearly set forth and defined 

in the Constitution and pertinent statutes, Hill County v. Hamilton, 273 S. W. 
Hon. 

,. 

LaVerne F. MoCann c Page 3 (VJ744) 

292; Edwards County v. Jennings, 33 S. W. 

585, and oases therein cited too numerous 

for repetition herein, 

"The above-quoted statutes provide 

the manner and method by which oountlas 

may establish and finance oounty parks, 

either independently or in cooperation 

with the cities. It is a well-recognized principle of laid that where the Legislature prescribes a defninte, aertain 

and fixed method of prooedure for a City 

or County to follow in the exeoutlon of 

its governmental functions other methods 

are by implication of law 4xclud4d, Foster v. City of WOO, 255 S, Wo 1104 (Sup, 

CL?), 

'In view of the fact that the CountP 

OS caiitw1 aid not ao~ipe the lands in4 

@ha&m'within:th4 Leekhart Bride P4xk in 

themanner provided by Article 6081e, 

V, A. C. Ss,, as amended, the C~saiancess* 

Court of Caldwell County la WitNUt 8uhhority to levy a tax of.5 cents on the 

$100 property valuation in the County of 

Caldwell to create a fund to help defray 

the expenses of mainten&cs and operation 

of this park." 

Applying the same rule to Article 6078, no 

tax authorized'by it may be levied for the improvement--or maintenance of parks acquired under authority 

of Article 60814, 

!:..:! 

Tax levied for park improvement is a charge 

against the County Permanent Improvement find and 

that levied for maintenance i$ a oharge'against the 

County General Fund, 

Your second question reada: 

;.' 

"In case the voters of the County by 

a two-thirds majority vote decided in favor of the tax authorized under Art, 6078 

RCS, would the Commissioners Court be authorized to levy any amount of tax it deemed neoessary to properly maintain such 
Hon. LaVomQ P. Whtm - Page 4 (V-744 1, 

parks or it be limited to a tax not to 

exceed five cents on each one hundred 

dollars valuati~on for al.1 purpeses authorized under A&. 6078 RCS, inc3uding 

maintenance?” 

. . 

v. co s., 

Under express provisions of Article 6078, 

when authorized by a two-thirds vote of 

the property tax-paying voters of a county, the Commiseionersl Court may annually levy five cent8 on 

raeh one hundred dollara~ of taxable propert in the 

county for the ,purchaae and ,improvement of 9 ands 

for ume aa county parks,’ It ia also provided in 

said Article that euoh Court, lllprg an@pilJy levy such 

additional tax as such court may deem neoesaary to 

maintain ayh ‘parks 0 Said tax leyied for the purchase and mprovement of 6uoh parks Is a charge 

against the County Permanent Improvement Fund and 

atich as is levied~ for malntenence thereof is a 

&arge against the County Oeneral Fund. 

6078 

In our Opinion V&a it was held that *Art. 

authorized the tax upon a vote of two-thlrdr majority f4r the JTB~ rohaqo and improvewnt of land2 for 

use a8 oounla Dar se It la Obvloua that this tax 

Your third quertlon reads: 

“Is the tex levy authoriaed by Art. 

6078.RCS a arpeoial levy in addltlon to 

the regular constitutional levy for g4noral and/or permanent improvements purpQa48, Or is suah amount aa may be levied under Art, 6078 RCS chargeable l 

or to be included within the over-al f? 

inat 

pormlttod for general and/or permanent 

levy 

improvements purposea?” 

would o4me &t-of ‘the Permanent Improvement tax.” 

(Art. VIII, Sec. 9, Texas Constitution,) By the same 

token a.maintenance tax levied by the Commlsslo!ymra8 

Court pursuand to Art. 6078 would be chargeable against the regular constltutloaal levy for ,general 

fund purpoees and not in addition thereto. 

Where the voters of a county authorize 

the isausmce of bonds for the purchase and 
Eon. LaVerne F. MoCann - Page 5 (V-744) 

improvement of county parks and levy of the 

tax under Article 6081e, V. C. S., such 

county may not le.vy taxes for maintenance 

purposes under Article 6078, V. C. S. 

illhere the voters of a county authorize 

the annual levy of a tax of five cents on 

the one hundred dollars valuation of property for the purchase and improvement of 

lands for use as county parks as authorized 

in Article 6078, V. C. S., the Commissioners' 

Court may annually, levy such tax and annually levy an additional tax sufficient in 

their judgment to properly maintain such 

parks and to make such improvements as authorized in said Article. 

Taxes levied for the acquisition and improvement of parks are chargeable against 

the regular constitutional levy for permanent improvement purposes, and taxes levied 

for maintenance of parks are chargeable 

against the regular constitutional levy for 

general fund purposes. 

Yours very truly, 

ATTOBH%Y GENERAL OF TElAS 

APPROVED: .