Hon. Bill F. Griffin, Jr. Opinion No. C- 39 

County Attorney 

Shelby County Re: The legality of certain exCenter, Texas penditures 'by Shelby County 

and whether-those expenditures may be paid out of the 

Dear Mr. Griffin: Permanent Improvement Fund. 

Reference is made to your request which reads in part 

as follows: 

"Shelby County, Texas, by and through its 

Commissioners Court, is interested in investing 

the sum of $1,200.00 in connection with the employment of Forrest and Cotton, Inc., Consulting Engineers and Marvin Springer & Associates, 

Urban Planning and Development Consultants for 

the purpose of developing a planning program for 

the Shelby County Area, primarily concerning the 

development of areas surrounding the proposed 

Toledo Bend Reservoir. . . . .~ 

(1 . . . 

"1 would like to have the benefit of your 

views concerning the legality of such an expenditure on the part of Shelby County. . . . 

"Assuming that such an expenditure by Shelby 

County would be legal, our first:question is 

whether same could be paid out of the Permanent 

Improvement Fund of Shelby County. . . .'I 

The decisions of the Texas courts have repeatedly he:Ld 

that 'the Commissioners I Court is a court of limited jurisdiction 

and has only such powers as are conferred upon it, either by express terms or by necessary implication, by the statutes and C'znstitution of this State. 

92 S.W.2d 1011 (1936); Vo 

ess Counts v. State, 127 'kc. 1343, 

berg v. Lovett l/5 S.W. 508 ('Tex. 

Civ.App. 1915, error ref.); Rooer v. Hall 280'S.W. 289 (Tex.Civ. 

App. 1925); Article 23.51, Vernon's Civil 6 tatutes; 11 Tex.Jur. 

632, Counties, Sec. 95. 

-IO?- 
. . 

t . 

: * 

Hon. Bill F. Griffin, Jr., page 2 (C-39) 

In order for Shelby County to have the authority to 

make expenditures for the planning of a county development 

program, there must be a granting of such authority by the Constitution or by the Legislature of the State of Texas. The only 

statute which would seem to apply to such an expenditure would 

be Acts 54th Leg., 

part as follows: 

R.S. 1955, Ch. 351, p. 899, which reads in 

"'Section 1. That all counties in the State 

of Texas may appropriate from the General Fund of 

said counties an amount not exceeding Five Cents 

(5$) on the One Hundred Dollars (#lOO) assessed 

valuation, for the purpose of advertising and promoting the growth and development of such county; 

providing that before the Commissioners Court of 

any county may appropriate acy sums for such purpose, the qualified taxpaying voters of said county 

shall, by a majority vote of the persons voting at 

such election, authorize the County Commissioners 

to thereafter 

%ll,tion I 

appropriate not to exceed Five Cents 

on the One Hundred Dollars ($+OO) assessed 

. 

. - 

" . . . 

YSec. 2. The authority to levy the tax provided for herein shall be restricted to counties 

of more than one hundred thousand (lOC,OOO) population, according to the most recent United States 

Census. 

"Sec. 3. The authority to appropriate the 

amount authorized in this bill out of the General 

Fund shall be restricted to counties of more than 

fifty thousand (50,000) population according to 

the last preceding Federal Census." 

The manner in which Article 2352d is reported in Vernon's Civil Statutes, Volume 7, is somewhat misleading in that 

Sections 2 and 3, quoted above, are found in the note following 

the compilation of Article 2352d rather than as a part of the 

present statute. Article 2352d, as it was amended and passed by 

the Legislature in 1955, has two Sections 2, 3, 4, and 5. (Acts 

54th Leg., R.S. 1955, Ch. 351, p. 899). Tie second Sections 2, 

3, 4 and 5, are carried in Verr?on!s Civil Statutes as a note to 

Article 2352d. 

The second Section 2 limits the authority to lavy a 

tax for this purpose to counties of 100,000 population or more, 
:. . 

_,_ 

. ? 

_” 

Hon. Bill F. Griffin, Jr., page 3 (C-39) 

; .’ 

and the second Section 3 of Article 2352d limits the authority 

to appropriate funds to counties which have a population in excess of fifty thousand (50,000) according to the last preceding 

United States Census. The last United States Census was taken 

in 1960, and at that time Shelby County had a population of twenty 

thousand four hundred and seventy-nine (20,479). Texas Almanac,- 

1961-1963. Therefore Shelby Countjr would not be included in the 

authority granted under Article 2352d. We know of no other stat,- 

ute which would grant Shelby County such authority. 

Shelby County does not have the authority to expend 

money'for the development of a planning program for the Shelby 

County Area. 

In view of the answer to your first question, it is no,t 

necessary to answer the second question posed. 

SUMYARY 

Under the facts stated, Shelby County is not 

authorized to expend money for the development of 

a planning program for the Shelby County Area. 

Yours very-truly, 

WAGG OXER CARR 

Attorney General 

BZ7Z???or~;a 

JN:wb Assistant 

APPROVED: 

OPINION COMMITTEE 

W. V. Geppert, Chairman 

Pat Bailey 

Frank Booth 

Howard Kays 

APPROVED FOR THE ATTORNEY GENERAL 

BY: Stanton Stone 

-165-