R-493 OFFICE OF 

## THE ATTORNEY GENERAL

AUSTIN. TEX&B :.

PRICE DANIEL ATTORNEY

GENERAL May 28, 1947

HonorableGeorge Moffett, Chairman State Affairs Committee Austin, Texas Dear Mr. Mofrett: opinion No. v-226 Be: Constitutionality of H. B. No. ll+

and required vote for passage. Your letter requeetitig our opinion oaptionedmatter reada, in part, as follows: "The above cited Bill 1s a tar donation sion, which gives rise to the following which are respeotrullysubmitted: relatiqs to above

or remisquestlone,
"1. Under the provisionsof the Constitution of the State of Texas,what, vote would be required for final passage of this measure?' "2. As House Bill 14 is drawn, may the oounties enumeratedtherein receive donationsand grants under the terms of our Constitution?" You attacheda copy of H. B. No. 14 and we have oarefully examinedsame. This bill is not a tax remissionbill, as authorizedin cases of great public calamityby Section 10, of Article VIII of the Texas Constitution (requiring a vote of twothirds of each House). This bill 'is a grant of publicmoneys, as authorizedin oases of public oalamityby Section 51 of Artitle III of the Constitutionor Texas.

Therefore, in answer to your first question it is our opinion that a majority vote in each House (a quorum being present) is sufficientfor final passage.HonorableGeorge Moffett - Page 2

We note in the oeption the followingclause:

grant to the San AntonioRiver C of one-half (4) of the State ad vasaid oounties;"and that the Act dodistrictone-half (&I of the Stata lorem taxes collected in olleotedduring the next twenty years commencingwith September 1st. Before action is taken on this legislationthe caption should be correctedaooordingly. In our opinion the clause in question should read as follows: Qakin a donation and grant to the San AntenioRiver Canal a& onservancyDistrict of one-half (4) of the State ad valorem taxes to be collected in said counties for a period of twenty (20) years;".

Inour opinion II.

B. No. 14, upon corxeotionof the oaption as suggestedabove,would be a,oonstitutional and valid enao tment. The Supreme Court of Texas, in Harris County Flood Control District va. Mann, ll& 9. W. (26) 1098, held a similar act valid.

The 45th Legislature,oh. 276, p* 556, created the San AntonioRiver Canal and ConservancyDistriot and defined its powers and duties.. -~Suoh distriot wooneistingof that part of the State of Texas whioh is included in the boundariesof Bexar County, and also ino,luding the natural bed and banks of the San Antonio River from itssouroe to its junctionwith the GuadalupeRiver", and other areas of land otherwiseacquired. The-SanAntonio River flows through the oounties of Bexar, Wilson, Karnes and Goliad. (The countiesmentioned in H. B. Yo. 14).

In answer to your second questionyou are advised, that House Bill 14, as drawn, or amended as suggestedabove, only grants to said San Antonio River Canal and Conservancy Distriot one-half of the State ad valorem taxes oolleotedin said oountiesduring the next twentyyears, and that said counties will not receive any grant or donationby virtue of said cr bill.
SUMWARY

H. B. Wo. 14 granting one-half of the State ad valorem taxes oolleetedduring the next twenty years to the San Antonio River Canal and Conservancy District, if the caption is amended to conform to the body of the bill, is aonstitutienal and, a majorityvote of each House is guffioientfor its passage, Section 51 

### 0r Article III, Constitution,--

'Iionorqbls

George Moff'ett.-

Page 3

_ of Texas. Har,ris~Cw.t Flood ControlDistrict va.. Mann, 140

’ 5..Wi :(2d

3 1098. This-billdoes not wki$ a don&tio&to Bexar, Wilson, Barnes or Goliad Odunty. Yours very truly ATTORNEYGENERAL OFTEXAS

By M W. V. Geppert

Assistant
WVG:IllItlO

. APPROVED

ATTORNEYGEmwAL