R-493 

OFFICE OF 

THE ATTORNEY GENERAL 

AUSTIN. TEX&B :. 

PRICE DANIEL 

ATTORNEY GENERAL May 28, 1947 

Honorable George Moffett, Chairman 

State Affairs Committee 

Aus tin, 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 

oaptioned matter reada, in part, as follows: 

"The above cited Bill 1s a tar donation 

sion, which gives rise to the following 

which are respeotrully submitted: 

relatiqs to above 

or remisquestlone, 

"1. Under the provisions of 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 enumerated therein receive donations and 

grants under the terms of our Constitution?" 

You attached a copy of H. B. No. 14 and we have oarefully examined same. This bill is not a tax remission bill, as 

authorized in cases of great public calamity by Section 10, of 

Article VIII of the Texas Constitution (requiring a vote of twothirds of each House). This bill 'is a grant of public moneys, 

as authorized in oases of public oalamity by Section 51 of Artitle III of the Constitution or Texas. 

Therefore, in answer to your first question it is our 

opinion that a majority vote in each House (a quorum being present) is sufficient for final passage. 
Honorable George Moffett - Page 2 

We note in the oeption the following clause: 

grant to the San Antonio River C 

of one-half (4) of the State ad vasaid oounties;" and that the Act dodistrict one-half (&I of the Stata 

lorem taxes collected in 

olleoted during the next twenty years 

commencing with September 1st. Before action is taken on this 

legislation the caption should be corrected aooordingly. In 

our opinion the clause in question should read as follows: 

Qakin a donation and grant to the San Antenio River Canal 

a& onservancy District 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 corxeotion of the 

oaption as suggested above, 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 Antonio River Canal and Conservancy Distriot and defined 

its powers and duties.. -~Suoh distriot wooneisting of that part 

of the State of Texas whioh is included in the boundaries of 

Bexar County, and also ino,luding the natural bed and banks of 

the San Antonio River from itssouroe to its junction with the 

Guadalupe River", and other areas of land otherwise acquired. 

The-San Antonio River flows through the oounties of Bexar, Wilson, Karnes and Goliad. (The counties mentioned in H. B. Yo. 14). 

In answer to your second question you are advised, 

that House Bill 14, as drawn, or amended as suggested above, 

only grants to said San Antonio River Canal and Conservancy 

Distriot one-half of the State ad valorem taxes oolleoted in 

said oounties during the next twenty years, and that said counties will not receive any grant or donation by virtue of said 

cr bill. 

SUMWARY 

H. B. Wo. 14 granting one-half of the State 

ad valorem taxes oolleeted during 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 majority vote of each House is guffioient for its 

passage, Section 51 0r Article III, Constitution 
,-- 

'Iionorqbls George Moff'ett.- Page 3 

_ 

of Texas. Har,ris~Cw.t Flood Control District 

va.. Mann, 140’ 5. .Wi :(2d 31098. This-bill does 

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 

ATTORNEY GEmwAL