November 5, 1956

Hon. Hubert W. Green, Jr. OpinionNo. S-219 Criminal DistrictAttorney Bexar County Re: Transfer 'ofRoad District San Antonio, Texas bond proceeds from a farmto-market allocation to a state and federal right-ofDear Sir: way allocation.
your request for an opinion eonthe following question has been received by this office. We quote fromyour letter of October 

### 12, 1956, at3follows:.

"OurCounty Road Engineer has requested that we obtain from you an opinion as to whether or not the sum of $40,000.00, the proceeds of a bond issue, can be transferred from the balance of a 

### $203,000.00 allocation for farm-tomarket roads and ,highuaysto a depleted fund allocated for the: purpose of acquiring rightsof-way for new ,and, existing state and federal highwayswithin Road District No. 1 of Bexar County, Texaa."~:, The order enteredby the Commissioners Court of Bexar County onAugust 28, 1953, the same:day on which the road bond election; under~

Section 52 ofArticle 

### 3, of the Constitution, for Road DistrictNo. 1, was ordered, 'anduhich set out certain particulars in connectionwith the expenditure of the bond funds in the event they were approved, controls the use of the proceeds of the bond issue.~~ Black v. Strennth, 112 Tex. 188, 

### 246 SLW. 79; Mosel v. R.eal,4qS.W.2d 4

### 75 (Tex.Civ.App.,1932), writ refused; Sterrett v,,. Bell, 240 S.W. 2d 516 (Tex.CLv.App., 1951), no writ history. Sections (2) (a), (2) (b),and,(2) (c)designate the pur oses for which the bond,proceeds are to'be used.' Sections 

### (3 P(a), !z;Lb)9 and (3)(c)allocate $1,6GG,OOO.O0 of such funds as fol- : Approximately $1,107,GOO.O0 for the acquiring of rightsof-way for new or existing,.state and federal highways; approximately $2O3,OOO.OO for the acquiring of rights-of-nay for new or existing farm-to-marketroads or highways; and approximately $2gO,OOO.O0 to be contributed to the State HighwayHon. HubertW. Green, Jr., page 2 (S-219)

Commission to assist in the construction or reconstruction of new farm-to-markethighways or roads. Sections 

### (3)(a),(3)(b), and 

### (3)(c)are followed imme~dlately by two paragraphswhich further define the duties of the commissionerst court in connection with these expenditures, The ,firstof these-two paragraphsprovides that none of the purposesabove set out shall have priority over the others, and ,thenext paragraphreads as follows:

"If this Courtfinds that It is not necessary or desir,able to use any of the funds above allocated for the purposes for which such funds are.allocated, such funds may be used for any of the other purposes hereinabove set forth;but none of such funds shall ever be used for any project which is not,consistentwith the overall long term planning of the,State Highway Department for state and federal highwaysand farm-to-markethighways or roads." ~,

It is the opinion of thi,soffice that the paragraph last quoted above reeerves limited discretion in the Commissioners'Court of Bexar County in the expenditure, of the funds allocated,under Section 

### (3)of said order. If the commissioners1court finds that it is no longer necessary or desirable to use any of the funds allocated for any one of the purposes set out, itmay use such funds for one or both of the other purposes as long as, such use is "consistentwith the overall long term planning of the State Highway Department for state 8nd federal highways and farm-to-markethighways or roads." Murray v. Wilkinson,'32 S.W. 2d 

### 863 (Tex.Civ.App.,1930), no writ hlstory; v. Mitchell, et al.,~ 1927),adopted. 

### 116Tex. 

### 378,292 S.W. 

### 1

It is further significantthat this reservation of authority ,in the Commissioners'Court was' not provided in connectionwith the expenditure of the remaining $350,,000,00 of such funds. This opinion has no application to farm-tomarket highwaymoneys derived from the taxes levied and colle~cted pursuant to Section la ofArticle VIII of the Constitution of Texasand Artlole 704&a of Vernon's Civil Statutes, because such moneys can not be used for the acquisition of rights-of-way for State designatedhlghways, but can only be used for the construction of a public roadHon. HubertW. Green, Jr., page 3(S-219)

of the county leading either directly or indirectly from a farm to market. Attorney General's .Opinlon 

### v-1169 (1951).

SUMMARY The commissioners~court may transferRoad Districtbond proceedsvoted under Section 52, ofArticle 

### 3, of the Constitution of Texas, from a farm-to-marketallocation to an allocation for acquiring rights-of-way for state and federal highways as providedby the wording of the order of allocation passed on the same day as, and supplementing,the order of election.

APPROVED: ElbertM. Morrow Bond Divi,sion~ John Reeves Reviewer
W. V. Geppert Reviewer
L. W. Gray Special Reviewer Davis-Grant First Assistant John Ben Shepperd Attorney General Yours very truly,
JOHN BEN SHEPPERD Attorney General

Assistant