. . - 

The Honorable Curtis Wilkinson Opinion No. H-914 

County Attorney 

County of Lamb Re: May Lamb County 

I'. 0. Box 946 finance a proposed revenue 

Littlefield, Texas 79339 bond feasibility study for 

the Lamb County Hospital 

Authority. 

Dear Mr. Wilkinson: 

You advise that in 1974 the Lamb County Commissioners 

Court passed an order creating the Lamb County Hospital 

Authority, pursuant to article 4494r, V.T.C.S. The appointed 

board of directors for the Authority has requested that the 

county pay for a study to determine if there is a financially 

attractive basis upon which hospital revenue bonds might be 

sold by the Authority to finance the erection, furnishing 

and operation of a hospital. 

Unless such a study is conducted which confirms that it 

is economically feasible to construct and operate a hospital 

in Lamb County, a good rating for the proposed bonds cannot 

be obtained. Such studies are statutorily sanctioned. See 

Hospital Broject Financing Act, V.T.C.S. art. 4437e-2, 9- 

3(c) (4). The directors of the Authority propose to repay 

the county from anticipated bond sale proceeds. According 

to your letter, the study is expected to cost between ten 

thousand and forty thousand dollars. You ask: 

Does the Lamb County Commissioners Court 

have legal authority to expend public funds 

for a feasibility study preparatory to the 

Lamb County Hospital Authority issuing 

revenue bonds? 

p. 3835 
The Honorable Curtis Wilkinson - page 2 (H-914) 

The Lamb County Hospital-Authority is "a body politic 

and corporate and a political subdivision of the State." 

V.T.C.S. art. 4494r, 6 3; Thomas v. Howard County Hospital 

Authority, 489 S.W.2d 403 (Tex.CE. App. -- Eastland 19721, 

writ ref'd n.r.e., 498 S.W.2d 146 (Tex. Sup. 1973). It is 

an entity distinct and separate from the county. Attorney 

General Opinion M-260 (1968). Cf. Attorney General Opinion 

H-554 (1975). The statute underwhich it was created denies 

it taxing power but it is empowered to raise funds by issuing 

revenue bonds and may accept donations, gifts and endowments. 

V.T.C.S. art. 4494r, 69 1, 7, 19. 

While one political subdivision may not constitutionally 

make a gift of its public funds to another political subdivision 

or lend it its credit, Tex. Const. art. 3, 9 52, a county is 

not prohibited by the Constitution from expending its funds 

for a proper public purpose merely because the expenditure 

will incidentallv benefit another political subdivision. 

See Harris County Flood Control Dist. v. Mann, 140 S.W.2d 

1098 (Tex. Sup. 1940). Cf. Barrington v. Cokinos, 338 

S.W.2d 133 (Tex. Sup. 19irm. 

S.W.2d 195 (Tex. Civ. App. 

In Dancy c Davidson, 183 

-- San Anton= 1944, writ ref'd), 

it was held that article 5, section 18 of the Texas Constitution 

and article 2351, section 7, V.T.C.S., authorized the Cameron 

County Commissioners Court to make expenditures for the 

purchase of a public building to house a state public health 

unit serving the county, as well as other state and federal 

agencies serving the county. The Court stressed that the 

agencies and offices were'performing governmental and public 

functions which benefitted the entire county. 

The public health of the populace is, of course, a 

proper concern of the Lamb County Commissioners Court. 

Article 4418f, V.T.C.S., specifies: 

The Commissioners Court of any County shall 

have the authority to appropriate and 

expend money from the general revenues of 

its County for and in behalf of public 

health and sanitation within its County. 

It seems clear that the Lamb County Commissioners Court 

might have expended county funds to pay for a feasibility 

study before it created the hospital Authority. The erection, 

furnishing, and operation of a county public hospital is a 

proper public function benefiting the entire county which 

it might have undertaken itself. V.T.C.S. art. 4478: art. 

4418f; Se dler v. Border, 115 S.W.Zd 702 (Tex. Civ. App. 

1938, no 5- writ . The creation of the Authoritv did not 

withdraw from the commissioners court the power to respond 

P. 3836 
The Honorable Curtis Wilkinson - page 3 (H-914) 

to the public health needs of the county, [Compare Tex. 

Const., arts. 9, 99 4, 9 and 13; Attorney General 

Opinions C-772 , C-646 (1966)] and under the facts presented 

to us, if the Commissioners Court of Lamb County determines 

that it is in the best interests of the county to undertake 

and pay for a hospital revenue bond feasibility study, we 

cannot say the Texas Constitution forbids it. 

The Interlocal Cooperation Act, article 4413(32c), 

V.T.C.S., authorizes "the fullest possible range of intergovernmental contracting authority at the local level" to 

improve the efficiency and effectiveness of local governments. 

-- See also V.T.C.S. art. 4434: Attorney General Opinion C-772 

(1966). The County Hospital Authority Act, article 4494r, 

requires bonds issued under it to specify that holders of 

the bonds shall never have the right to demand payment out 

of money raised or to be raised by taxes, but it does not 

forbid the use of tax money to aid the Authority. It does 

not repeal article 4418f. 

SUMMARY 

The Lamb County Commissioners Court has 

legal authority to expend public funds 

for a feasibility study preparatory to 

the Lamb Count? Hospital Authoritv issuing 

revenue bonds.- - 

ery truly yours, 

Attorney General of 

C. ROBERT HEATH. Chairman 

Texas 

Opinion Committee 

jwb 

P. 3837