THE ATTORNEY GENERAL 

OF TEXAS 

Honorable Randy M. Phillips Opinion No. JM-1193 

Lipscomb County Attorney 

BOX 348 Re: Authority of a county to 

Booker, Texas 79005 pay its employees who are in 

debted to the county for pro 

perty taxes (RQ-1826) 

Dear Mr. Phillips: 

You advise that certain county employees are delinquent 

in paying ad valorem taxes owed to the county, and that 

these employees are making periodic payments on the taxes 

owed. YOU ask whether section 154.025 of the Local 

Government Code prohibits the payment of salaries of county 

employees or elected officials who owe taxes to the county 

if the employees or elected officials have made arrangements 

with the county to make periodic payments to retire the 

obligation. 

Section 154.025 of the Local Government Code reads as 

follows: 

A warrant may not be drawn on a salary 

fund in favor of a person, or an agent or 

assignee of a person, who is indebted to the 

state, the county, or the salary fund. 

The attorney general responded to a similar question in 

Attorney General Opinion O-5249 (1943).1 In Attorney 

General Opinion o-5249 the question posed was whether 

article 4350, V.T.C.S., prohibited the comptroller from 

issuing a warrant to a person against whom the state had an 

1. Debt as a bar to the issuance of government 

warrants, and the determination of when such indebtedness 

exists has been discussed in a number of attorney general 

opinions over the years. See, e.a., Attorney General 

Opinions JM-255 (1984); Mm-416 (1981); Letter Advisory No. 

57 (1973); WW-1504 (1962); hW-671 (1959); v-1113 (1950); 

O-4655 (1942). 

P. 6299 
Honorable Randy M. Phillips - Page 2 (JM-1193) 

outstanding judgment for delinquent tax payments. At the 

time Attorney General Opinion O-5429 was issued article 4350 

read as follows: 

No warrant shall be issued to any person 

indebted to the State, or to his agent or 

assignee, until such debt is paid. 

The attorney general held that the term "debt," as 

ordinarily used, did not include a tax, and that 

consequently, the comptroller was not authorized to withhold 

a warrant on this basis. In so holding, the attorney 

general was in line with the preponderance of precedent in 

American courts. &B Words and Phrases, l'Debt,q* (West 

1971). But cf. Price v. 

(1926).2 Texas 

United States, 269 U.S. 492 

courts have also held that, ordinarily, 

l@debt'q does not include taxes. Brooks v. Brooks 515 

S.W.Zd 730, 733 (Tex. Civ. Anp. - Eastland 1974, writ'ref'd 

n.r.e.). in &3 helle 

car:. denizd, 

Citv‘ of Dal1 as, 264 Fi2d 166 (5th 

Cir. 1955) 361 U.S. 828 (1959), the court 

stated: 

[W]hile occasionally the words *'debtsl* and 

Vaxes" are used interchangeably, 

this is not so. 

ordinarily 

Indeed in most instances 

they are used distinctively. This 

established, it follows that to support a 

construction of a statute that the word 

"debt** include taxes, there must be some 

reason shown to so read a statute other than 

the fact that sometimes the word debt will 

include taxes. This reason must be sought in 

the purpose of the statute, that is the 

mischief sought to be prevented and the 

appropriate means to achieve that end. 

2. In holding 

United States for _ . 

that '1debt'1 included taxes owed the 

purposes of the priority of federal 

claims, the court in w stated: "The meaning properly to 

be attributed to that word depends upon the connection in 

which it is used in the particular statute and the purpose 

to be accomplished." 269 U.S. at 500. The statute construed 

in Price, the former R.S. 3466, now appears as 31 U.S.C. 

5 3713(a) and uses the word V'claim.'O 

P. 6300 
Honorable Randy M. Phillips - Page 3 (JM-1193) 

The purpose of section 154.025 of the Local Government 

Code is to insure payment of obligations owing to the 

county. Rains v. Mercantile Nat'1 Bank at Dallas, 188 

S.W.2d 798, 804 (Tex. Civ. App. - El Paso 1945) (construing 

section 7 of predecessor article 3912e) u, 191 S.W.2d 

850, 854 (Tex. 1946). While such a purpose could as easily 

apply to delinquent taxes as to any other obligation, we 

have no basis for finding that the legislature meant the 

word "indebted" in section 154.025 of the Local Government 

Code to have a more inclusive meaning than it would 

ordinarily have. To the contrary, we note the legislature 

has, with regard to other legislation, affirmatively 

indicated by the use of express language its intent to 

include delinquent taxes as a bar to the issuance of 

government warrants. 

For example, article 4350, quoted above, was amended by 

House Bill 2067 in 1977 to read: 

No warrant shall be issued to any person 

indebted or owina delincuent taxes to the 

State, or to his agent or assignee, until 

such debt or taxes are paid. 

Acts 1977, 65th Leg., ch. '682, 5 1, at 1715 (emphasis added 

to show 1977 changes).3 The bill analysis of House Bill 

2067 states: 

around : 

The state treasurer under present law mav 

withhold warrants from persons indebted t'o 

the state. 

purpose : 

This bill enables the state treasurer to 

withhold warrants from persons owing 

delinquent taxes. 

3. Article 4350 was subsequently amended in 1983 to 

prohibit the issuance of a warrant to a person owing 

delinquent taxes on any tax administered or collected by the 

comptroller. Acts 1983, 68th Leg., ch. 100, at 499. In 

1987, article 4350 was codified into the Government Code 

where it now appears as section 403.055. Acts 1987, 70th 

Leg., ch. 147, § 1, at 333. 

P- 6301 
Honorable Randy M. Phillips - Page 4 (JM-1193) 

The 1977 amendment to article 4350 indicates 

recognition by the legislature that the term "indebted'@ in 

the original version of the statute did not include 

obligations for delinquent taxes. As the legislature has 

not enacted an analogous amendment to section 154.025 of the 

Local Government Code, we conclude that the term "indebted" 

as used in that statute does not 

obligations.4 

include outstanding tax 

In conclusion, section 154.025 of the Local Government 

Code does not prohibit a county from paying the salaries of 

county employees or elected officials who are delinquent in 

ad valorem tax obligations. As this resolves your question, 

we need not consider under what circumstances, if any, an 

agreement to make periodic payments could be considered a 

discharge of indebtedness for purposes of Local Government 

Code section 154.025. 

Code 

SUMMARY 

Section 154.025 of the Local Government 

does not prohibit a county from paying 

the salaries of county employees or elected 

officials who are delinquent in ad valorem 

tax obligations. . 

-J I M MATTOX 

Attorney General of Texas 

MARY KELLER 

First Assistant Attorney General 

LOU MCCREARY 

Executive Assistant Attorney General 

JUDGE ZOLLIE STEAKLKY 

Special Assistant Attorney General 

4. The source law for section 154.025, former section 

7 of article 3912e, was slightly reworded when included in 

the Local Government Code, but no substantive change was 

made. Acts 1987, 70th Leg., ch. 149, 55 1, 51 at 936, 1308. 

P. 6302 
Honorable Randy M. Phillips - Page 5 (JM-1193) 

RENEA HICKS 

Special Assistant Attorney General 

RICK GILPIN 

Chairman, Opinion Committee 

Prepared by John Steiner 

Assistant Attorney General 

P- 6303