OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF TEXAS
**AUSTIN**

dlVided by *It,

the avera@ dafiy xawt pees, WhPQh rd et the l!%lt6

or ur plan la used in

l*eaer and roraltf 1nWNet itQnBtltutlottttl?=

### 761

Hon. E. 8. Gritfit& Page 3

Artiols6 7177 to **7M4, 2.**  **C. S.**  **of Tamea,**  **as amended**  and shown In Vorn~n~a¬ated Civil Statutes undrr **the** mm artiolenumberr,which we, vrlll **not** diaowe in detail, afnoe the tex aese88orand Pmrd of Equalization should be thmou#ly faniliarwith theta statutsr uadar whloh they are **bottad** 80 act. The para

### mountthing in aw3owlttg prep8rty

### r0r faration 1s the tletarm%statlon

of the faii pparket value of the property, **end** ii it la huwl not to bar8 % market, than ltr true ralue a8 provided in the above statotaa. I?# 1E tea-y **obviow** that the above mrthd whloh ycm stats a6 **being** wed in Young C&u&y hae Very fitt& to do wlth thr marketrdlue a? tb cbil laasee or oil royalty,818 thla plan dealm with the mt OS oil prothtoed in a pretlow pearwhen the oriterlonia the ra3m of thm proprty on January 1 of tha par for whloh It 18 a%%aamd.

Them am, no doubt, B%O$ lbassawbioh~haro not been dewlo ar% very raluab Pe4 at all **or** not develepo&fuUy, whloh l& Tha abwe tmthod 8eema to bs baaed, te s large **extent** on haw well th% tsaot in qonst$on has been d~elepeb %nd not at all **upaa** th% amountof mooverable oil in plaoo,whloh **would** k a detarmlttlttg faotor In arrivingat tbr, Sair metit value. It 8em8 thet the ralr rparket raluo of the mlneralrunder e'gfrsn tractOS land ahou.Id not be dlifloultto a8aertein. partlonl6rl.y

in a prarcm field.

' In the oa%o of Rleheld~onV* State, 53 8, Vi. (3) 5Of.l, (Oourt of Olv. App., IIEastland), 84 8. We (2) 1077 Cam. App., tha, l xm amthod of a8aearrwntaII related in your opinion nquast wa% us%d eraept t& value oried itt that aem was abettt thrro tlmw em high a8 **bhat** used ItI

YOUR@ courlty,

and the jet in th6t can toutxd that ths method w%% not teir, \utilerr, and equal maathod oi &Wtrtilna, euoh relwe, muI that suoh nmthod **raaul.tod** In arbltrarpdiaorisinatfon agalnattha taxpagc In*otved ln favor of other propertiesia thm QoQnt, I Thl6 rinun((
was upheld **br** the dourt on apps& The R ohardsanQam and **RoDt** Y. Throokmxton Indopondeat Sohool Dlstrlot,39 9. w. (3) 470, olted by yo\l in roux!

lOWm! 88 Well **a#** mttny other o%%e%,hold that an arbitr z mebhod at flxh$ veluatlona,

relsulting

is \rajaft

**,dlsar** netloa ariwt the talpaywrresults 5.n tk8 assmmm8nt bw Yoi

.., 

### 7m

Eon. E. R. ciriftith, Plqp 3

An emwer to your question an118 fox the dctermlnationof ci

g~eetlonof fsot, as well as one 0S lcr, but we tee1 that the mthod edopted is 80 fozelepto tha method providedby the Constitution**eti S;** **“ lrrtutes**  **of** thin state, and ao VU&nerebleto an atteokby the taxpeyerr fn general of the County; thst your questionshouldbe answerod In the negative, end WB eo enmm It.

In ansrerln~your request,vm have loeked at It Srom a broad vlev:pblnt aa you-have luestlonec:. UE -&th respoot to the nathod in gensral,and oS aoursewe realize that should tha mthod bs attaoked ln oourtby e partloular taxpayer,euoh tnxpaperwould not only have to prove that the method WQB arbltra an unjust dirroriminetlon againsth

% but t&t& it worked in order to sueoesefullyattaok smm.

Trusting:

that thla suffiolently ensvmrll

your request,wa are

**~ATTOAWEY GZT2WUL**  **021 TEXAS** 

DDMtBT D. 1). Mahon Asri:4mit