The Honorable Jim Sharon Bearden 

County Attorney 

Orange County 

Orange County Courthouse 

Orange, Texas 77630 

Dear Mr. Bearden: 

Opinion No. H- 194 

Re: Authority of County 

Auditor to transfer 

surplus funds in the 

Road and Bri~dge Fund 

into the General Fund 

You have requested an opinion of this office on the following question: 

“can the County Auditor place all carry-over funds of the Road and Bridge 

Fund into the General Fund after the budget year with or without an order 

by the county court? ” 

You further explain: “In Orange County, a county under 225, 000, there 

is a ‘General Fund’, consisting of the general fund, jury fund, and public 

building fund, leaving the ‘Road and Bridge Fund! separate. ” 

The applicable limitation upon the type of county financing which you 

question is Article 8, § 9, of the Texas Constitution which provides: 

“Sec. 9. The State tax on property, exclusive of 

the tax necessary to pay the public debt, and of the taxes 

provided for the benefit of the public free schools, shall 

never exceed Thirty-five Cents (35#) on, the One Hundred 

Dollars ($100) valuation: and no county, city or town shall 

levy a tax rate in excess of Eighty Cents (80$) onthe One 

Hundred Dollars ($100) valuation in any one (1) year for 

general fund, permanent improvement fund, road and 

bridge fund and jury fund purposes; provided further that 

at the time the Commissioners Court meets ‘to levy the 

annual tax rate for each county it shall levy whatever tax 

rate may be needed for the four (4) constitutional purposes; 

p. 909 
The Honorable JimSharon Bearden, page 2 (H-194) 

namely, general fund, permanent improvement fund, 

road and bridge fund and jury fund so long as the Court 

does not impair any outstanding bonds or other obligations and so long as the total of the foregoing tax levies 

does not exceed Eighty Cents (80$) on the One Hundred 

Dollars ($100) valuation in any one (1) year., Once the 

Court has levied the annual tax rate, the same shall remain 

in force and effect during that taxable year; and the Legislature may also authorize an additional annual ad valorem 

tax to be levied and collected for the further maintenance of 

the public roads; provided, that a majority of the qualified 

property taxpaying voters of the county voting at an election 

to be held for that purpose shall vote such tax, not to exceed 

Fifteen Cents (15$) on the One Hundred Dollars ($100) valuation of the property subject to taxationin such county. Any 

county may put all tax money collected by the county into one 

general fund, without regard to the purpose or source of each 

tax. And the Legislature may pass local laws for the maintenance of the public roads and highways, without the local 

notice required for special or lacal laws. This section shall 

not be construed as a limitation of powers delegated to counties, 

cities or towns by any other Section or Sections of this Constitution. ” 

We presume that your inquiry relates to the Road and Bridge Fund referred 

to in the constitutional provision as one of the four funds subject to the combined 

Ei&ty Cents per One Hundred Dollars valuation limit and that you are not referring to the Public Road Fund that can be established by a vote and a tax of up to 

Fifteen Cents per One Hundred Dollars valuation. 

Prior to 1944, Article 8, $ 9, of the Texas Constitution put individual 

limitations on each of the four funds, specifically Twenty-Five Cents per One 

Hundred Dollars valuationfor the generalfund, Fifteen Cents for the jury fund 

and Twenty-Five Cents for public improvement. This was amended in 1944 and 

again in 1956 so as to retain only the Eighty Cents on the One Hundred Dollars 

valuation limitation for the combined four funds and, in 1967, the people added 

another amendment which states: “Any county may put all tax money collected 

p. 910 
The Honorable Jim Sharon Bearden, page 3 (,I-I-194), 

by the county into one general fund, without regard to the purpose or source 

of each tax.” 

Prior to the 1967 amendment, it was well established law that the four 

constitutional funds, namely: the genera 1 fund, the permanent improvement 

fund, ‘the road and bridge,fund, and the jur~y fund had to be kept completely 

s.eparate.from.one another land no comingling or transfer of,the funds was 

condoned. Carroll v. Williams, 202 S.W. 504 (Tex. 1918). 

However, the plain import~of the amendment in 1967, (also shown by 

its legislative history Andy the publicity which attended its proposal), is to 

free counties from such .re,strictions and to allow unrestricted comingling 

and transfer of these funds. 

In Lewis v. Nacogdoches County, 461 S. W. 2d 514, 518 (Tex. Civ.App., 

Tyler, 1970, no writ), the Tyler Court of Civil Appeals stated: 

“Appe.llants argue that the Commissioners’ Court 

cannot legally transfer. one constitutional fund to another 

fund and in support thereof relies upon Carroll v. Williams, 

109 Tex. 155, 202 S. W. 504 (1918). This was a well established principle of law in this state until the Constitutional 

provision upon which it was founded (Article VIII, Section 

9 of the Constitution of Texas) was amended in 1967 to read 

in part as follows: 

’ * * * Any county may put all tax money 

collected by the county into. one general fund, 

without regard to the purpose or source of each 

tax. ***“’ 

The fact that the county originally budgeted the road and bridge fund 

separately would not impair the authority of the commissioners court to 

effect the contemplated transfer. The 1967 constitutional amendment allows 

the county to “put all tax money . . . into one general fund, ” which plainly 

allows a transfer as well as an original consolidation. 

p. 911 
The Honorable Jim Sharon Bearden, page 4 (H-194) 

Such a transfer would require an order of the commissioners cour,t. 

The amendment permits “any county” to combine funds. The county acts 

through the commissioners court. See 15 Tex. Jur. Zd, Counties 8 35, et. seq. 

Any conflicting statements in the following opinions of this office are 

overruled: Attorney General Opinions M-207 ‘(1968), M-369 (1969), M-438 

(1964, M- 692’.(1971), M-1195’,(1972); M-1245-A (1972) and M-1250 (1972). 

SUMMARY 

A county commissioners court may transfer surplus 

road and bridge funds into the general fund. 

Yours very truly, 

- 

JOHN L. HILL 

Attorney General of Texas 

DAVID M. KENDALL, Chairman 

Opinion Committee 

p. 912