# THE ATTORNEY GENERAL., OFTEXAS ,

Hon. James R. Strong County Attorney Panola County Carthage, Texas Dear Mr. Strong: Opinion No. V-1222 Re: Sufficiency of the submitted wording for ballots at an election on levying farm-tomarket or flood-control taxes. You request the opinion ofthis office as to the sufficiency ofaproposed form ofballot tobe used in the submission ,tothe voters in connection with the levy ofthe 30$tax for farm-to-market roads or flood control, or both, as provided in Article 7048a, V.C.S. The proposed ballot is as follows:

““FOR tax ofnot exceeding 20$ on each $100.00 valuation, tobe used for the construction and maintenance ofFarm-to-Market and Lateral Roads.

““AGAINST tax ofnot exceeding 20$ on each $lOO.- 00valuation, tobe used for the construction and maintenance ofFarm-to-Market and Lateral Roads.

““FOR tax ofnot exceeding lO$ on e&h $100.00 valuation, to be used for flood control, 2 “‘AGAINST tax ofnot exceeding lO$ on each $lOO.-

00valuation, tobe used for flood control.‘” Section 7ofArticle 7048a provides, in part, as follows: 6)oaothe proposition submitted to the qualified taxpaying voters at said election may provide that the tax at a rate not to exceed thirty cents (3Oc) on each One Hundred Dollars ($100) valuation may be used for the construction and maintenance ofFarm-to-Market and Lateral Roads or for Flood Control purposes, either or both, as the Co&issioners Court may determir (inch event the ballots shall have written or printed thereon, “For the tax ofnot exceeding cents on each One Hundred Dollars ($100) valuat9on,’ and the contrary thereof, specifying the tax tobe voted upon), or the proposition may provide for a specific maximum tax for Farm-to-Market and Lateral Roads purposes and aspecific maximum tax for Flood Control purposes,

-.

### Hon.Jaines R. Strong, Page 2 (V-1222)

the total ofthe two (2) specific maximum taxes not to excscd thirty cents (30$) on the One Hundred Dollars ($100) valuation (in which event the ballots shall have written or printed thereon, ‘For aFarm-to-Market and Lateral Roads tax ofnot exceeding cents and a Flood Control tax ofnot exceeding -cents, on the One 

### Hundred,Dollars ($100) valuation,’ and the contrary thereof, specifying, the specific taxes tobe voted upon)0

” (Emphasis added.) You will note that the **stbtute** states that the proposition may provide that the tax at arate not to exceed thirty cents may be used for the construction and maintenance ofFarm-toMarket and Lateral Roads E for Flood Control purposes, either or both. This language clearly contemplates that the proposition may cover only one of the two purposes. There is no reason why a proposition covering each purpose could not be submitted at the same election, In other words, two separate propositions may be submitted at the same election, one relating to the Farm-to-Market and Lateral Roads tax and one relating to the Flood Control tax.

You have added the language “to be used for the construction and maintenance ofFarm-to-Market and Lateral Roads” to the ballot form covering that proposition, and “‘tobe used for flood control” to the ballot form covering that proposition. We think that the addition ofthis language is proper so that the voter will without question know the proposition upon which he is voting. SUMMAR,Y The Commissioners’ Court may order an election for the levy ofa tax for farm-to-market and lateral roads, and for flood control, and fix aspecific maximum tax for each purpose, but both together may not exceed 3Oe on the $100 valuation Both may appear on the same ballot, but in such form that the voters may adopt one and reject the other, or may reject both or adopt both*

APPROVED; W. V. Geppert Taxation Division Everett Hutchinson Executive Assistant Charles D. Mathews First Assistant 

### LPL/mwb Yours very truly, PRICE DANIEL Attorney General

Assfntant