‘A CDRFJEP GENE

0~ TEXAS

June 25, 1948

Hon. Weldon B, Davis County Attorney Austin County Bellvllle,Texas OpinionRo. V-617

Re: Legality of defraying the expenses of BPploging a county nurse fpom the jury fund.

Dear Sir:

ject Your request fop oup opinion on the above submatter is, in part, aa follows~

"The Commissioners Court of Austin County,Texas, has been requestedby
some of the county citizens to employ a graudateregisterednumc) to visit publfa schools fn the county and to investlgate health aond%tfonaand sanitary surroundingsof ~ueh sohooPspetc,, all. as providedunder Article 45288, R, C, se of Texas, Seetfon 3 of the same articleprovides that the ComiIssfoneas Coust shall be empowemd to appropriatefrom funds of the reepectlve count%ea, the necessary wney to cover the salary of such nurse, not to exceed $1.800.00 a year fop any one nurse, and In addftlon themto, the Conmlssions~s Cowt may appropriateadditlonal funds to covep the expenseaof such
mwse fncumed In the visitingof schools, etc.

"You will notice that Section 3 above mentione& of ArtfcPe 4528a, provides Df~~many funds of the Pespective oounties

D R ktfcle 8* Section g9 of OUP State Constitution provides,among other p~ovislonsof such section, that a COMty, city OP town may levy a tax of not to exceed fifteen oents on the $lOO,OO valuation to pay jurofs.
"Questfona Since Sectfon 3, AleI-Hon. Weldon B. Davis, page 2 (V-617)

cle 4528a above referred to, uses the vords Ofpornany funds of the respective couutles

0 p could the Commissioners Collpt legally levy a two pep cent jury tax to defpag the expensesnecessaxy,,fop the employmentof a oounty nupse?

AFtlcle 4528a,V. C. 9. ppovlder::

"sece 1. That the Comlrslone~s Court of the various Counties In the State of Texam shall have the authority, when in their judgmentit shall be de,emed to be necessary OF advisable,to employ one OP more GraduateRegistered
nurses whose duty It shall be to visit the public schools in the county In which they are employed,and to Investigatethe health conditionsand sanlhb suproundlngs of such schools,and the personal, physical and health conditionof pupils thepeln,and to co-opeaate with the duly organizedBoard of Health and local health authoritiesin generalpublic health nursing and perform such other and fplpthep

duties as may be required of them by the Conrfssfoners Court.

'See0 2. That said nui%es when so appointed shall be employed on a monthly salary to be fixed by the CommLssioners Court and shall at all times be subject to Pemovalby the Commfsafone~s Court without prfor notice,

"Sec. 3. The CommlrslonePs Court shall be empowe.Ped to apppoprlatefrom any funds of the r?espectlve Countfes the necessarymoney to cover the ealaPy of such nurses, not to exceed the sum of $1,800~~ to each nose, and In addition theretomay apppoprlateadditionalfunds to COV~P

all expenses that may be proper and necessary in the visitin of such schoola,and Qenepal Pnblio fie alth mupaing includingtpanap$rtstfon and other Incidentalexpenses0
Aptlcle VIII, section 9 of the Toxaa Constitu-Hon. Weldon B. Davis, page 3 (V-617)

tion provides the maximum rate of taxes for aounty ptirposes, for roads and bridges, for permanent improvements and for juries. The courtshave repeatedlyheld that the CommiasionePsD Court cannot transfsrthese oonstltutionalfunds and it cannot spend tax money for one purpose raised ostensiblyfor another gurpose. See Aqlt v. Hill Count liama, 202 9,W. T' 116 S.W, 359, and Carroll v. Wil50 D

We quote the following from Attorney Ceneralss OpinionNo. V-332:

"Article

VIII, Section g9 authorizer the levy of a tax Onot exceedingfifteen (15) cents to pay juror~.~ In cons truing ArticleVIII, Section 9, the courtm have uniformlyheld that the p~ovlslonsof this Sectlon of the ConstitutionDweredesigned, not merely to limit the tax rate for certain therein clesfgnated purposes9but to require that any and all money rafsed by taxation for any such purpose shallbe applied, faithfully,to that particular P-Poses as needed therefor,and not to any other purpose or nse whatsoever.D Carrollv. Williams, 202 S.W. 5Ok, 506. See also Ault v. Hill County, 102 Tex, 335, 116 3.W. 359.

"The JUP~ Fund of the county la a constitutional

fund composedof tax money levied for the sole purpose of paying jurors. The Legislatureis thereforeprohibitedby ArticleVIII, Section 9, from authorlzlng such tax levy to be used for any other purpose than Dtopay jur~rs.~ Therefore,it is our opfnfon that the portion of Section 3 of H. B, 683, Acts of the 50th Legfslature, authorizingthe Commissioners Court to pay the salaples of the investigators OP assistantsand stenographers out of t#e Jury Fund is unconsti%ut%onal and void.

Sines the jury fund of the county fr composed of tax mOn8y levied fQr the SOPSpwpose Of paying juPOPS, and in view of the foregoinga,athoritles, It is
our opinion that no portion of the jury fund can be used to defray the expenseanecessary for the employment of a registerednurse to visit public schools in. .

Hon. Weldon B. Davis, page 4 (V-617)

the oounty,

Blo portion of the jury fund may be expendedfor the purpose of eaiploying a reglstepednurse to visit public schools in the county. ArtibleVIII, 8ectioq 9, of the Texas Constitution.

Yours very tmalJ,

ATTORRRY QEl#ZRAL

OF TEXAS

APPROvH)s