Honorable Charles J. Lieck, Jr. Opinion lo. WW-769 

Criminal District Attorney 

Bexar County Courthouee Ret Legality of uae of 

San Antonio, Texas bond funds for purchase of building. 

Attention: Eon. L. J. Gittinger, 

Asst. Grin. Dist. Atty. 

Chief, Civil Section 

Dear Sir: 

You have requested the opinion of this office as to the legality 

of the proposed purchase by the County of an exiating building, 

a portion of which ia to~be uaed for jail purposes, with funds 

received from the sale of Bexar County Jail Bands, dated September 10, 1959, aggregating the sum of $3,650,000.00. 

These bond8 were issued under the authority of Article 237C$, 

V.C.S., (Acta 1957, 95th Leg., R.S., p. 1386, ch. 4761, hereinafter called the "Act.. 

Certain broad powers, but none to iasue bonds, are granted to 

Cosmisaloners Courts in Section 1 of the Act, which follows: 

-Section 1. Whenever the Comiaelonera 

Court of any county determines that the county 

courthouse is not adequate in site or facilities to properly hEuse all county and district 

offices and alL.county and district courts and 

all'justice of the peace courts for the precincts in which the courthouse is situated, and 

to adequately store all county record? and 

equipment (including voting machines) and/or 

that the county jail ia not adequate in size 

or facilities to properly confipe prisoners 

and other persons who may be legally confined 
. . 

~~~~ marlea J. Lie&k, Jr., Page 2 W-769) 

or detained in a county jail, the Qmmissioners Court may purchase, constrxt. 

reconstruct, remodel, improve and equip, 

or otherwise acauire an office buildinq 

or buildings. or courts buildins or buildinos, or jail buildina or buildinas (a 

addition to the existins courthouse and/or 

jail), or an additional buildins or buildinas in which anv one or more of the county 

or district offices or county, district or 

justice of the peace courts, or the countr 

jail or any other county facilities or 

functions mav be housed. conducted and maintained: and may purchase and improve the 

necessary site or sites therefor, and may 

use such building or buildings for any or 

all of such purposes, provided that any 

such building or buildings so acquired shall 

be located in the county seat. and provided 

that no justice of the peace court shall be 

housed, conducted or maintained in any such 

building if said building is Located out of 

the boundaries of the precinct of au& 

justice of the peace court.” (Rnpbaais added) 

The power to issue bonds, and the purposes far which they may 

be issued. are contained in Section 3 of the Act. whicla is, 

in part, as follows: 

*Sec. 3. To pay for the purchase. construction, reconstruction. remodelins. imnrovement 

-z&d eauirnaent of anv such buildina or buildinas 

and/or iails, includins the nurchase and imp&,the 

cosm&ssioners Coure'is authorized to issue 

negotiable bonds of the county and to levy and 

^ collect taxes in payment thereof. . . . : and 

the issuance of such bonds and ttae levy and 

collectipn of such taxes shall otherwise be in 

accordance with the provisions of Chapter 1, 

Title 22,. Revised Civil Statuteg of Texas, 
B~. axles J. Lieck, Jr., page 3 M+76g) 

governing the issuance of bonds 3.:. cities, 

towna and/or counties in thie Sta?.?." 

(Rnphasis added) 

It is clear that bonds may be issued for any one or all of 

the saveral purposes specified in Section 3, above, provide' such purpose; or purposes8 are clearly stated by the 

Commissioners Court in the proposition submitted to the 

property taxpaying voters of zhe county and approved by them 

at an election properly called and held in accordance with 

the requirements of Chapter 1, Title 22, Revised Civil Statutes of Texas, and provided all other requirements of law are 

properly observed. 

But all of the purposes of issue named in Section 3 were not 

included in the proposition as worded by the Bexar County 

Coannissioners Court and voted upon by the property taxpaying 

voters in this instance. As pertains to the manner of acquisition of a County Jail building the word "construction" was 

singled out by the Comnissioners Court, and only that~one word 

appears in that connection in the voted proposition and throughout the election proceedings, viz- *. . . for the purpose of 

paying for the construction and equipment of a County Jail 

buildinq, including the purchase anil improvement of the site 

therefor, . . .I (~hasis added). 

Thus, the Coanni.ssi.oners Court chose to sharply narrow the proposition submitted to the voters, omitting the words "purchase", 

"reconstruction", "reauxdelingn. Uimprovement*, and "buildings". 

There can be no doubt that ihe Commissioners Court possessed 

the power to thus limit and restrict the purpose to be voted 

upon for it is specifically granted in Section 4 of the Act, 

which is as follows: 

. . 

"Sec. 4. The Cosuulssioners Court may 

submit at any bond election one proposition 

for the issuance of such bonds which proposition may include al1 the nurnoses au'thorieed 

herein kor which such bonds may be issuedp or 

it may,, at its option, submit $t any bond 
--. _ 

Hon. Charles J. Lie&, Jr., page 4 (WW-769) 

election one or more separate =zc.q ::itions 

for the issuance of such bon&, 9%cn of which 

separate propositions ray inc.luc'e any one or 

such bonds may be issued." (Emphasis added) 

The vzd "construction * is of definite and limited meani.ng. 

In its ordinary sense it meam to build or erect something 

which theretofore did not eathit; the creation of something 

new, as distinguished from the repair or improvement of samething already existing. Carlson v. Kitsan County, Supreme 

Court of Washington, 124 Wash.. 155, 213 P. 930, 931: Board of 

Supervisors of Covinaton Cou*.tv v. State Hiabwav Comr~esio~,, 

Supreme Court of Missi6sippi, 194 So. 743, 748, 188 Miss. 274. 

And it has been held that a statute authorizing a town to 

"constrilct* a town hall can not be construed as authorizing 

the purchase of a buiPding already constructed. Barker v. 

Town of Flovd, Supreme Court of New York,, 66 N.Y.S. 216, 2~17, 

32 Misc. 474. 

An applicable dictionary definition of the word "construction' 

is the *Process or art of constructing; act of building: erection: act of devising and forming: fabrication: composition; 

l Webster's New Internat,iona% Dictionary~Second JW.tion, 

&bridsed. p. 572 (1957). 

It IS fundamental that the proceeds of bonds voted for a particular purpose by the people -ozstitute a truet fund which 

must be expended for the purpose for which the bonds were 

voted and may not be diverted from such purpose and applied 

to some other use. Clark, et a% v, Greer. et al, (Civ.App.) 

232 S.W.2d 876 (No writ history): Gillham v. CitV of Dallas 

(Civ.App.) 207 S.W.Zd 978, 983 (Writ ref., n.r.e.): Lewis v. 

ci+,r of Fort Worth, 89 S.W.Td 975, P26 Tex. 458x Moore v. Coffman, 

1.89 S.W. 94, affirmed 200 S.W. 374, 109 Tex. 93: blcQuillin. Municinaltornorations. Vol. P5, p. 598, et seq.. 

It is our opinion that funds derived from the sale of bonds 

voted by the people for the purpose of "Daying for the construction and equipment of a County Jai.?. building, including 

: 
HOG. Charles J. Lieck,'JrI, Page 5 (W-769) 

the purchase and improvement of the site the-efor" may not be 

~g%d for the purchase of an existing structux, a portion of 

which '.s to be used for jail purposes. 

Of course, in the purchase and improvement of a site for the 

County Jail building the Commissioners Court, in the exercise 

of its sound discretion and pursuant to the terms of its contract with the City of San Antonio, may choose such land as 1' 

deems proper. The fact that such tract, or tracts, of land at 

the time of purchase haa thereon an existing structure, or strucLllres , would have no bearing upon the authority of the Commissioners Court to acquire the land. The Commissioners Court, after 

the site is acquired, may then utilize or demolish such structures, if any, as it might, in the exercise of its sound discretion, determine would be proper in improving the site for the 

County Jail building. However, it is clear that none of these 

bond funds could be expended upon such structures. 

SUMNARY 

Bond proceeds voted for the construction 

and equipment of a County Jail building, 

including the purchase and improvement of 

the site therefor, may not be used to purchase an existing structure, a portion of 

which is to be used for jail purposes, although such proceeds may be used to purchase 

and improve the site for the County Jail 

building. 

Very truly yours, 

1. 

HWM-s 

APPROVED: 

OPINION-COMMITTEE 

Korgan Nesbitt, Chairman 

Charles D. Cabaniss 

C. Dean Davis 

Grundy Williams 

RFXIEMD FOR THE ATTORNEY GRWRRAL 

By: Leonard Passmore 

WILL WILSON 

Howard W. Ways 

Assistant