, 

# TREATTOIRNEY GENERAL OF TEXAS
A%USTIN. -,bXAS 78711

April 11, 1975
The Honorable Tom Hanna Criminal District Attorney Jefferson County P. 0. Box 2553 Beaumont. Texas 77704
Dear Mr. Hanna: Opinion No. H- 579 Re: Whether a county may purchase and maintain parks with general fund revenues instead ofholding an election to levy apark tax under articles 6078 or 6081e. V. T. CiS. You have requested our opinion regarding whether a county may purchase and maintain parks with general fund revenues without holding an election for the purpose oflevying apark tax under article 6078 or article 6081e. V. T. C.S. Article 6078 authorizes the commissioners court ofa county to:

. . . levy and collect atax not to exceed five (5) cents on each one hundred dollars assessed valuation ofthe county for the purchase andimprovement oflands for use as county parks. Collection of such tax must be ratified by “a two-thirds majority ofthe property taxpaying voters” ofthe county. The commissioners court is also authorized to “levy and collect an annual tax sufficient intheir judgment toproperly maintain such parks” and tomake various permanent improvements. Article 6081e empowers “[a]ny county or any incorporated city ofthis state, either independently or in cooperation with each other:’ to acquire parks, and for their purchase and/or improvements, to:

levy atax not exceeding ten cents (lO$) onthe One Hundred Dollars ($100) valuation oftaxable property.

. . . Art. 6081e, section2, V. T. C.S. Counties and incorporated cities may also “levy atax of not exceeding five cents (50 onthe One Hundred Dollars ($100) property valuation to create afund for tie improvement and operation of such parks.” Id,, sec. 3.

p. 2580The Honorable Tom Hanna. page 2 (H-579)

Article 6081f, enacted in 1965, repealed all ad valorem tax limitations with regard to parks or park bonds ofall counties and incorporated cities, towns and villages, “except for those ad valorem tax limitations imposed by the provisions ofthe Constitution ofthe State ofTexas.” Prior to 1967, counties were required bythe Constitution to maintain separately the four constitutional funds: general, permanent improvement, road and bridge, andjury fund. The tax levy for the acquisition andimprovement ofparks was allocable tothe permanent improvement fund, and the tax -for themaintenance and operation ofparks was allocable to the general fund. Attorney General Opinions V-284 (1947) and V-744 (1948). We believe that, even prior to 1967, a county was permitted to expend moneys from the general fund for park maintenance and operation, even though no specific park tax had been authorized pursuant to the election provisions ofarticles 6078 and 6081e. Those statutes place nolimitation onthe authority ofa commissioners court to expend funds for park purposes: they merely provide a means of raising tax revenues. Furthermore, since article 6081f has repealed the tax rate limitations ofarticles 6078 and 6081e. it can nolonger be argued that permitting a county to expend from thegeneral fund for park maintenance and operation without holding an election provides ameans of circumventing the ceiling imposed by the statutes. Expenditure from the general fund for the purpose ofacquiring and improving parks presents amore difficult question. As we have noted, the tax levy for the acquisition ofparks is allocable tothe permanent improvement fund. But the 1967 amendment to article 8, section 9ofthe Texas Constitution provides that:

(a)ny county may put all tax money collected by the county into one general fund, without regard to the purpose or source ofeach tax. A previous opinion ofthis office has interpreted this language as discretionary:

. . . it seems clear that ‘acounty may use cne general fund for its taxes, subject to its outstanding debts, or a county may use the four funds in question according to its ownjudgment
. . . Attorney General Opinion M-207 (1968) other parts of which were overruled by Attorney General Opinion H-194 (1974). p. 2581- c

I

The Honorable Tom Hanna, page 3 (H-579)

The opinion held further that a commissioners court may consolidate fewer than all four funds into the general fund, and may maintain one or more funds separate and apart from the others. Ifa.county has consolidated its permanent improvement fundinto its general fund, as authorized by article 8, section 9ofthe Texas Constitution, itmay then expend moneys from the general fund for park acquisition and improvement, since article 8. section 9places nolimitation onthe “purpose or source” oftax moneys in the general fund. Ifthe county continues tomaintain,a separate permanent improvement fund, however, we believe that expenditures for acquiring and improving parks should be made solely from this fund, since itis the fundinto which taxes levied for such purposes are allocated. See Attorney General Opinion V-284 (1947). - Insummary, it is our opinion that a county may expend moneys from its general fund for the maintenance and operation ofparks without holding an election tolevy apark tax. A county may expend moneys from its general fund for the acquisition and improvement ofparks without holding an election to levy apark tax only where the permanent improvement fundhas been consolidated with the general fund, otherwise, such expenditures must be made from the permanent improvement fund. SUMMARY A county may expend moneys from its general fund for the maintenance and operation ofparks without holding an election to levy apark tax. A county may expend moneys from its general fund for the acquisition and improvement ofparks without holding an election tolevy a~parktax provided the county’s permanent improvement fundhas been consolidated with its general fund: otherwise, such expenditures must be made from the permanent improvement fund. Very truly yours,

/ / Attorney General of Texas

p. 2582The Honorable atom Hanna, page 4 (H- 579)

APPROVED:

DAVID M. KENDALL, First Adsistant

I C. ROBERT HEATH. Chairmar Opinion Committee ,.

p. 2583