, 

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 of holding 

an election to levy a park tax 

under articles 6078 or 6081e. 

V. T. Ci S. 

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 of levying a park tax under article 6078 or article 6081e. V. T. C. S. 

Article 6078 authorizes the commissioners court of a county to: 

. . . levy and collect a tax not to exceed five (5) cents 

on each one hundred dollars assessed valuation of the 

county for the purchase and improvement of lands for 

use as county parks. 

Collection of such tax must be ratified by “a two-thirds majority of the property 

taxpaying voters” of the county. The commissioners court is also authorized 

to “levy and collect an annual tax sufficient in their judgment to properly maintain such parks” and to make various permanent improvements. 

Article 6081e empowers “[a]ny county or any incorporated city of this state, 

either independently or in cooperation with each other:’ to acquire parks, and 

for their purchase and/or improvements, to: 

levy a tax not exceeding ten cents (lO$) on the One 

Hundred Dollars ($100) valuation of taxable property. 

. . . Art. 6081e, section2, V. T. C.S. 

Counties and incorporated cities may also “levy a tax of not exceeding five cents 

(50 on the One Hundred Dollars ($100) property valuation to create a fund for 

tie improvement and operation of such parks.” Id,, sec. 3. 

p. 2580 
The 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Article 6081f, enacted in 1965, repealed all ad valorem tax limitations 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 of all counties and incorporated cities, 

towns and villages, “except for those ad valorem tax limitations imposed 

by the provisions of the Constitution of the State of Texas.” 

Prior to 1967, counties were required by the Constitution to maintain 

separately the four constitutional funds: general, permanent improvement, 

road and bridge, and jury fund. The tax levy for the acquisition and improvement of parks was allocable to the permanent improvement fund, and the tax 

-for the maintenance and operation of parks 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 of articles 

6078 and 6081e. Those statutes place no limitation on the authority of a 

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 of articles 6078 and 6081e. it can no longer 

be argued that permitting a county to expend from the general fund for park 

maintenance and operation without holding an election provides a means of 

circumventing the ceiling imposed by the statutes. 

Expenditure from the general fund for the purpose of acquiring and 

improving parks presents a more difficult question. As we have noted, the 

tax levy for the acquisition of parks is allocable to the permanent improvement 

fund. But the 1967 amendment to article 8, section 9 of the 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 of each tax. 

A previous opinion of this office has interpreted this language as 

discretionary: 

. . . it seems clear that ‘a county 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 own judgment . . . 

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. 

If a.county has consolidated its permanent improvement fund into its 

general fund, as authorized by article 8, section 9 of the Texas Constitution, 

it may then expend moneys from the general fund for park acquisition and 

improvement, since article 8. section 9 places no limitation on the “purpose 

or source” of tax moneys in the general fund. If the county continues to maintain,a separate permanent improvement fund, however, we believe that expenditures for acquiring and improving parks should be made solely from this 

fund, since it is the fund into which taxes levied for such purposes are allocated. 

See Attorney General Opinion V-284 (1947). 

- 

In summary, it is our opinion that a county may expend moneys from its 

general fund for the maintenance and operation of parks without holding an 

election to levy a park tax. A county may expend moneys from its general 

fund for the acquisition and improvement of parks without holding an election 

to levy a park tax only where the permanent improvement fund has 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 of parks without 

holding an election to levy a park tax. A county may 

expend moneys from its general fund for the acquisition 

and improvement of parks without holding an election 

to levy a~park tax provided the county’s permanent 

improvement fund has 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. 2582 
The Honorable atom Hanna, page 4 (H- 579) 

APPROVED: 

DAVID M. KENDALL, First Adsistant 

I 

C. ROBERT HEATH. Chairmar 

Opinion Committee 

,. 

p. 2583