Aprll9, 1969 

Honorable Roy Pickett 

County Attorney 

Martin Countv 

Opinion No. M-369 

Re: Whether the Commissioners 

Court may consolidate certain constitutional funds 

with the Officer's Salary 

Fund, and related question. 

P. 0. Box lli 

Stanton, Texas 79782 

Dear Mr. Pickett: 

Your request for an opinion from this office, accompanied by an opinion prepared by you on the matter, presents two 

questions, the first being whether the Commissioners Court may 

consolidate the funds authorized by Article VIII, Section 9 of 

the Texas Constitution. 

Prior to 1967, the law was well established thatthe 

general fund, permanent improvement fund, jury fund and road 

and bridge fund, being the four funds about which you inquire 

and with which Article VIII, Section 9 of the Constitution is 

concerned. could not be comminRled or used for DurDoses other 

than that-for which each was raised. To this e?fect, see Carrol 

v. .Williams, 155 202 S.W, 564 (1918) md Attorney 

Eeneral's Opin:~&'~~: 0-661 (1939), No. O-869 (1939), No. O-931 

No. O-4763 (1942), No. O-5422 (1943j and No, O-6948 

In 1967, Section 9 of Article VIII, Texas Constitution, 

was amended by the addition of a sentence reading: "Any county 

may put all tax money collected by the county into one gene$al 

fund, without regard to the purpose or source of each tax. 

That such amendment overruled the prior law as to corn;Fi;;;g 

the funds prescribed by Section 9 Is without doubt. 

discussion of this amendment. appears in Attorney General's 

Opinion No. M-207 (1968). 

Therefore, the answer to your first question is that 

Section 9, Article VIII, Texas Constitution, as amended In 1967, 

clearly authorizes consolidation of the four funds about which 

you have inquired. 
Hon. ROY Plckett, dage 2 (M-369) 

Your second question is predicated upon an assumption 

that the Commissioners Court makes an election to consolidate 

the aforementioned constitutional funds Into the general fund. 

After so electing, you ask, may the Commissioners Court eliminate 

the Officers’ Salary Fund, by consolidating It with the resultant 

general fund of the county? 

In 1935, Section 61 of Article XVI, Texas Constitution, 

was adopted, providing for the compensation of county officers 

on a salary basis. The Implementing legislation passed by the 

Legislature, which became effective January 1, 1936, is Article 

3912e, Vernon’s Civil Statutes, and provides, in part: 

II 

. . . 

“Sec. 3. the assessor and collector of 

taxes shall coit&e’to collect and retain for the 

benefit of the Officers’ Salary Fund or funds 

hereinafter provided for all fees and commissions 

which he Is authorized vnler law to collect; and 

It shall be his duty to ackount for and to pay 

all such moneys received by him into the fund 

created and provided for under the provisions of 

this Act; . , . 

“Sec. 4. In all counties of this State con-. 

talnlng a population of less than one hundred and 

ninety thousand (190,000) Inhabitants according to 

the last preceding Federal Census wherein ,the county 

or precinct officers are compensated on a salary 

basis under the provisions of this Act, there shall 

be created a fund to be known as the ‘Officers’ 

and shall be protected to the same extent~as other 

c,ounty funds. 

‘“sec. 5. It shall be the duty of all officers 

to charge.and collect in the manner authorized by 

law all fees and commissions which are permitted 

by law to be assessed and collected for all official 

- 1820- 
Hon. Roy Plckett, page 3 (M-369) 

service performed by them. As and when such fees 

are collected they shall be deposited in the Officers' Salary Fund, or funds provided In this Act. 

. . . 

"Sec. 6. (a) In counties wherein the county 

officials are on a salary basis, in addition to the 

monies deposited In said Officers' Salary Fund or 

funds under the provisions of Sections 1; 3 and 5 

of this Act there shall be deposited therein quarterly on the first day of January, April, July and 

October of each year, such sums as may be apportioned 

to such county under the provisions of this Act, out 

of the available appropriations made by the Leglslature for such purposes, . . . It shall be the 

duty of the Comptroller of Public Accounts to an; 

nually apportion to all counties in which the 

county officers are to be compensated on the 

basis of a salary any monies, appropriated for 

said year for such apportionment; . . . 

"(b) No officer receiving a salary shall 

hereafter receive any ex officio compensation; 

provided, however, the Commissioners' Court shall 

transfer from the General Fund of the county to 

the Officers' Salary Fund or funds of such county 

such funds as may be necessary to pay the salaries 

and other claims chargeable against the same when 

the monies deposited therein are Insufficient to 

meet the claims payable therefrom. 

"(c) Any monies remaining In the Officers' 

Salary Fund or funds of any county at the end of 

any fiscal year after all salaries and authorized 

expenses Incurred against said fund for said year 

shall have been paid may be, by order of the Commissioners' Court, transferred to the credit of 

the General Fund of the county." (Emphasls added.) 

(1966): 

Quoting from Attorney General's Opinion No. C-772 

"Section 18 of Article V of the Constitution 

of Texas authorizes the commissioners court of a 

county to 'exercise such powers and jurisdiction 

over all county business, as Is conferred by this 

Constitution and the laws of the State I . -' 

-.1821- 
Hon. 

does 

Fund 

tlon 

Roy Pickett, page 4 (M-369) 

Our courts have held that this provision does not 

confer on commissioners courts general authority 

over county business, but, on the contrary, limits 

their authoritv to that conferred, exoressly or by 

necessary implication, by the statutes or cbnstl-- 

tution. Mills County v. Lampasas County, 90 Tex. 

603, 40 S.W. 403 (1897); Childress County v. State, 

127 Tex. 343, 92 S.W.2d loll (193b ; Canales v. . 

Laughlin, 147 Tex.169, 214 S.W.2d 51m) 

Anderson v. Wood, 137 Tex. 201, 152 S.W.2d 1084 

11941) . '. 

Ncwhere In Article 3912e, Vernon's Civil Statutes, 

any authority appear which would allow the Officers' Salary 

to be consolidated with the general fund authorized by Sec9 of Article VIII of the Texas Const;tution. Indeed, it 

Is stated in Section 4 of Article 3912e, "Such fund shall be kept 

separate and apart from all other county funds, and shall be 

held and disbursed for the purpose of paying the salaries of 

officers and the salaries of deputies, assistants and clerks 

of officers who are drawing a salary from said fund under the 

provisions of this Act, and to pa 

their off1ces.I' 4 

the authorized expenses of 

(Emphasis added. The use of ."shall" In the 

foregoing makes the provision mandatory, and directs for what 

purposes the fund Is to be used. The necessary result of such 

mandatory provision is that the fund may not be used for purposes other than those directed. 

Moneys may be transferred to the Officers' Sa,lary 

Fund from the general fund, when the Officers' Salary Fund is 

depleted, so that the salaries payable therefrom can no longer 

be paid. Section 6(b) of Article 3912e, V.C.S. For discussion 

of this practice, see Attorney General's Opinions No. O-1431 

(1939), No. O-1494 (1939) and No. O-4844 (1942). Moneys may 

also be transferred under Section 6(c) of Article 3p12e, wherein It is provided that, in the event a surplus in the Officers' 

Salary Fund exists at the end of the year, the Commissioners 

Court may transfer such surplus to the general fund. 

In light of the express prohibition a 

the Officers' Salary Fund with any other funds 7 

ainst commingling 

Section 4, Article 

3912e) as well as the two well defined circumstances under which 

there may be an interplay between the Officers'~ Salary Fund and 

the general fund, as set out in Section 6(bj and 6(c) of Article 

3912e, It seems evident that the two funds can not be consolidated. 

Further, the 1967 amendment of Section 9 of Article 

VIII, Texas Constitution, allows consolidation of the general 

-1822 - 
Hon. Roy Pickett, page 5 (M-369) 

fund, permanent Improvement fund, jury fund and road and bridge 

fund, but In no way Indicates an intention that such provision 

shall apply to any funds other than those composed solely of 

revenues from county taxes. As the Officers' Salary Fund includes funds derived from sources other than county taxation 

(see Sections 1, 3, 5 and 6, Article 3912e), It necessarily 

follows that the Officers ' Salary Fund may not be consolidated 

with the general fund of the county. 

For the reasons stated above, it Is the opinion of 

this office that the Commissioners Court of a county may consolidate the general fund, permanent Improvement fund, road and 

bridge fund and jury fund Into the general fund of the county, 

as provided for by the 1967 amendment of Section 9 of Article 

VIII, Texas Constitution. However, where such an election has 

been made, and such consolidation achieved, the Commissioners 

Court may not consolidate the Officers' Salary Fund with the 

resultant general fund. 

SUMMARY 

The Commissioners Court of a county may consolidate the general fund, permanent Improvement 

fund, road and bridge fund and jury fund Into a 

county general fund, as provided'for by the 1967. 

amendment of Section 9 of Article VIII, Texas 

Constitution. However, where such an election 

has been made, and such consolidation achieved, 

the Commissioners Court may not consolidate the 

Officers' Salary Fund with the resultant general 

fund of the county. 

Prepared by Bill Corbusier 

Assistant Attorney General 

APPROVED: 

OPINION COMMITTEE 

-1823- 
Hon. Roy Plckett, page 6 (M-369) 

Kerns Taylor, Chairman 

George Kelton, Vice-Chairman 

David Longorla 

Ralph Rash 

W. 0. Shultz 

Jay Floyd 

W. V. GEPPERT 

Staff Legal Assistant 

- 182-L -