. . . . .

*

. .. .:...-

OFFICE OF THE A’ @ORNEY GENERAL **OF** TEXAS

AUSTINI$onorable 

### Jo. Releon, me #%!

& on soptsrber 22, 1952 "&a deo&nation waa canoelladand &anged to the road iram Llbe to lbix~ston. According %a a hateuent by Juae;s W. R.?I y and D. K. Hartin, who aompriwd a tajoriQ of the HIghmay Caemholon in 1332, the Com- ~imlan **did** not have ~ficlont 

### funds to builU both the roads *it was proposed &8t the draignrtionfk'0.m Dayton to Cleveland bu oencallodand Ch%t the county oonsbuot this road with bond 

### ommy, rdth fhs undW&anding th%t the road roUta be redeaignated a.tter

cronatruotion

was ocnnplekd. Aaoordlngly,in Rov

### umber19S2, tha doolgmtlon f'rcm Darton to 

### Clevel8?~~rosoancelled and changed to the mad from Liberty to UvirGaton. At the tLne of this o%noeI.tition, it was We expresmd intention of the m8Jorlty of tha IfS.@msy Cbaml~~olon

to radeslgmbe the road aa a State hi-7 after e& Oountg complete4oonatructlon thsreon.

*



### During theyears 19S6 thw@h 3.999 Liberty Cauat ioauad lta benda and spent tha n@ney on the oonstruat&on of an IS-SooC ooncmt0 ld.ghw%y

betmdn the terms of Dayton and Cleveland. Aster completionof tha **road, the**  **Highmay OaurLseion**  oondltiowlly 

### des&ncde4l thlo roads4 HQhnyHo. 

### 891, but 

### the aomdltiono Imposed in thedealgn%tlon

wtwo not **met** 

### uatU **Ootober,** 

### lfW and ct that tlw the State **aoswcd** mintenanm of the road. The Btmrd oi County CinB

DiotMat Raad fndebtedns8ath.nSmntud 

### Liber z,the ColmtJ partiolpedon on the bonds that were oubetamlixqg at the t road rau tpken over by &a Eigzlsrry CaPsaiaaion for aobtimanos purposba, in aocordencewith our Opinion Nob O-1942.

The uounty nor requeots that it be rsirpburood fork ~11 prinaip8lsnd lnter6at**paid** bg the eouxaby fmm 1935 to the date 

### %ha roadna tekenOVOP for maintenanoe, and baae$ this contan

### t&on **on** 

### the fs& t&t the road use a deoignated h.Qhwa~on Sept**miber** 17, 

### lOPar **and** 

### the **furth%r** 

### foot that thex%md was a deaignatedaighwar

when our Opinion

No, 04854 use **approved** in COW 

### mictee. We do not agree with there contention&

Opinion oIlS84 oontain8 the following~ar~raphs:**320**

"The h&a uhioh
e:

lvs riss to our first question are, briefly, as lo1 ovo8 In 1898 the Dayton-Cleveland Road in Liberty County was a part of tha Mate 

### HighraySysta and M dms@ated as Hate Highway #l&i,ax@ laterthisdesQn8tlonwas liftedor abandoned **and** 

### said**designation appUsd**  

### to ano%her 

### road. .subnquen~, that 1lB bdrooa soptimber87, 1988 aud 

### ~ortoJ~%,i~,~b~~Ooontyao~tnzo~ theDayton-OleveladRoadulthbondfWads. Tao msrlso,ltraastbs noted thmt suahd.sfparrt$onns **abandsnsd and**  **tb** State **R&#isay -so**  **ub%sh bad**  **bs@n** rpprled to ths Dsyton-Olsvalud Road was **appklad** t0 **another road,**  

### nsmly, the LAbwhy-livingstan **Road.** puxthw,

it is l 

### dm%ttadtbettben as rm **bbt,** 

### oxistiag~t~at~~drord~abuzdoLud~sr~ of Urr,8tatoEl&huq6ystam,~sh, iaaa~op2nlol2, ox8lude*

frompwtioipetlsnin the on@?wnfJ gao tax Um **obUgatbn8** 

### 8ub88quez1bly ereatub

**for** 

### tha ean-

*mar 00n*txwtlan of J3ar8@@ 3, Seation 8, is 

### Wt cmly suchxo8d1~88 had fomnerly

oonstituted

&

**wt0r tb0**  **sw0Hiehry8~8knmati~08kt~~ hd**  **bssn &+st**  **f;hrough &U&s,**  **X'dOO8t&0S 02**  **8bfUAdon-.** msnt, that hsd bsan aenstrus%adwith bond funds and the obllgstlons**lssusd to**  **ssowe** such funds we~m outsknafnpS at the tLne.tlm read was a **part** of the Systoa, and *hioh bonds or obwtiona bad not been disohax+ged

**or** retired %t the time such mad 

### lost its **de&nation** either %hmmgh ahsnga,relaoatlon or sbandorsss~~,

aan par8iolpats **80** LILrellgiblaissum~ undex the *wow and provlslonsof Rouse Bill #686. We oannot osnoelvethat $2~ &sgislatum.$ntsndad to, penrlt 

### bonds, the prooeads of wh2uhara tQ.bs expended on a **rord** iowerly ooru%ltutlng 8 part; oi the W&e HIghway syotea, to partialpotsin ths ~LarrJ benaiZts of the ens-centgasoline tss if such b,onds ara lssusd subsequentto the abandomkentof su6h mad as a paP***323.**



### of the StateRighmy Sp8tm+ **Further,** 

### therebalng

no erid*nt inkntion by aa lughway **a08ftiwd0a of**  **mdedgn6tt3.ng rush**  mad **aa a**  **part of**  **the Righway**  8 *tom, me think the axoeptlon provided ln sub#eetIon (a) al sootion 6, to thS.8 LMW of bon&. gamgqh 8, inrpplloabfm



### mhon the Baytun4~v~lan1¶ road WM deaigxmted as a Stat. Highwayin 19a8 them wx'a no ont8tukding obligationr.Bonda had beenvoted in X9%3but the .sub not boon soXd,hem. did not 8cln8tituto

'OUb8tanding

obllgaionr.* t gubmatlan (a) of Seatiun 6 oi the "Bond Ama@icn AaM* pmW%dbs that ‘t&U bOnd8, namanta or other svidanaea of i.ndebtalnaur **horotofore f88ued**  

### by ouUIlti.8

or detIne&

foJl diB.rtri0t8

O? this state, Which tituW


### on or artasamaary 1, l@ss, l.nwtu, y OpouDtfJ

et &B&were i8- r9 n?l iR s OOll8~%5?i OO&8.: “'$A& Of the QUt# Of **doslgnatad** 

### atah Ugkmaya on September 17, 1osB 9 u it.*'

Ilo bond8

**‘ i6P8**  **Issued md**  OUt8kpdfpg,WS'hrd the &W%WWd8 Of 81IybOnd8 been ratUalXyaspendad on thir rQad at the t%m OS ths 

### 1992deslgRatlon. In oW? o&t&ah *elAgkbZs bonds'U-9 bORd8 whioh were out8tandlngltthetlamtha roadwan apart of the deaignntsd state Rlghuay syrtaa.

%%a aBunt~ eubnZt8a k.tst **of bond8**  **rhioia 10~0**  **mode** eliable 

### br aertaln num pro tunoRordorrr end asserts

that their olaima are not M atron& km t&t of Libm'ty tJounty. It is not 8hW3 tkt any Of the$e bonds mm nQt OUt8tUIdiq obUgat2cmm

on 

### themmpectim date6of de8ignatl.m a6 a 

### part of the Elghmy SY8hU.

In our 

### Opinion No, O-194311)

sridt**“ It**  **8e8IM tit**  **this is**  **the Otiy**  **OOZLI?ItrUOtiOn**
tht **OW be**  **shoed UpOil**  **th0 8kbltk68**  **& W8**  **UVs** aooordingly,

of the opinion that the publia road OS a county does not beocansr ‘ pert of the dbsigneted Stete @,hWRy **6y8tePI Until**  **it h&pB**  **been $&-** 
**gpi&p!?2*L&~*~** **&s!!&~; ‘**  **~~~ lE&ay**  **Comtnl88lon** rev8 oontingsnt **# teraporery**  end aonditioaal **ded.gnatlon8** but we think it not Unreii8oMblsto **ooIblude** tit SUoh road8 OO=Ot beacme a pel't

of the %ate Hi&W‘y 838teBl Until t;bs tez%uI and OonditiM8 laid do- in 8U&tiutw have beonoaapliedrith and BhPtfollmrfng **8Uoh** time ë8 l OC8l@~Oi?J **ha8 be6l3** **lJrOV@U t0**  **t HlghTIey** **IcngMer, and**  **the ul&luay**  **aoBl?aloeion of**  iic%eUy de8igaat;es 8uQh rO8d Oa a j%I'rt of the state **IiQhwaly Sy8t!W,**  aad bond or other oblij&atton i8aed, the **procreOd8 of**  aoh PBFTB

expended in ths con8truotion or pwaheee of right-ot-way therefcwcan partfolpeteIn tha County and Mstr.iet Highway Fund as provided in H. B. 68% Fe thiDL tilia 18 true lrrearp8otlve of the opperent crcsption WC%Sting in Paragraph8 of SOOtiOn 80 Of 8Uoh kW, Whioh reads a8 follows:

"'In the event the State Xighnrs Con&e**eion** haa on a dtatwprlo~~ to Vemery 2, 1839, indicatedits intentionof deemUng ea Stats **Hfghnry8** the publfo roada Of Wy aounty OP qeP;tned

road dlatrigat

in thI.8 Stats ad has svidenaed rueh intention in **it8 @fficid**  **reUords or**  **fib8** then the pro

### vision6of thisAot shallapply as 

### if the road had eotuallybeen designetedprior to January 2, 1939.'"

We adhere t0 the CORCluSionSeXpm98Bed in the foI?%er 

### opinion8

herslnabove

oited - holding thet only a--h bonds a8

**I&+X ’** **6 OUt8tandi~**  **at the**  **tialw the**  **Fo ‘** **dr** beoonm 0 part of the Bteite System **6trb** sl&ible for pertloipetionin the one-centam4

geuouilo tax, and that road8 do not oonstltutr a pert or the aJ8tW8 Of Std8 ar&arrrsr Until tb Sighway b3plrtXQ8b taker tmn over ror malntenapoe.

You are, therefore, advl.aed Wat In our opinion tfbertyOounty la nut entltlad to be refmbmsed lor prinaipal and intsremtpa-t8 Blpdo w the County prior to tb 

### data that 

### theroad nataken over f'cr maintenanoaby tie

St&'8 gi&lWSby CCWSb8bW.k.