OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF TEXAS 

AUSTIN 

mnorabie Cohn H. Shook 

Crlmlnal Dlatrict Attorney 

Bra County 

m Antonio, Texas 

Dear sir: 0plnion lo. O-6448 

80: Lsga11ty 0 

to bo ieeu 

pore or re 

held by Be 

tlaa or the 

lloI 

riring 88 rollowo- ‘n‘e ye ln rece~y\~~eoent dote, readopinion relae original request of the 

ing this requeet, certain personelinto the dlsouesion thereof, end oerted acouaatlonm hare been directed by the 

bonding companies toward8 this oliloe, and for this 

reaeon we deem it advieable to tranemit to you this file 

with the request that you kindly answer the legal queations propounded by our County Auditor, aa wall 88 an 

additional question which thle orrice wishes to propound to you. 
or the provIslons or fib. 2368h of the HevIeed Ciril 

Statute8 of the date of Texas, and are suoh bond8, 

we believe, ti61 ar,e held to be not refundable In the 

cmae or Jarrereon County v. Sellers, 180 5. W. (26) 

5t pags 138. 

“It would thererore eeen that if the same are 

therefore rerun&able, they would be so by virtue only 

ot the fact that they tire owned and eontrolled by the 

refunding authority. 

*you will not* also rror the letter or tb county 

,&iitor to thie orfice thnt there 18, clt thu prsrrmt 

thus, in tlm sinking ibid of the8e meveral bond8, the 

aggregate 8ua 0r Sixteen thouaad ($16,000.00) Dollar*, 

wbioh is at thirr time available for tha purpoee of retiring a portion of the bond8 now in Bexar County*8 

hands, and eought by thin oontraot to be refunded. 

*The queotionr propounded by the County Auditor 

ara as r0liow0: 

*‘(1 .) Oan them rour bowl imues be legally 

reiunded, am t&me bond8 1881~8 afo 

r 6 

eria bond@ and ~FO not op ional bonda? 

See ookran County Ca8e an a Parasaph 3 

or thie letter) 

“( 2) Il? these bonds oan be legally refUnded, 

aan th6y be rerunaed by a bond irreue with 

a mturity ubaequent to the maturity of 

the bonds being rerunbed? (bee Paragraph 

5 or this letter) 

“( tith above referencea belug to the lettsr of 

tb county Auditor) 

“In addition thereto, the queetioa propounded by 

thli# @ifloe 18 aa follow8~ 

“There being In the verioua afnk~idna; funds 

or the bead iesuaa in quemaioa the sua or 

gla,ooO.Oo, which ia available tar the purpose or retiring bonar now nought to be re- 
run&e&, is It or uot incumbent upon the 

CommIseionero* Court to apply suoh fund8 

to the rettra~ent of the available bond8, 

and refund only that portion in exoe88 

or auoh amunt? 

"Your early anewer to the above queatione will be 

greatly appreoiated by thie offlOe.* 

The Ziret question propounded by the County Auditor 18 

a8wered in the arrirmatire. The matter of refunding outstanding 

bonds 18 one for the Conxni88ioner8* Court to determine. 8eotion 7 

of artiole 2st@A rradm,in part, a8 follow8: 

"See. 7. The Co:nmi8sionerr* Court of any oounty 

or the governing body oi any oity in the State of Tcxa8 

mny pws all neoessary order8 and ordinanae8 to provide 

for funding or rerunding the whole or any part of the 

legal debt oi euoh oounty or city, by oanoelling evidences thereof and issuing to the holders or oreditorr, 

notea, bon&e or treasury warrants with or without coupoxu, 

bearing intereet payuble annua&l~ 

rate not to exoe.4 six per cent r 

or 8eni-annually at a 

S$) per u&mm. The 

uerofae oi much authority ahall ba rsguhted a@ follow8: 

"(a) Suoh Commi8eioner8~ Courts and euoh governing 

bodism shall have the ri tet all time8 to 188~ raiunding bond8 ior the refun a.? ng of any outetandlDg bond8 legally 18eued and outstanding matured intereat on any leglly 

18sued outstanding bonds, subject to law8 applicable to 

the irauanoe of refunding bond8 and without the neae88ity 

or any notice or right to a referenduta vote. 

"i 1 * 

*(o) * * * The runding bona8 hereb 

shall be payable ssriolly not eroeeding 

nut c ed 

Iortyhpdf year8 

iron the date thereof, unless oomi88ioner81 aourte or 

governing body affirm&ively adjudge that the f lnsnoisl 

oondition or euoh oounty or oity will not permit in 8uoh 

installments aa will make tbr, burden of taxation to rupport ewe, approximately uniform throughout tin term of 

8816 bond Ieeue. 3uoh bonds 8hall be axeouted and 18- 

sued in the same manwr no1 provided by law for the 
220 “. 

I 

mwrsble JOhh d. &hook, &ge 4 

l xeoutioh and issuance of bond8 to refund outstanding 

county or olty bonds. Said bond8 shall bear Interest 

sot eroeedlng six per osnt (6%) psr ahnun, and rhall 

be approved by the 4ittorney General and registered by 

the state Comptroller in the same ;Mnner as other oounty 

or city refunding or runding bmkn 

TAO CoOhran ColUlty case tild that bond8 ierued under a 

partioular ohapter were optional whether expressed im the proceedinga 

cr not, but did not hold that bond8 whioh were not optional could not 

bs rerunded with the consent Or the holder8 or suoh bonda. Yince the 

&xar County bond8 tire owned by 8inking rWd8 of oertain othsr bond 

irruea under the oontrol 0r the Oo3missioner8* Court of &rar County, 

ad that oolirt ha8 oonsented to the rerunding thsrwi, it i8 tb 

opinion of this departmnt that the four 18suer of bonda mq be 

legally rerun&s&. ThI8 department ha8 alwaya approvrd rerunaing of 

non-optional bond8 with ths oonaent 0r the holder8 0r aame. 

The opinion in the oaae of Road Distriot Ho. 1, Jerter8on 

Ooanty v. tieller8, 12O 8. V. (2d) lM, does not hold ttlat bond8 oannot 

be refuuaed with the coneent 0r the bolder8 0r the outstanding bondr* 

on the oontrary it hold8 that they may be rerunded with 8uoh oonsent. 

We quote the foilowing from thm opinion of the Court in that oaae: 

-That article dose anthoriu blWi88iOlur8' COUZtE 

8ought to be refunded we- then redeemable, or when the 

oould be redeemed with ths eonoent ot the ownerd ' 

\rtalio8 our*) 

The second question 18 anmered in the arrirnratira alao. 

The only limit,ition in the law 18 that they Ohall mature not exeeeding forty (40) year8 rrcm their date. 

In answer to the quertion propounded by your offloe, wo 

think it 18 a matter within the discretion or the Oommi88loners* 

‘, 

Cooit, except that bond8 maturingwithin the ourrent year, ii any, 

should bs paid out or the #16,000 in the sinking fund. We are of 

the opinion that the xttorney Oeneral 1s wlthout authorltf to require 

the county to apply this money on iuture maturitioa. In the Oa8e of 

city or E;aoo f. &UUI, 127 S. W. (26) 879, it was agoad that oertain 

bond8 were due or would be due during the then ourrent year and that 
223. 

the oity had i0ma and 00u00tea tare* 8urfiolont to pay mm. 

Tbr ktt0m.y 

Q# paid with 

General ooatenaea that said bona8 80 mturing should 

b r0fwia0a. 

the money oolieotea for that .purposo ana @hOuld not 

The Court held that the Attorney G4naral wan oorreot 

a that oontrntion. 

Your8 tory truly 

ATTolUUY GZNEXAL OF TEXAS 

By ub 

‘C. 1. Gibron 

Arrcrlstant 

c