September 11, 1974. 

The Honorable William R. Pemberton 

County Attorney 

P. 0. Box 610 

Beeville, Texas 78102 

Opinion No. H- 397 

Re: May a county become a 

dues paying member of a 

chamber of commerce which 

is a corporation. 

Dear Mr. Pemberton: 

Your request for an opinion explains that the Beeville and Bee 

County Chamber of Commerce is a corporation, and that its Board of 

Directors has asked Bee County, through the Commissioners Court, 

to become a dues-paying member. You also advise that the purposes 

and functions of the organization include promoting industrial development in the county, the development of downtown Beeville, and the 

promotion of the county-owned stadium. We understand that it also 

supports other measures beneficial to its commercial members. 

Specifically, you have asked: 

May Bee County, through the Commissioners Court, 

become a member of the Beeville and Bee County 

Chamber of Commerce and pay dues, out of the 

General Fund, in the amount of $1, 500.00 per year? 

In a helpful. brief you have directed our attention to several Texas 

Constitutional prbrisions bearing on the matter --among them, Article 

11 $ 3 of the Constitution which reads in pertinent part: 

No county, city or other municipal corporation shall 

hereafter become a subscriber to the capital of any 

private cor,poration or association, or make any 

p. 1856 
i -’ 

__._~ 

. ., I 

The Honorable William R. Pemberton page 2 (H-397) ” 

. appropriation or donation to the same, or in 

anywise loan its credit. , . . 

In our opinion this provision of our Constitution prohibits Bee 

County from becoming a dues paying member of the Beeville and Bee 

County Chamber of Commerce, and Article 3 5 52 of the Constitution 

prohibits legislative authorization of such a practice. Attorney General 

Opinion O-6168 (1945). 

The situation you describe does not, in our opinion, come within 

the holding of Barrington v. Cokinos, 338 S. W. 2d 133 (Tex. 1960). Nor 

is it insulated from the abuses which those Constitutional provisions 

were designed to prevent, as was the case in Brazes River Authority v. 

Carr, 405 S. W. 2d 689 (Tex. 1966). It is an attempt to secure for the 

community and its citizens by subscription to a private corporation general 

benefits resulting from encouragement of private industry and business. 

While this is a laudable purpose it is one to which Bee County is prohibited 

by law from participation. 

Although counties may not, in our opinion, become dues paying 

members of private corporations operating chambers of commerce in 

order to promote and advertise the area, the Legislature has enacted 

provisions enabling certain counties to raise and spend funds for advertising 

and promotion under certain conditions which include an authorizing election and the establishment of a Board of Development. Articles 23528, 

2352c, 2352d, V. T. C.S. And see Bland v. Taylor, 37 S. W. 2d 291 (Tex. 

Civ. App., Austin, 1931) aff’d 67 S. W. 2d 1033 (Tex. 1934). Authority to 

engage in such activities under such conditions, however, does not carry 

with it other authority to join or make donations to private organizations 

in order to achieve a similar end. Attorney General Opinions M-936(1971), 

O-2629 (1940). 

SUMMARY 

A county may not become a dues paying member 

of a chamber of commerce which is a corporation. 

ery truly yours, 

p. 185 

Attorney General of Texas 
r- - 

The Honorable William R. Pemberton page 3 (H-397) 

APPROVFD : ‘. ’ 

I 

LARRY F.\jY& 

LL 

DAVID M. KENDALL. Chairman 

on Committee ,. 

, 

p. 1858