B-355

Hon. E. F. Campbell County Attorney Fisher County Robg, Texas

c Opinion No, V-194 Re: Theauthority of the Commissioners' Court, sitting as a Board of Equalization, to conslder an assessment on Its own motion andwithout the Assessor’s request or suggestion, in regard to raising valuations. Dear MrnCampbell:

In your letter of April 9, 1947you request the opinion of this department upon the following question, concretely stated in your letter as follows:

"Whenthe TaxAssessor for the County, assesses real estate in the regular wayand the land owner signs it and swears to it as provided in Article 7211 Vernon Civil Statutes andthe assessor accepts lt as mad,eby the land owner, does the Commissioners Court sftting as aboard of equalization have a right to take this up on their ownmotion without any suggestion, notation, request or complaint of any kind from the Assessor and after due notlce to the land holder raise or lower the rendition as to value especially to raise the value?" As a preface to our opinion wepoint out briefly the constitutional and statutory provisfons pertaining to the Tax Assessor and the Commlssloners’ Court, (Board of Equalization) 0 Suffice it to say that the Office of Tax Assessor Fs a constitutional office and Lsprovided for by Article VIII, Section 18 of the Constitution, end nowcombined with the office of Tax Collector by the Constitution as amendedNovember 8, 1932. Therefore, by the terms of Article 718la V,C,S. the terms are used lnterchangeably, andrefer to the one office of Assessor and Collector of taxes. Notwithstanding the consolfdation of the two offices there still remains certain statutory duties and functions, separate and apart andattached to each respective office, as existed at the tfme of the consolidation,

Ther,efore, TOP the purpose of this opinion weshallHon. E. F. Campbell, page 2, v-194

first confine ours,elves to the duties imposed by statute upon the TaxAssessor O

Article 7211 V.C.S *provides:

“Hereafter whenany person, firm or corporation renders his, their or its property in thfs L?.ta$efor taxation to any tax assessor, andmakes oath as to the’kind, character, quality and quanttty of such property, andthe sald officer accepting said rendition from such person, firm or corporation of such property is satisfied that ft is correctly and properly valued according to the reasonable cash market value of such property on the market at the time **of** Its rendition, he shall list the sameaccordingly; but, if the assessor 1s satisfied that the value Is below the reasonable cash market value of such property, he shall at once place on said rendltfon opposite each piece of property so rendered an amountequal to the reasonable cash market value of such property at the time of Its rendition, and if such property shall be found to have nomarket value by such officer, then at such sumas said officer shall deemthe real or intrinsic value of the property; and ff .the person listing such property or the owner thereof is not satisfied with the value placed on the property by the assessor, h,eshall so notify the assessor, and if desiring so to do to makeoath before the assessor that the valuation so fixed by said officer on said property Is excessive; sueh officer to furnish such rendition, together with his valuation thereon and the oath of such person, firm or officer OPany corporation, if any such oath has been made, to the commissioners’ court. of the County in which said rendition was made, which court shall hear evldenoe anddetermine the ~truevalue of such property on January 1 19 (here give yeas for whioh assessment is madej asIs herein provided; such officer or oourts shall take Into consideration what 5eid property could have been sold for any time withln six months next beiore the lat day of January of the geap ?OPwhich the property fs rendered.” In addition to Article 7211‘quoted above the following provisions direct the Assessor to ’.transmit ‘tothe Commissioners’ Court (Board of Equalization) assessments of rendered andunrendered pPopert$:

“‘Article 7218Hon. E. F. Campbell, page 3, v-194

"The assessor of taxes shall submit all the lists of property rendered to himprior to the first Mondayin June to the board of equallzatlon of his County on the first MondayIn June or aa soon thereafter as practicable, for their Inspection, approval, correction or equallzatlon a OD6-" "Article 7206 It 0 0 0 (I

Theassessors of taxes shall furnish said board onthe first Mondayin Hayof each year, or as soon thereafter as practicable, a certified list of names of all persona whoeither refuse to swear or to qualify or to have algn%d the oath required by law, tog&her withtie asaeasment of aaid person's property madeby himthrough other information; and said board shall examine, equalize and correct assessments so madeby the assessor, and whenso revised, ecjuallzed andcorrected, the same shall be approvsd. "Article 7217 "The assessor of taxes shall furnish the board of equalization on the first Mondayin June of each year, or as .soon theresfter aa practicable, a’certiffed list of namesof all persona whoeither refused to swear or qualify or to sign the oath as prescribed in this title; also a list of the names of those persons whorefused to rendera list of taxable proper%y as required by this title a a .,'I Theforegoing statutory provlslons cover generally the duties imposed upon the TaxAssessor in racelvlng the rendition of property owners at the value set by themIn makingvoluntary renditions of their property for the purpose of taxation and changes madein said renditions by the TaxAssessor as to value and the transmission of such renditfons, whether changed by him OP not, to the Commissioners ) Court (Board of Equalization) for the purpose of equalizing and correetfng the values shownby the rolls.

.

Whenhe has transmitted the renditions to the Commissioners' Court for fts official action, he has completed ,a11 that is required of himuntil the~Commissfon%rs' Court ha8 acted upon the sameas the Board of Bqualfzation.

Wepass next to the constitutional and statutory duties of the CommfssfonersV Court as aBoard of Equallzatlon~ The Commissioners' Court is a constitutional COUPE provided for byBon, B. F. Campbell, page 4, v-194

Article V, Section 1, of the Constltutlon which 1s aa follows:

"The judicial power of this state shall be vested In one SupremeCourt, in Courts of Civil Appeals, In a Court of Criminal Appeals, In D&strict Courts, in County Courts, in Commissioneps Court&, in Courts of Justices of the Peace, and in such

.other courta as maybe provided by law," supplied) (Emphasis

Thejurisdiction of the Commissioners' Court 1s'dePined in the'latter part of Section 18 of Article V of the Constitution as follows:"The county commissioners so chosen, with the county judge, as presiding officer, shall compose the County Commissioners Ccurt, which shall exercise such powers andjurisdiction over all $ountg businesp, aa is conferred by,thls Constitution and the laws of the State OF as ma (Emphasis supplied 7be hereafter prescribed."

There is, however, an express llmitatlon upon the jurisdiction thus conferred upon the Commissioners' Court, that is, it mast be "county business",

TkeConstitution has further expressly conferred upon the Legislature the power to provide, as nearly as maybe, the valuation of all property subject to or rendered for taxation, This is provided for byA~ticls VIII, Section 18 of the Constftution as follows~

"The Legislature shall provide for equalizing, as near as maybe, the valuation of all property subject to or rendered for taxation, (the County Commissioner's Court to constitute a board of equalization); andmayalso provide for the clasaification of all lands with reference to their value in the several counties." This brings us to yc~r concrete problem of whether or no%the Commissloners ICour% (Board ofEqualization) mayact upon Its ownmotion in equalizing value without Its jurlsdlctlon in this regard being first invoked by the TaxAssessor. Theanswer to this questlon 1s in %heaffirm&tive~ Wedlscuaa briefly our reasona for this conclusion. As above noted, Sectlm 18 of Article VIII of the Constltulon requires %heLegislature to "provide for equalizing as near as maybe, the valuation of all property subject to or rendered for taxation," Pursuant to this constitutional mandate the Legislature has by the Wactwnt of.



### Hon. E. F. Campbell, page 5, v-194

Articles 

### 7206and

### 7212V.C.S. provided for equalizing the valuation of all property subject to or rendered for taxation.

Theterms of Article 7206 are:

“Each commlssloners court shall convene and sit as a board of equalization on the second Monday in Mayof each year, or as soon thereafter as practicable before the first day of June, to receive all the assessment lists or books of the assessors of their counties for Inspection, correction or equalization andapproval I” Article 

### 7212v.c,s, provides:

“Theboards of equalization shall have power, and it is madetheir official duty, to supervise the assessment of their respective counties, and, if satisfied that the valuation of any property 1s not in accordance with the laws of the State, to lncrease or diminish the sameand to affix a proper valuation thereto, as provided for in the preceding article; ‘Oo m
. O” Whenthe Legislature said InArticle 

### 7206, V.C.S.; !‘shall examine, equalize and correct assesments so madeby the assessor, andwhenso revised, equalized and corrected, the same shall be approved” and sald l.nArticle 7212, V.C.S. the “Board of equalization shall have power, and It Is madetheir offlclal duty, to supervise, the assessment of their respective counties, and, if satisfied that the valuation of any property Is not In accordance with the laws of the State, to increase or diminish ,the sameand to affix a proper valuation thereto,” It dealt with such matters unquestionably as “county business” appropriately entrusted to the Commlsslonsrs ICourt acting as aBoard of Equallzatlon, In the exercise of this quasi judicial function the Commlsslonersl Court (Board of ISquallzatlon) maydo soupon its owninitiative without a suggestion from the TaxAssessor.

This view has been confirmed In the,Case of Brundett et al vs. Lucas 

### 1949,W.

### ~614(Ct. of Civ. App. SanAntonio) e !lbe following is stated:

“Weconclude that the act of 1879which becamearticle 5120, R-9. 1895, andarticle 

### 4715Rd. 1879were both designed to give the board of equalization the power to equalize assessments In al,1 cases, regardless of whether the assessor or any one else madecomplaint, and this appears to have been the construction placed thereon by the **Suprem** Court

.Hon. E. F. Campbell, page 6, v-194

whenit cited both provisions in support of its statement with reference to the change made. In 1907 said article 4715, then No. 5124, was amended so that the first portlon thereof reads as follows:

“‘The boards of equalization ,shall have power) and it is madetheir official duty, to supervlse the assessment of their respective counties, and, if satisflea that the valuation of any property is not in accordance with the laws of the state, to increase or diminish the same and to affix a proper valuation thereto, as provided for in article 7569 of this chapter

. 0 0f

“Andthus’ amended, it nowappears as article 7570 R.S. 1911. Asl,t nowreads, It it111 confers ample power to equalize without complaint, even though the words ‘without complaint from any one’ were omitted; but If such omission could be given the effect contended for by appellee, nevertheless article 7564 gives the board full power to equalize andmakes it the duty of the board to do so, regardless of whether any;complalnt has been madeby t,heassessor or any one else. This article received renewed legislative spproval in 1909, therefore cannot be said to be affected by the repeal clause &the act of 1907 hadthere been a conflict between the twoacts, Weconclude that the judgment cannot be sustained on the theory that, as the assessor madeno complaint, the action of the boeti wasnot authorized.” Wepoint out that whet was formtirly Article 5124 dlscussed in this case is nowArticle 7212 and as will be observed Is in identical language, but as it read before amendedIt specifically said “without complaint from any one”- Bow eversas was saLd in Brundett et al vs, Iucas supra, t,hepower still remains to act “without’ complaint from any one under Article 7206 - 7212, Thephrase without complaint from any one” was iii the amendmentsimply eliminated as surplusage. Article 7212

“shall have power etc.” Shall have power to dowhat? i%cle 7212 gives the answer as follows:

11 to auperyfse the essesment of thelr,iespectfve counties, and, If satisfied that the veluatlon of any property 1s not in accordance with the laws of the State, to increase OP zp;im;zh the sameand lo affix a proper valuatfon

9 a 00000 D.

Hon. IL F. Campbell, Page 7, v-194

Amore recent case to the same effect is Wright vs. State (Ct. of Civ. App. Amarillo) 80 S.W. (26) 1015 from which wequote as follows:

"The action of the equalization board In fixing values IS judicial In Its nature, andthey mayflx such values based upon matters wlthln their ownknowledge a e e Thegeneral rule is that equalization boards mayact upon their own judgment of what la equal andjust, and, In the absence of fraud, their determination cannot be challenged if It appears that they have previously Inspected the properties with the view of determlnlng values 0s D0*" It does not follow, however, that the Commissioners Crrurt (Board of Equalization) mayincrease the values in the exercise of its Judicial functions wlthout giving the taxpayer notice andan opportunity to be heard, for such notice Is a necessary prerequisite to its jurisdiction, andwithout It there would be a lack of "due pro 89s". fil Highland Park Independent School District of Dallas C Company, 80 S.W. (2d) 1053. nty, et al vs. Republican Insurance Hoefllng vs. SanAntonio 39 S.W. 918 (Supreme Court.) In this latter case the court said: Theboard has nopower to increase that v&e'(referring to the value fixed by the property owner in his rendltlon) without glvin notice to the owner 000*" (Parenthesis oursk It follows from the foregoing that weare of the oplnion that the Commissioners ICourt (Board of Equallzatlon) has the power and authority to raise or lower valuation of property for taxation without the samebeing lnltlated by the TaxAssessor, but if the valuation is to be raised notice mst be given to the taxpayer of the Board's intention to raise such valuatFon and give himan opportunity to be heard. SUMMARY The Commissioners' Court (Board of Equalization) has the power to raise property valuation for taxation without its jurisdiction belng first invoked by the TaxAssessor. It mayact upon its owninltlative. If the valuation 1s increased, however, notice mst be given to the taxpayer. Article 7206, V.C.S., Article 7212, V.C.S.; Brundett et al viseLucas, 194 S.W. 613, State vs. Wright, 80 S.W. (26) 1015.Hon. E, F. Campbell, page 8, v-194

Yours very truly, ATTORNEYGENERAL

OFTEXAS By: s/L. P. Lollar L. P. Lollar Assistant

APPRUVED

MAY10, 1947 s/Price Daniel ATTORNEY

G-