AUSTXN.TEXAS 

June 30, 1947 

Hon. Vernon‘D. Adcock Opinion No. V-282 

County Attorney 

Dawson.County Re: Authority of Dawson 

Lamesa, Texas County to expend money 

for the pavement of areas upon the court- 

. . 

D~ear Mr. Adcock: 

house yard and a related matter. 

Your request for an opinion of this Department is substantially as follows: 

*The Court House'in Lamesa is looated 

on a, block of land deeded to the bounty for 

the consideration of $1.00 about the time 

the Original Town of Lamesa was platted and 

became the County Seat. This Block of land 

.is.square and haswide streets running on 

four sides of the Block. These streets permit angle parking on both sides of the street. 

During Saturday's ,busy hours, it is difficult 

to find parking space within a block of this 

Court House Block. 

"It has been proposed that the City of 

Lamesa and Dawson County, jointly finance 

the pavement of areas upon this..Court Yard. 

This area has heretofore been kept in grass 

and trees and after it is paved, will be open 

to~the public as free parking space for customers of stores around the Court House square 

as well as for those who may have business in 

the Court House... 

"In the preparation of the budget for the 

current year, this was not one ofthe planned.expenditures. 

Way Dawson County legally use this ground 

as parking space and expend County funds separately, or jointly with the City, in paving the 

:. 

: 
..’ ; 

Hon. Vernon D. Adcock, Page 2 7-282 

era1 

(2d) 

In the case of Dodaon v. Marshall, 118 S.W. 

621, Justice Alexander, speaking for the Court, 

- _- 

same? If 90, what County fund, Court House & 

Jail; or Road dc Bridge, oould be used for this 

purpose.” 

Previously, In conformity with your request by 

telegram, you were sdvlsed that former opinions of this 

Department authorized the County of Dawson to pay its proportionate share of the proposed project, provided it was 

properly budgeted. 

Generally spesking, a County Commissloners~ 

Court may exercise only such authority as is oonferred 

by the Constitution and statutes of this State. (Art. 

V, Sec. 18, Tex. Constitution; Art. 2351, V.C.S.; 11 Tax. . 

Jur. p. 563; Bland v. Orr, 39 S.W. (2d) 558; Dobaon v. 

‘Marshall, 118 S.W. (2d) 621; and Howard v. Henderson 

County, 116 S.W. (2d) 479). 

In an opinion numbered O-6146, dated November 

13, 1944, this Department stated: 

“With reference to your ‘quest ion regarding 

the paving of all the streets around the Court 

House and the payment for such improvement. you 

are advised that it Is our opinion that *by vlrtue of Artiole 1082, the County being the owner 

of the Court House property, would under this 

Artiole, have’ authority to defray its proportionate part of coats of street lmprovementa.~ It is 

our further opinion that the Commissioners* Court 

has the legal authority to pave and pay for any 

portion of the streets around the’court House 

where such streeta constitute a part of the County road system, whether such streets are a part 

of the Court House property or are owned by others 

than the County.* 

In Opinion No. 2033, Report of Attorney Gen1918-1920, page 117, the A.ttorney General stated: 

” 

. . . I would therefore adviae you 

that the County Coimisaioners may . . . 

pay the entire cost of the pavements of 

such portions of the court house square 

within an incorporated town or city as 

are used for highway purposes. . .* 
. . 

Hon. Vernon D. Adcock, Page 3 V-282 

"The Constitution, art. 5, sec. 18, 

Vernon's Ann. St; Const. art. 5 6 18, 

provides: '* * * The county commissioners so chosen, with the county judge, as 

presiding officer, shall compose the County Commissioners Court, which shall exercise such powers and jurisdiction over 

all county business, 8s is conferred by 

this Constitution and the laws of the. 

State, or as may be hereafter prescribed.' 

n 

. . . The duty to provide a courthouse includes the obligation to furnish 

same with suitable and necessary equipment. This is not limited to the bare 

necessities for carrying on county bus- 

<iness, but includes modern conveniences.incident thereto. . . 

‘n. . . But so long as there is's 

reasonable exercise of-the discretion 

vested in the commissioners' court in a 

matter within its jurisdiction, that 

court'alone has the right to determine 

t,he policy to-be pursued and~the district.court has no authority to intervene. Schsiller v. Duncan, Tex. Civ. 

APP.. 21 S. W. 2d 481, pars. 5, 6; Slimp 

TV. Wise County, Tex. Civ. App., 96 S.W. 

2a 537, pars. V-9; Tarrant County v. 

Sghannoz, Tex. Sup.;lO4.S. W. 28 4, par. 

. . . 

Inasmuch sa you were previously advised that 

*the ~expesditure:would be authorized if properly budgeted, 

it willbe notedthat if such expenditure was not set up 

in the original budget, it must now be predicated upon 

facts constituting it a case of "grave public necessity 

to meet unusual and unforeseen conditions which could not, 

by reasonably diligent thought and attention, have been 

included in the original budget." (Art. 689a-11, V.C.S.) 

It is within the discretion of the Commissioners' Court 

.to determine whether a situation exists as would authorize.an amendment to the budget to allow the expenditure 

in question. Therefore, it is the opinion of thj.s .Department that areas on the courthouse yard may be used.for'f 

parking purposes by Dawson County and that the couiity may 

pay for the cost of paving the same. If such parking areas do not constitute a pert Of the street but actually 
. 

Hon. Vernon D. Adcock, Page 4 Y-282 

comprise a part of the court house yard, such expenditur 

if properly budgeted, could be paid from the court house 

fund of the Permsnent Improvement Fund of such county. 

However, if the facts are such that this project amounts 

to a widening of the existing streats, and if such atree 

are portions of the designated or establis.hed county roe’ 

system, then the expenditure could be made from the Coun 

ty Road and Bridge Pound B severslly or jointly, with the 

City or Lameaa. 

Dawaon County may use certain areas on 

the courthouse yard for parking purposes and 

the county may pay for the cost of paving the 

aame . If such parking areas do not constitute 

a~psrt of the street but actually comprise a 

part of the oourthouse yard, such expenditure, 

if properly budgeted, could be paid from the 

courthouse fund of the Permanent Improvement 

Fund of suoh county. However,~ if the raots 

are such that this project amounts to a wldening of the existing streets, and if such streets 

are portions of the designated or established 

county road syatem, then the expenditure could 

be made from the county road and bridge fund, 

severally or jointly, with the City of Lameaa. 

Very truly yours, 

ATTORNEY GENERAL OF TEXAS 

BY-~- 

Burnell Waldrep 

Assistant 

, 

APPROVID 

EL t3zLl 

ATTORNEYGENERAL 

BW:djm:jrb 

ri 

.