## 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 uponthe court-

. . D~earMr. Adcock: house yard and a relatedmatter.

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

*TheCourt House'in Lamesais looated ona,block of land deeded to the bounty for the consideration of $1.00 about the time the Original Townof Lamesawas platted and becamethe County Seat. This Block of land .is.square and haswide streets running on four sides of the Block. These streets permit angle parking onboth sides of the street. During Saturday's ,busy hours, it is difficult to find parking space within ablock of this Court HouseBlock. "It has been proposed that the City of Lamesaand DawsonCounty, jointly finance the pavementof areas uponthis..Court Yard. This area has heretofore been kept in grass andtrees and after it is paved, will be open to~the public as free parking space for customers of stores around the Court Housesquare aswell as for those whomayhave business in the Court House... "In the preparation of the budget for the current year, this was not one ofthe planned.expenditures. Way DawsonCounty 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 Dodaonv. Marshall, 118 **S.W.** 621, Justice Alexander, speaking for the Court, - _- same? If 90, what County fund, Court House & Jail; or RoaddcBridge, 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 Dawsonto pay its proportionate share of the proposed project, provided it was properly budgeted.

Generally spesking, a County Commissloners~ Court mayexercise only such authority as is oonferred by the Constitution andstatutes of this State. (Art. V, Sec. 18, Tex. Constitution; Art. 2351, V.C.S.; 11Tax.

. Jur. p. 563; Bland v. Orr, 39S.W. (2d) 558; Dobaonv.
‘Marshall, 118S.W. (2d) 621; andHowardv. Henderson County, 116S.W. (2d) 479).

In an opinion numberedO-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 paymentfor such improvement. you are advised that it Is our opinion that *byvlrtue of Artiole 1082, the County being the owner of the Court Houseproperty, 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 Houseproperty 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. 56 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 andjurisdiction over all county business, 8s is conferred by this Constitution and the laws of the. State, or as maybe hereafter prescribed.'
n

. . . Theduty to provide a courthouse includes the obligation to furnish samewith 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,hepolicy to-be pursued and~the district.court has noauthority to intervene. Schsiller v. Duncan, Tex. Civ. APP.. 21S. W. 2d 481, pars. 5, 6; Slimp TV.Wise County, Tex. Civ. App., 96S.W. 2a 537, pars. V-9; Tarrant Countyv. Sghannoz,Tex. Sup.;lO4.S. W.28 4, par.

. . . Inasmuchsa 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 nowbe predicated upon facts constituting it a case of "grave public necessity to meet unusual and unforeseen conditions which could not, by reasonably diligent thought andattention, 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 amendmentto the budget to allow the expenditure in question. Therefore, it is the opinion of thj.s .Departmentthat areas on the courthouse yard maybe used.for'f parking purposes byDawsonCounty andthat the couiity may payfor the cost of paving the same. If such parking areas donot 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 Fundof suchcounty. However, ifthe facts are such that this project amounts to awidening of the existing streats, and if such atree are portions of the designated or establis.hed county roe’ system, then the expenditure could be madefromthe Coun ty RoadandBridge Pound Bseverslly or jointly, with the City or Lameaa.

DawaonCounty mayuse certain areas on the courthouse yard for parking purposes and the county maypay 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 Fundof suoh county. However,~if the raots are such that this project amounts to awldening of the existing streets, and ifsuchstreets are portions of the designated or established county road syatem, then the expenditure could be madefrom the county road and bridge fund, severally or jointly, with the City of Lameaa. Very truly yours, ATTORNEY

GENERAL

OFTEXAS

BY-~- Burnell Waldrep Assistant

, APPROVID

EL t3zLl ATTORNEYGENERAL BW:djm:jrb ri

.